Content uploaded by Jörg Sydow
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Jörg Sydow on Dec 17, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Regional Studies, Vol. 36.3, pp. 215–227, 2002
The Institutional Embeddedness of Project
Networks: The Case of Content Production in
German Television
JO
¨R G S Y D OW * and U D O S TA B E R †
*Free University of Berlin, Boltzmannstrasse 20, 14195 Berlin, Germany. Email: sydow@ wiwiss.fu-berlin.de
†Stuttgart Institute of Management and Technology, Filderhaupstrasse 142, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany.
Email: u.staber@web.de
(Received June 2001; in revised form September 2001)
SYD O W J. and ST A BE R U. (2002) The institutional embeddedness of project networks: the case of content production in
German television, Reg. Studies 36, 215–227. Project networks are an organizational form of production and exchange among
functionally interdependent but legally autonomous rms and individuals. Although these networks are of limited duration,
co-ordination of actors and activities takes place with respect to past experiences and future expectations. Project networks
depend on suppor tive institutions in the surrounding organizational eld to provide the regulative and normative resources
within which practices are given meaning. In this paper, we explore the role of ‘institutional thickness’ for the performance of
project networks in television content production in two media regions in Ger many. We use GI D D E N S ’, 1984, structuration
perspective, to emphasize the dynamics and ambiguities of institutional processes. The analysis suggests that the two media
regions diVer in institutional thickness in ways which explain, at least in part, diVerences in the growth and viability of project
networks.
Project networks Institutions Institutional thickness Structuration theory Television
SYD O W J. et S T A B ER U. (2002) L’ancrage institutionnel des SY D O W J. und STA B E R U. (2002) Die institutionelle Einbet-
re
´seaux de projet: l’e
´tude de cas de la production du fond et tung von Projektnetzwerken – Der Fall der Content-
de la forme dans la te
´le
´vision allemande, Reg. Studies 36, Produktion fu
¨r das deutsche Fernsehen, Reg. Studies 36, 215–
215–227. Les re
´seaux de projet constituent une forme organ- 227. Projektnetzwerke sind eine Organisationsform o
¨kono-
isationnelle de production et d’e
´change parmi des entreprises mischer Aktivita
¨ten von zwar rechtlich selbsta
¨ndigen, jedoch
et des individus qui sont interde
´pendants du point de vue funktional interdependenten Unternehmungen bzw. Unter-
fonctionnel mais autonomes sur le plan juridique. Malgre
´la nehmern, die fu
¨r eine begrenzte Zeit – ein Projekt –
dure
´e de vie limite
´e de ces re
´seaux-la
`, la coordination des zusammenkommen, ihre Zusammenarbeit allerdings im
acteurs et des activite
´s a lieu en fonction des expe
´riences du Lichte ihrer bisherigen Erfahrungen und im Schatten ihrer
passe
´et des attentes futures. Les re
´seaux de projet de
´pendent zuku
¨nftigen Erwartungen koordinieren. Projektnetzwerke
des organismes de soutien situe
´s dans le domaine organisa- sind dabei auf die Unterstu
¨tzung durch Institutionen in dem
tionnel environnant a n de fournir les ressources re
´gulatrices organisationalen Feld angewiesen, die ihnen den ZugriVauf
et normatives au sein desquelles les pratiques se voient donner Ressourcen ermo
¨glichen und Sinn und Legitimita
¨t verfu
¨gbar
un sens. Cet article cherche a
`examiner le ro
ˆle de l’ancrage machen. In diesem Beitrag wird die Rolle von ‘‘institutional
institutionnel pour ce qui est de la perfor mance des re
´seaux thickness’’ fu
¨r die Performanz von Projektnetzwerken im
de projet dans la production du fond et de la forme dans Feld der Content-Produktion fu
¨r das Fernsehen in zwei
la te
´le
´vision de deux re
´gions d’importance me
´diatique en deutschen Medienregionen untersucht. Dies geschieht auf
Allemagne. On se sert de la perspective stucturante de der Grundlage der Giddens’ schen Strukturationstheorie, die
GI DD E N S , 1984, pour souligner la dynamique et l’ambiguite´ die Dynamik und Ambiguita
¨t von Institutionalisierungspro-
des processus institutionnels. L’analyse laisse voir que deux zessen betont. Die Analyse zeigt, dass die zwei untersuchten
re
´gions se distinguent du point de vie de leur ancrage Regionen sich hinsichtlich der institutionellen Dichte signi-
institutionnel d’une fac¸on qui explique, du moins en partie, kant unterscheiden. Dies erkla
¨rt – zumindest zum Teil –
les diVe
´rences de la croissance et de la viabilite
´des re
´seaux die Wachstums- und ErfolgsdiVerenzen der Netzwerke und
de projet. Regionen.
