A literature- and senior stakeholder-informed model of southern African programme risk management challenges

Abstract

Strategic capital infrastructure programmes are risky endeavours due to the complexity inherent in implementing and managing such large project-based programmes. Successful programmes demand well-developed skills in the under-researched and underdeveloped discipline of programme risk management. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore programme risk management challenges, as described in the literature and experienced in southern African programmes. The study was based on a literature review on programme risk management, followed by semi-structured interviews with southern African programme risk management stakeholders. A model was then created based on inductive thematic analysis of the study data, which provides a novel diagrammatic view of the relationship between programme risk management maturity, culture, and execution, thereby facilitating a holistic understanding of the corresponding management demands required for the successful delivery of large-scale programmes. The model and a study codebook provide a framework and a tool for (1) researchers to position and structure their research and (2) programme management stakeholders to analyze and assess their programme risk management practices. Our conclusions provide novel theoretical and practical insights into a field that is important for the southern African development agenda, where updated research-based knowledge is required to support the delivery of capital infrastructure programmes.

Keywords:

• programme risk management in southern Africa
• programme risk management challenges
• programme risk culture

Acknowledgement

The corresponding author of this manuscript acknowledges that this article formed part of an article-based doctoral thesis that comprised three articles at the North-West University, South Africa (Mulambya 2020). The first article from the thesis was reworked into this manuscript.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.