1.1 Introduction
Two separate stages, known as “project” and “operations,” are involved in the construction and management of large-scale infrastructure systems (Ramasesh and Browning, 2014). According to Zhang et al. (2023), there is a fundamental difference between the project phase and the operations phase of these big inter-organizational initiatives. Plans, designs, and constructions of new systems or renovations of old ones are the unique, one-time operations that makeup projects. Providing infrastructure services to consumers involves repeated and continuing tasks, (Yun et al., 2020). More than ten project customers make up the complicated Beijing Daxing International Airport (BDIA) programme (Zhang et al., 2023b). These clients include the airport, the metro, and the high-speed railway projects. The essay aims to analyse the critical issues of BDIA as a complex case study.
1.2 Complex Case Study Challenges
1.2.1 Departmental and Employee Overlap
Daxing Airport Management Company, a newly formed major player in BDIA’s integrated management, spent a lot of time growing up and maintaining tight ties with HQ (Chen, 2020). Rather than existing as a separate entity, its predecessor, the Operational Readiness Office, was “one organisation with two titles” under Headquarters. Headquarters externally oversaw operational readiness exercises under the auspices of the Operational Readiness Office (ORO). The managers created a department to the current organisational structure of the HQ to handle specialised operational preparedness operations. So, there was a lot of duplication between the two organisations, the HQ and the ORO.
Formerly known as the ORO, the Daxing Airport Management Company (DAMC) became an autonomous entity in July 2018 after separating from the headquarters (Mao, 2021). The manager of the HQ also served as the general manager of the DAMC. Other senior leaders and department heads worked for both organisations. Additionally, some staff members from the HQ were transferred to the DAMC to manage airport operations. Despite this, there was still some overlap in staff between the two organisations. The HQ and the DAMC were the two main organisations that supervised BDIA’s projects and operational preparations, respectively. There was a lot of personnel and organisational overlap, which helped with a couple of things: first, it reduced interface and communication issues, and second, it promoted the coupling of project and operational preparatory operations. It only took BDIA 87 days to complete the shift from projects to operations, due to part to organisational and personnel intersection and overlap (Xu et al., 2022).
1.2.2 Whole Process Interaction
In addition to facilitating the adaptation and coupling of project and operational preparation tasks, whole-process interaction enabled project teams and operational organisations to work together and innovate on the project and operational plans, which ultimately led to value creation assignments. In addition, top-down incorporation and collaboration, organisational and personnel overlap, and the potential for negative effects from whole-process interaction influenced the interaction between project activities and operational preparedness activities (Lu and Yan, 2007). Capital Airports Holdings Limited (CAH) proposed a strategic initiative to ensure the high-quality opening of BDIA, and these three systems of governance brought together all levels and types of organisations within CAH to couple all aspects of the project with active planning activities.
1.2.3 Gradual Integration
When it came to operational readiness, some tasks, like those in the aviation industry, were too complex for professional management firms to handle, therefore the responsibility fell on the Operational Readiness Office (ORO). In addition, it began to include some divisions of professional management firms, such as four of them’s non-aviation divisions (Liu, 2016). Relationships between OROs and professional management firms were more comparable to parallel partnerships, and the level and extent of integration were modest. There was a constant change in the process of governing operational preparedness operations. During the planning and building stages, CAH coordinated with professional management firms and the Capital Airport Management Company to offer expertise in areas such as knowledge support, operational scheme formulation, operational management organisation establishment, institutional development, and talent reservation (Pi et al., 2021). The official establishment of DAMC to combine all enterprises and operational preparedness operations occurred during the close-out period. The integrated management company and the specialised management businesses of airport operation formed a matrix integration, which was the ultimate governance style of operational preparatory operations from CAH’s standpoint.
1.2.4 Major Issues
The Group (CAH) delegated complete authority to the Headquarters (HQ) to oversee the project’s operations. At first look, it was necessary to notify the Group (CAH) only of significant matters, such as the airport’s yearly investment plans, bids for baggage management and terminal development, modifications of significant magnitude, and problems with exceeding the budget. However, when it came to consultation, design, building, supervision, and equipment, the HQ had considerable discretion in the bidding and procurement processes (Zhang et al., 2021). It was up to the discretion of the HQ to establish several institutions for project management, including those for bidding, pricing, risk, quality, time, and safety. To oversee the construction of the airport, headquarters opted for the design-bid-build (DBB) approach. To be more precise, the HQ used competitive bidding, invited tendering, or direct confiding to choose market providers for the equipment, advisory services, development, building, supervision, and equipment. According to Pi et al. (2021), the headquarters oversaw around 700 contracts in total. To address the issue of contract interfaces brought about by the DBB model, the headquarters used a mixed approach that included local integrated management, professional integrated management, and functional assistance as shown in Figure 1
Figure 1: DBB model components used by Headquarters (Source:Self)
1.3 Conclusion
The Beijing Daxing International Airport (BDIA) project is a multi-agency effort to create and manage huge infrastructure. HQ and DAMC faced several case study challenges managing the project, including personnel and departmental overlap, interaction throughout the process, and gradual integration.To manage BDIA’s programming and operational preparations, HQ and DAMC staff collaborated. This enabled better coordinated and creative project and operational initiatives, creating value.The headquarters employed design-bid-build (DBB) to oversee the airport’s construction and had significant autonomy in procurement and bidding.The HQ and DAMC faced various challenges when managing the Beijing Daxing International Airport project, including departmental and personnel overlap, full process communication, and contaract interfaces.
References
Chen, Z. (2020). Airport surrounding area development in China.Available at: [Accessed 11 Jan. 2024].Liu, D. (2016). Measuring aeronautical service efficiency and commercial service efficiency of East Asia airport companies: An application of Network Data Envelopment Analysis. Journal of Air Transport Management, 52, pp.11–22. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2015.12.001.Lu, S. and Yan,
- (2007). A model for evaluating the applicability of partnering in construction. International Journal of Project Management, 25(2), pp.164–170. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.09.009.Mao, J. (2021). The Deconstructive Enlightenment of Daxing International Airport. [online]. and Freestone, R. (2021). The spatial distribution of employment around major Chinese airports. Journal of Transport Geography, 91, p.102978. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2021.102978.Ramasesh, R.V. and Browning, T.R. (2014). A conceptual framework for tackling knowable unknown unknowns in project management. Journal of Operations Management, 32(4), pp.190–204. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2014.03.003.Xu, Q., Jia, G., Wang, X. and Chen, Y. (2022). Governing Value Creation in a Major Infrastructure Project Client Organization: The Case of Beijing Daxing International Airport. Sustainability, 14(5), p.3001. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su14053001.Yun, L., Wan, J., Wang, G., Bai, J. and Zhang, B. (2020). Exploring the missing link between top management team characteristics and megaproject performance. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, ahead-of-print(ahead- of-print). doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/ecam-12-2018-0566.Zhang, L., Hou, M., Liu, Y., Wang, K. and Yang, H. (2021). Measuring Beijing’s international air connectivity and suggestions for improvement post COVID-19. Transport Policy. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2021.11.015.Zhang, X., Juliano Denicol, Chan, P. and Yun Zheng Le (2023a). Designing the transition to operations in large inter‐ organizational projects: Strategy, structure, process, and people. Journal of Operations Management. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/joom.1275.Zhang, X., Liu, M., Le, Y., Wu, J., Zhu, Y. and Li, Y. (2023b). Deconstructing Organizational Capabilities of Megaproject Owners: Dimensions and Levels. Journal of the Construction Division and Management, 149(7). doi:https://doi.org/10.1061/jcemd4.coeng-13097.