Re
´seaux de projet Organismes Projektnetzwerk Institutionen
Ancrage institutionnel The
´orie de structuration Institutionelle Dichte Strukturationstheorie
Te´le´vision Fernsehen
0034-3404 print/1360-0591 online/02/030215-13 ©2002 Regional Studies Association DOI: 10.108 0/00343400220122034
http://www.region al-studies-assoc.ac.uk
216 Jo
¨rg Sydow and Udo Staber
I N T RO D U C T I O N between action and structure. While structural
approaches neglect the possibility that individual or
corporate agents have signi cant latitude even underProject networks constitute an organizational form of
co-ordinating activities and relations among legally severe structural constraints, more action-oriented
perspectives tend to overlook the constraining andautonomous but functionally interdependent rms and
individuals. Project networks are ‘temporary systems’ enabling capabilities of structures. Structuration theory
tries to overcome, more than any other perspective,(G O OD M A N , 1981) in so far as the project activities
are limited in time. But because network actors coordi- the one-sidednesses of much theorizing, and by doing
so contributes to a more dynamic understanding ofnate their activities with reference to practices and
experiences of collaboration in previous ventures and (inter-) organizational life, including the development
and reproduction of institutions. By highlighting insti-in anticipation of future relationships, project networks
are more than just temporary systems (S Y D O W and tutional processes and spatial dynamics, the present
study not only go es beyond conventional manag ementW I N D E LE R, 1999). Although project tasks are tempor-
ary, the network of interpersonal and interorganiza- oriented explanations of project organizations. It also
oVers a theoretical perspective which, we believe,tional relationships in which tasks are embedded may be
more enduring. Network stability provides the context deserves more attention in the analysis of the time-
space dimension of modern forms of productionwithin which the kind of trust, commitment, and
reciprocity norms can develop that support project co- organization.
ordination. Because of the temporary nature of tasks,
and despite a certain degree of relational stability, P RO J E CT, P ROJ E C T OR G A N I Z AT I O N
project networks themselves develop only a limited set A N D P RO J E C T N E T WO R K
of institutions. As a consequence, they depend more
heavily than other organizational forms, including A project is de ned as a temporally limited set of
interrelated tasks (L U N D I N and S O
¨DE R H O L M , 1995).other types of interorganizational networks, on suppor-
tive social and political institutions in their organiza- When tasks are truly unique, the project is formulated
for a set of contingencies that will not recur. Goodtional eld. These institutions not only supply essential
material and informational resources but also set regu- management, in this situation, depends heavily on the
creativity and exibility of the project participants,latory constraints, create possibilities for interorganiza-
tional action, deter mine normative expectations, and especially when knowledge about how, why, and with
whom to interact is poorly understood. By contrast,provide the social context within which practices
obtain project-relevant meaning. when tasks are repetitive, the co-ordination of the
project is likely to take on at least some of the propertiesIn this paper, we explore the signi cance of institu-
tional thickness for the perfor mance of project net- of a ‘per manent’ organization, in that members can
develop common frames of reference within whichworks in television content production in two media
regions in Germany. We compare the interaction struc- learning can take place. Regardless of whether project
tasks are unique or repetitive, they are limited in timetures and processes in the media regions of Cologne/
Du
¨sseldorf and Berlin/Babelsberg. The empirical data and identi able within temporal boundaries. Projects
may be seen as a ‘highly organized way of dealingfor this analysis were collected between 1998 and
2000 through semi-structured interviews conducted with time problems and of acting according to the
perception of time as being scarce, linear and valuable’primarily with producers and managing directors of 16
major production rms, and programme editors and (ibid., p. 440). Perceptions of time provide a rationale
for arranging social relations and for organizing projectchief executive oYcers of the four broadcasting stations
located in the two media regions. Inter views with objectives, instruments and management processes.
Projects are usually not a series of isolated activitiesproviders of artistic and technical media services,
funding and development agencies, and other industry but are embedded in a system of more or less enduring
social relationships within the context of a project organi-experts enabled us to cross-validate most ndings. A
total of more than 70 interviews were conducted. They zation, which has a distinct social identity and organiza-
tional culture. This identity and culture may developeach took an average of 2·5 hours and focused on
the organization of projects, the integration of the within and, as in the case of project networks, between
organizations. Project organizations may complementcustomers (i.e. the broadcasters) in the projects, and
their eVorts to co-ordinate and control the production or, in industries characterized by increasing ‘project-
i c ation’ (M I D LE R , 1995), replace more permanentprocess within the institutional setting of the regions.
The analysis is informed by GI D D EN S’, 1984, struc- organizational structures. The ‘social capital’ of project
organizations consists of obligations and expectationsturation perspective. Although originally developed as a
social theory, it also helps to understand the institutional concerning the co-ordination of tasks and re ects the
collective capability of project members to learn andembeddedness and dynamics of project-based produc-
tion systems in time and space, in that it forces attention innovate. But social capital can also generate negative
outcomes, as when social relations are so tight andto the duality and recursiveness of the relationship
The Institutional Embeddedness of Project Networks 217
exclusionary that they lead to inertia and stagnation, A S T RU C T U R AT I O N PE R S P E C T I V E
rather than innovation and change (U ZZI, 1997; O N A C T I O N, ST RU C T U R E AN D
GA RG I O U L O and B EN A S S I, 2000). Project manage- I N S T I T U T IO N S
ment thus concerns more than the execution of goals A substantial literature exists on project organizations
and the use of technical instruments (budget plans, and project management. Some of this literature focuses
deadlines, etc.). It also has to address the causal ambi- on the management aspects of projects and project
guities, interest con icts and legitimacy issues one organizations, typically taking a situational contingency
normally nds in social relationships (SA H LI N perspective. From this perspective, it is assumed that
AN D ER S S O N , 1992). there is one best organizational design that suits a
When the project organization is itself embedded particular set of circumstances. These circumstances are
in a larger web of long term and reciprocity-based seen as given, and the design and management of
interorganizational relationships, it takes on the char- project organizations is assumed to be motivated mostly
acter of a project network. This network connects the by technical-eYciency criteria, implemented rationally
project enterprise to the rms which participate in the and purposively. This perspective addresses some
project as well as to the organizational and institutional important contingencies but does not capture the
environments in which these rms are embedded. The dynamics and ambiguities of project organizations, nor
member r ms do not dissolve within the context of does it examine the role of spatiality and institutional
the project organization. Although they are functionally resources. More recent approaches have emphasized
and economically interdependent (as project members), the system character and the relational aspects of project
they retain their legal autonomy and organizational org anizations (e.g. H E L L G RE N and ST J E R N B ER G ,
identity. To the extent that project networks comprise 1995; EK S T E D T et al., 1999 ; L U N D I N and H ART-
relationships that exist beyond the speci c and current
M AN N , 2000). By taking into account the role of social
boundaries of the project organization they may be legitimacy, tacit knowledge, political interests, sense-
considered ‘latent or ganizations’ (S T A R K EY et al.,making processes and resource dependencies, and thus
2000). the possibility of interest con icts and path dependen -
The spatial boundaries of projects and project net- cies, they come closer to capturing the reality of many
works are drawn partly on the basis of material resource project organizations, including project networks. By
requirements (such as access to studio facilities in lm paying attention not only to the business context but
production). But, more importantly, they re ect the also to the social framework in which project work
necessity of face-to-face contact for individuals to takes place, these approaches help to explain why
exchange and interpret diYcult-to-code knowledge. ineYcient project enterprises are not always eliminated
The diYculty of transmitting tacit knowledge, as well as (quickly) from the market. They are thus a useful
the strength of local cultures and traditions, explain why corrective to the conventional technical-eYciency
some networks are highly place-speci c and diYcult to approach, by viewing the project enterprise as an
transfer to other locales. But the regional component of organizing process rather than a rationally structured
project networks is not well understood. In the literature organization, and by accepting the associated ambigui-
on innovation systems and industrial districts, some
ties as givens rather than something to be de ned away.
authors treat territorial closeness as a de ning char-
Although these more recent approaches to the study
acteristic of inter rm networks (M A L M BE R G and
of project organizations and project networks oVer
MA SK E L L , 1997), whereas others examine it as a
important insights into various dimensions of this
variable, exploring the extent to which actors must be
organizational form of production, none of them
located in proximity to be able to co-operate eVectively
addresses the interrelated aspects of structure and action
and learn jointly (STA B E R , 1998). In line with a
as simultaneously and explicitly as we think is necessary
structuration theoretic perspective (discussed below),
and possible, given the advances in social theories.
and supported by our empirical observations, we think
Similar to E KS T E D T et al., 1999, who analyse action
of territorial proximity as a social variable. Project
and knowledge formation in temporary systems, we
networks may be thought of as existing within an
think that G ID D E N S ’, 1984, structuration theory
organizational eld whose spatial boundaries are deter-
provides a useful perspective for integrating and re-
mined by the fact that the actors orient themselves
interpreting the concept of project network in light
signi cantly towards each other, the region in which
of its relationship to institutions (see S Y D O W and
they are located, and the industry of which they are
WI ND E L E R , 1998, for an earlier attempt in a diVerent
part. There is an awareness among the actors of their
context). We use structuration theory to explore the
regional embeddedness, as re ected in the ways in
dynamic constitution of institutional embeddedness,
which their social practices are linked to the regional
with reference to the re exivity of agents and their
institutional framework. This awareness can be
actions, as well as the recursive interplay of social
explored when the concepts of structuration theory are
interactions within and across the organizations
employed as a ‘sensitizing device’ to interpret empirical
observations (G ID D E N S , 1984, p. 326). involved. This perspective deals both with the creation
218 Jo
¨rg Sydow and Udo Staber
and maintenance of ideas, structures and institutions, at the discursive level of consciousness and to implicit
understandings at the practical level of consciousness.and with change and continuity, using the same lan-
guage. And it oVers a set of ‘sensitizing’ concepts that In their re exive monitoring of interaction, agents
actualize these rationales as they mobilize the modalitieshelp to understand social relationships in time and
space, such as the time-space constitution of institu- (interpretive schemes, facilities and norms) inherent in
the network. Because of incomplete information andtional embeddedness.
Giddens employs the concepts of duality of structure the possibility of contradictory expectations, prefer-
ences and interests, behaviours do not always haveand structuration to explain the dynamic relationship
between human agency and the structure of social intended consequences, and the outcomes of action are
never entirely predictable and controllable.systems. In structuration theory, structure is not seen
as detached from action. ‘Structure is not ‘‘external’’ The structuration perspective oVers a processual view
of the constitution, reproduction and transformationto individuals: as memory traces, and as instantiated in
social practices, it is in a certain sense more ‘‘internal’’ of project networks. Networks are produced and repro-
duced by actors who, depending on the complexitythan exterior to their activities’ (G ID D E N S , 1984,
p. 25). Duality of structure means that social structures and uidity of external conditions, in uence the struc-
tures of the network without fully controlling it. Forare constituted by human action and, at the same
time, are the medium of this constitution. From this that purpose, agents, in their interactions, draw upon
the structural properties of the network (e.g. the densityperspective, project networks are not structures but,
like all other social systems, they have structures or and diversity of relations) and thereby reproduce or
change them (S T A B ER and SY D OW, 2002). Hence,structural properties which actors draw upon in their
social interaction. the organizational and institutional properties of a
project network are considered as neither given norThe concept of structuration refers to the processes by
which actors reproduce and transform social practices xed, but as more or less contested and thus vulnerable
to change. This processual view is in sharp contrast toacross time and space. These processes are related to
structures in that practices are embedded in the system the conventional static approach to project organiza-
tions and project management.which, depending on how the project and the project
network are structured and depending on external Institutional embeddedness means, from the structur-
ation perspective, more than the simple presence ofconditions, either enables or constrains action. Struc-
tures thus never determine action. Actors are seen as particular institutions thought necessary for survival,
innovation and change, but addresses the forms andembedded in a social context, including the history
of their previous interactions. They are engaged in processes by which meaning is constructed, trust is
built (or destroyed), knowledge is exchanged, and sostructures which they reproduce or transform in the
process of acting upon and through them. Con- forth. Institutions, according to G I D D E N S , 1984, p. 17,
are those ‘practices which have the greatest time-spacesequently, their interactions are not considered isolated
events or dyadic exchanges, but are conceptualized as extensions’ and thus represent ‘the more enduring
features of social life’ (ibid., p. 24). As such, they do ows of interactions which are contextually bound.
Structuration theory thus oVers a conceptual scheme not have a life of their own but depend upon the
reproductive actions of agents. Institutions outside of,for understanding how actors create project network
structures as both the medium and the outcome of but relevant to, project networks include formal organ-
izations (training institutes, associations, state agencies,their social practices.
Giddens’ per spective on the recursive interplay of sponsors, banks, etc.), formal standards and regulations,
as well as less visible rules, shared norms and taken-structure and process deals simultaneously with dom-
ination, cognition and legitimacy as interrelated aspects for-granted beliefs.
Thus, the structuration perspective on action, struc-of the processes through which structures are consti-
tuted. Unlike theories which emphasize action and ture and institutions goes beyond the neo-
institutionalist perspective on (inter-) organizationalfocus on the symbolic or cognitive aspects of behaviour,
structuration theory also takes power into account. relations, which has gained much prominence in the
analysis of networks and institutions (e.g. DAC I N andAnd unlike theories which analyse structures primarily
in terms of power or eYciency, structuration theory O L I V E R, 1999), in at least two respects. First, the ‘dia-
lectic of con trol’ (G I D D E N S , 1984) means that agentsalso pays attention to normative interpretations of
action which give meaning to power and eYciency. not only reproduce but also transform network struc-
tures, especially when structures involve contradictionsBecause the relationships inherent in project networks
re ect thes e stru ctures, their design and managem ent and con i cts (S Y D O W and W I N D E L E R , 1998). Action
takes place within structures, but structures also exist inrequire attention to all aspects of social practice through
which they are constituted. action. Second, structuration theory goes beyond the
neo-institutional assumption that action is motivatedThe agents are seen as knowledgeable and purposive
in their actions. They are capable of providing a ration- primarily by leg itimacy requirements (S C O T T , 1995).
Social leg itimacy is an important element in projectale for their actions, referring to explicitly stated rules
The Institutional Embeddedness of Project Networks 219
networks, re ecting diVerences in power and domina-
tion. But network relations are also driven by considera-
tions of technical and resource eYciency. If legitimacy
and eYciency concerns are viewed by actors as contra-
dictory, they may become a source of con ict and
change.
P RO J E C T N E T WO R K S IN
T V- C O N T E N T P RO D U C T I O N
Television programmes (movies, series, documentaries,
etc.) are normally produced on a project basis, with a
duration of between several days and several months
and with highly customized and project-speci c results.
The projects are based on more or less stable relational
networks which often involve the same group of rms
and individuals. Fir ms co-operate for the duration of a
lm project, but their (evolving) business relations
typically extend beyond a single project. Thus, a new
project is often based on the collaboration of rms and
individuals who have worked together in the past and
consider the possibility of joint work in the future
when developing a viable form of project governance.
Past experiences of collaboration and expectations
emerging in the ‘shadow of the future’ (A XE L R O D ,
1984) can facilitate project co-ordination, even in pro-
B r o ad -
c a s t e r
D i r e c t o r
P r o d u c e r
A u th o r
Te c h n ic a l
s e r v ic e s
p r o v id e r
n o n te c h -
s e r v ic e
p ro v i de r
In d e p en d e n t e n t e rp ris e
W a g e d e p e n d e nt e m p lo y e e
jects where rms and individuals meet only for a very
limited period of time. Fig. 1. An example of a TV project network
Fig. 1 shows a typical project network in T V-content
production. It includes suppliers such as authors, direc-
tors and a variety of providers of artistic and technical is ‘integrated’ in the production process with respect to
services (e.g. script consultants, casting agencies, cut- issues of content, persons and rights. This ‘integration’
ters, lighting specialists and location scouts). Some rarely proceeds har moniously, but re ects diVerences
project participants may perfor m several functions, in power, interests and preferences (W I N D E L E R et al.,
while others specialize in unique activities. A variety 2000).
of member constellations and task interdependencies In the context of project networks, agents tend to
are possible, depending on the content of the pro- orient themselves, re exively, to their experiences with
gramme and the par ticular context in which it is past collaboration, as well as their expectations of future
produced. The participants of a project are normally relationships. Producers, for example, normally rely on
selected by the producers or production r ms which a core of authors with whom they have worked in
also tend to co-ordinate the activities. Production is the past:
usually commissioned by television stations, and
increasingly also by internet providers which, There are authors with whom we work over an extended
depending upon the type of programme and the con- period, I would say not more than ve authors. But we
do that only if we already have a programme series and
cern of the producer for integrating customers, are
we want to produce another episode . . . In this case, we
more or less strongly involved in the co-ordination of oVer the author favourable terms, because he was good
production. in the past. We guarantee him a certain budget for a
Although producers normally produce for a variety certain time period. And we then also pay even if the
of broadcasters, and broadcasters obtain programme broadcaster demands less, because that’s not the author’s
content from diVerent producers, relations between responsibility. In other cases, we use authors again and
producers and broadcasters can be fairly tight for the again, or only once. (producer 2)
duration of the project and beyond. But this does not
mean that there is no competition in the execution of Despite diVerences in power, interests and prefer-
ences, network members over time develop routinesthe production process and in attempts to appropriate
pro ts, licenses, property rights, and so forth. There and practices, with sets of rules and resources that can
be used to co-ordinate current project activities andremains an important element of competition in co-
operative relations, as is normally the case in service to formulate common strategies for future projects.
Recurrent relations may lead to the development ofindustries, where the customer (here, the broadcaster)
220 Jo
¨rg Sydow and Udo Staber
reciprocity norms which, for example, enable produ- are brought into the project network as volunteers
or dependen t self-employed workers. Although theircers to obtain assistance from authors, even if such
assistance cannot always be paid for fully or if com- project-oriented activities oVer diverse opportunities to
develop artistic, technical and/or administrative com-pensation is delayed. From the structuration perspect-
ive, the latency of the organization provides an petencies, these are often very speci c to the needs
of a particular project network. It is only throughopportunity for project members to assess their own
and others’ future involvement in the project. In this participation in several networks and career paths,
which are not bound to a speci c rm but operateway, relations can persist over an extended period of
time, even in an industry as volatile as the media within the institutional context of project networks,
that self-employed workers can learn the appropriateindustry. Chains of reputation help to institutionalize
reciprocal rights and obligations which, in turn, enable practices to build their personal careers (J O N E S , 1996).
Occupational standards cannot develop in the contextco-operation. According to one producer, ‘if co-
operation is successful, we can stay in business for a of a speci c project. This is especially problematic in
television content production, where trainee activitieslong time, sometimes as long as 20 to 25 years’. By
learning from past relations, actors develop competen- are predominant and formal education is more the
exception than the rule. In this kind of industry, projectcies and rules of behaviour which can be transferred to
new projects and project networks and which facilitate networks serve as connectors between singular projects
and broader eld-based in stitutions (W I N D E L E R andoperational exibility and short term collaboration,
without the use of extensive and constraining formal S Y D OW, 2001).
Institutional embeddedness in T V-content produc-contracts. In structuration terms, it is in the context of
common rules and practices, mediated through norms tion, especially when seen from a structuration per-
spective, means more than the mere presence ofand moral codes, that interpretations about ‘what does
a good television programme look like?’ and ‘what is institutions that set reliable rules and provide material
and informational resources. Institutional embedded -eVective project management?’ can become institution-
alized and reproduced over time. ness also implies intensive interaction and a common
orientation among interdependent actors. A projectThere are considerable variations among project net-
works in terms of duration and territorial scope, network may be said to be institutionally embedded if
organizations as institutions are ‘actively engaged withdepending on the content that is produced. For
example, soap operas, comedies and talkshows tend to and conscious of each other, displaying high levels of
contact, cooperation, and information exchange whichbe long lasting and locally bound, whereas T V-movies,
science programmes and documentaries are normally may lead, in time, to a degree of mutual isomorphism’
(AM I N and T HR I F T , 1994, p. 14). The collectivelimited to a small number of episodes. These episodes
are often recorded in diVerent locations, while post- structures and mutual awareness which emerge as a
result of this interaction facilitate the organization ofproduction activities, such as lm cutting and editing,
generally take place in one location. diverse interests, help to reduce opportunistic tenden-
cies and enable uni ed action which, in tur n, is theBecause projects are of short duration and relation-
ships among most project participants are uid, project basis for further strengthening institutional embedded-
ness. The outcome of such collective structures andnetworks can, by themselves, develop institutions with
only limited capacity to support co-ordination: formal orientations is a certain deg ree of ‘institutional thick-
ness’ (A M I N and T H RI F T , 1994), with likely ambi-or informal rules of collaboration; the acceptance of
the producer as the organizer of the network; and so guous implications for change and innovation.
forth. As a consequence, they must rely heavily on
broader eld-based institutions which set professional T H E I N S T I TU T I O N A L C O N T E XT O F
standards, rules concerning working hours and product P RO J E C T N E T WO R K S I N T WO
quality, and formal regulations concerning intellectual ME D I A RE G I O N S
property rights, and which provide new infor mation,
expertise and other critical resources. For instance, On the basis of available statistical data (as estimated by
diVerent research institutes) of the sales and productionproject networks require a human resource pool from
which new and diverse competencies can be drawn, volume, the media region of Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf ranks
larger than the Berlin/Babelsberg region (see L UTZ
but without a minimum degree of institutional stability
for training, standard setting and career building, such and S Y D O W, 2002, for details). Despite diVerences in
scope, a sizeable production apparatus has developed inpools are diYcult to sustain. Only TV stations and
large production r ms are able to develop and retain both regions during the last decade. The Cologne/
Du
¨sseldorf media region includes two large televisionhuman resources in a more for mal, professional way
(MI C H E L MED I E N F O RS C H U N G UN D BER A T U N G stations and about 590 production r ms (Colonia
Media, Columbia TriStar, Endemol, among others), as(M M B), 1998), but these rms are increasingly opting
for lean structures. well as writer schools, professional associations, and a
growing number of training institutes. Current plansMany artistic and technical media service providers
The Institutional Embeddedness of Project Networks 221
include the construction of Europe’s largest studio S TA R KE Y et al., 2000, for a similar development in
the UK). Another factor conducive to the developmentcomplex, with the potential of creating 6,000 new jobs
(K U R P, 1999). The Berlin/Babelsberg media region of the region as a media centre was the public owner-
ship of television stations. It enabled the exertion oftoday includes two smaller television stations and about
770 production enterprises (including a few large r ms signi cant political pressure to, for example, ensure
that important economic relationships were conductedsuch as UFA and a branch of Studio Hamburg), a large
number of artistic and technical service providers (e.g. mostly with enterprises based in the region. This has
motivated several production rms to settle in theStudio Babelsberg), and three well-known colleges
specializing in lm, television, theatre and new media. Cologne region.
In 1991, a leading television station and the state ofBerlin/Babelsberg also bene ts from the attractiveness
of Berlin as a cultural capital as well as from its history Nor th-Rhine Westphalia established jointly the
Filmstiftung N R W in nearby Du
¨sseldorf, a foundationas an important lm production centre before World
War Two. Despite similarities in ter ms of the number that eventually became an important source of funding
for television production and educational programmes.of institutional organizations, there are diVerences in
institutional structures and processes that may explain The professed goal of this foundation was to support
job creation within the region by requiring that onenot only the diVerences in institutional support for
the respective project networks but also the diVerent and a half times of the funds provided be spent in
North-Rhine Westphalia. In time, this region-centredpotential of these two media regions to prosper and
become a signi cant backbone of the regional funding programme led to the establishment of an
increasing number of production rms and serviceeconomy.
organizations, which helped to develop the necessary
technical infrastructure and human resource pool in
Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf: an example of the successful development areas like casting, directing and perfor ming, as well
of a media region as production-related services such as car rental and
catering. Because of its historical origins and its closeThe economic signi cance of the Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf
media region seems surprising because, until the mid- institutional as well as infor mal ties to actors in polity
and economy, Filmstiftung N R W was more than a1980s, there existed neither a media-specialized infra-
structure of studios and service organizations nor, at source of funding. It also helped to mobilize ‘soft’
resources, such as political legitimacy and contactthat time, an urban metropolis that would appear
particularly attractive to artists, journalists, actors and opportunities. Together with other regional institutions
it contributed to the development of collective strat-others in the cultural arts sector. In the mid-1980s, the
small television economy started to become a focal egies in the following areas:
point of political support. The state government of the establishment of educational institutions which
North-Rhine Westphalia felt the need, because of a focus on the speci c requirements of television
rapidly shrinking iron, coal and steel industry, to initiate production; these institutions conceptualized, in
economic structural change by concentrating its eVorts collaboration with regional producers, service organ-
on potential growth industries, including the lm and izations and interest associations, the forms that
television industry. The close co-operation between education and training should take and helped to
polity and economy, typical for the ‘old economy’ in implement these programmes with the nancial and
North-Rhine Westphalia (G RA B H E R , 1993), charac- political support of the state ministry of science
terized also the rules and practices of government the development of a culture of co-operation and
support for the media sector, as politicians, regional knowledge transfer; by brokering ties between pro-
media enter prises and interest associations attempted to ducers, scriptwriters and other media service pro-
assemble joint resources for the development of a viders, Filmstiftung N R W created an ideal focal
regional media sector (G E SC H W A N D TN ER - A N D R E ß ,point for newcomers to the industry and the region
1999). This included support by the state ministry of the creation of discussion groups, such as the
economics for building the technical infrastructure, the Cologne Mediafor um, for debating problems in the
initiation of educational programmes for new media industry as well as formulating action strategies.
professions by the city of Cologne in collaboration
with a local trade association, and the provision of real The importance of these ‘soft resources’ is illustrated
by the comments of a leading television lm producerestate and low-interest risk capital by local nancial
institutions. in Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf :
The growth of this media region was slow initially, Most of the new producers, directors and script writers
but took oVin the early 1990s, when the private are discovered today by broadcasters and production rms
television stations switched from their strategy of pur- at the colleges. That is also the reason why I spend so
chasing programmes (mainly from the U S) to a strategy much time there, namely to get my hands on those people
of having programmes produced locally and externally as early as possible. That’s how you meet people, for
example, when they produce a lm project that is shown
by rms in project networks, as de ned above (see
222 Jo
¨rg Sydow and Udo Staber
at a college lm festival. . . . The industry a lso has numer- are re ected in the politically available resources (for
ous contact possibiliti es . . . I att end many lm premieres, sponsoring, location marketing, etc.) and the degree to
discussion panels, festivals, conferences, lm awards and which political support instruments and organizations
gathering s. On the se occasions one meets everybody. . . . are diVerentiated. The jurisdictional division between
That was a successful premiere for me, but don’t ask me two states (Berlin and Brandenburg) has, so far, had
which lm I saw. There we hear everything we need to negative consequences for the development of a strong
know, and we see how these people emerge. (producer 2) media region. While Berlin/Babelsberg is presented
This comment does not suggest that producers, or other publically as a single media region, the actual support
members of project networks involved in the produc- initiatives are bound by legal–administrative jurisdic-
tion of content for television, are unable to develop and tions rather than oriented to the economic region
sustain an internal labour market for quali ed personnel. (RO
¨B ER and V O
¨L KE L , 1999), with the eVect of
But it makes clear that there is no need to build such an creating competition between support programmes.
internal market because of the existence of eld institu- Currently the only state-spanning support institution
tions ful lling this function. is the Filmboard Berlin-Brandenburg, founded in 1995.
In sum, Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf has grown into a rather But because of funding limitations (compared to the
successful media region, with project networks that are far more resource-muni cent support organizations in
embedded in a supportive institutional framework. This North-Rhine Westphalia), this organization has so far
framework is a recursive result of close interactions of not been able to encourage joint eVorts of the two
(members of ) project networks and other organizations states in building a regional lm and television industry.
in the region. These regional institutions also help to The level of institutional thickness tends to be greater
co-ordinate project activities in ways which project net- in the Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf than the Berlin/Babelsberg
works cannot accomplish on their own. Over time, the media region, re ected in diVerences in political strat-
institutional framework has co-evolved with the eco- egies, levels of co-operation, and institutional diVeren-
nomic activities in T V-content production in the tiation and interlocking as, for example, in the media
region. The situation is somewhat diVerent in Berlin/ oriented education and training sector. Table 2 shows
Babelsberg, despite the presence of similar institutional the number of (and names of key) organizations active
organizations. as supporters or members of the most important train-
ing schools/institutes in the two regions. These are
more numerous, represent a larger variety of sectors
Berlin/Babelsberg: political laissez-faire or inhibited co- and are more likely to meet in more than one school/
operation? institute in Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf than is the case in
Berlin/Babelsberg.
In contrast to the more or less continuous development
To what extent Berlin/Babelsberg will evolve into
of the Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf media region, the evolution
a lm, television and/or multimedia region depends
of lm and television production in Berlin/Babelsberg
largely on the attractiveness of Berlin as a political and
was interrupted twice. World War Two led to the
cultural capital. But it also depends on the ability and
virtual destruction of the lm industry in that location,
willingness of actors in polity, economy and education
while the restructuring of the East German economy
to exploit this potential for economic growth. The
after 1990 upset the industry’s (re-) development.
conviction, as expressed by the former Minister of
Further more, the failed merger attempt of the states
Economics of Berlin, that a bustling metropolis like
of Berlin and Brandenburg complicated government
Berlin will attract automatically, and without the inter-
support for initiatives to revive the historical cinema
vention of politicians, creative forces and enterprises
lm production centre in Babelsberg.
(BR A N ON E R , 1999) indicates the preference for aThe diVerent strategies of key political actors in
laissez faire approach which, so far, has not been ablethese media regions (summarized in Table 1), as well
as diVerences in the economic strength of the regions, to compensate for the disadvantageous economic start-
Table 1. Differences in the strategies of political actors in the two regions
Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf ‘focus on core industries’ Berlin/Babelsberg ‘diVuse support’
Strong orientation to Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf region; location in a Partial orientation to the region and strong orientation to two states
single state (North-Rhine Westphalia) (Berlin and Brandenburg)
Co-operation and only partial competition among the political Partial co-operation and strong competition among political actors
actors at the municipal and state level in the region at the state level
Strong incentives for the founding of new media-related industries Limited marketing of location advantages; weak to absent
and institutions; co-operation with industry representatives positioning of regional actors (e.g. public enterprises and
(enterprises and associations) associations) as supporters of the regional institutional framework
Support for a strong regional institutional infrastructure Relative neglect of the regional institutional infrastructure
Source: LUTZ and S Y D OW, 2002.
The Institutional Embeddedness of Project Networks 223
Table 2. Institutional differentiation and interlocking in the television education and training sector in Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf and
Berlin/Babelsberg
Number of supporters and members
Schools/training institutes Production, Association/
(founding year) State City rental, legal Station foundation Support institutions
Cologne/Du¨ sseldorf
Filmschule N R W e.V. (1996) N R W 3 6
casting, costume, theatre . . . VF F V N RW e.V., Filmstiftung N RW,
Spiel lm NRW Filmbu
¨ro NR W
e.V. , . . . e.V. , . . .
Schreibschule Ko
¨ln e.V. (1994) Cologne 8 4 4 3
lm/TV genre, series, sitcom . . . Colonia Media, RT L, WD R, VF FV NR W e.V., Filmstiftung N RW,
GF F, Se nator, . . . SA T.1, Kanal Spiel lm Filmbu
¨ro NW
N RW.e.V. , . . . e.V. , . . .
Medienschule Erftkreis e.V. (1992) 7 1 1
production organization, law, lm/ NO B, M M C, . . . RT L VF FV N RW e.V.
TV technology
AIM e.V. (1995) media NR W Cologne 1 3 5 6
occupations, information centre MMC RTL, WD R, VFFV NR W e.V., Filmstiftung
VI V A Spiel lm N RW NR W, .. .
e.V. , . . .
Medienakademie Ko
¨ln (2000) N R W 1
multimedia Bertelsmann Stiftung
Ko
¨ln Comedy Schule (1999) NRW 1 1
Endemol RTL
Gag Akademie (1999) 1 1
Brainpool Adolf Grimme
Akademie
State Production, law Station Associatio n Suppor t institutions
Berlin/Babelsberg
Erich-Pommer-Institut (1999) Brandenburg 2
media management, law Ufa, A G ICOA
Scripthaus GmbH (1997) script
writing
DFFB (1965) directing, camera, Berlin
production
Drehbuchakademie (1997) Private producers 2 2
(DFF B) SF B, R TL Filmboard, EU-
Media II
Programme
TV-Producer-Programm (1999) 1 1 1
(DFF B) Pro 7 Bundesverband Dt. EU-Sozialfond (for
Fernsehproduzenten Berlin Senate)
HFF (1954) Brandenburg
directing, camera, production,
theatre, animation, drama
Source: LUTZ und S Y DO W, 2002.
up conditions, the division of the region into two T H E D Y N AM I C S AN D S PAT I A L
federal states and the absence of economically potent I M P L I C AT I O NS O F I N S TI T U T I O N A L
television stations. Recent eVorts by some rms to T H I CK N E S S
locate more of production in the Berlin/Babelsberg
region may improve the prospects, but it is too early The comparatively higher level of institutional thick-
ness in the Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf region is re ec ted into predict the eVect of this on the creation of a viable
media region. the close interaction and collaboration among the key
224 Jo
¨rg Sydow and Udo Staber
actors. For example, the state agency responsible for three comments above indicate, the institutional frame-
work in the Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf region seems to meetmonitoring and licensing television stations in NR W
nancially supports a Cologne school specializing in the requirements of content production through project
networks more eVectively than in Berlin/Babelsberg.training and retraining television journalists, which is
run by a private broadcaster (RT L). Another example The institutional thickness in the Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf
area, as interpreted from a structuration perspective atof close collaboration is the Filmstiftung N R W, which
can act as an important network broker because it is least, is as much an outcome of close interaction
between diVerent economic and political actors as it issupported by regional politicians and private investors
with critical resources and political legitimacy. Many a medium for future institution-building processes. But
despite its contribution to the eYciency and eVective-of our interviewees consider the Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf
media region a thriving network of exchange and co- ness of organizational forms in general and project
networks in particular, institutional thickness, like anyoperation, as, for example, the chief executive of a
Cologne production rm who views the region as form of social capital, may also lead to various kinds of
lock-ins (G R A B H E R , 1993), such as resource-based,‘livelier than what happens in other federal states in
Germany. . . . I don’t see that kind of pep in Berlin. All normative or cognitive lock-ins. For instance, the pre-
sent institutional framework in the Cologne/Du
¨sseldorfI see in Berlin is that all these creative people settle
there: actor s, director s, and authors. . . . That’s only region may be more suitable for the kind of pro-
grammes that are currently produced there (quiz showsbecause of the urban attractions, but then they all go
to Cologne to do their actual work’ (producer 9). An and comedies, in particular) than other kinds of con-
tent. The resource base of this framework is illustratedeconomic developer commented that:
by, for example, the Gag Academy and the Writers’
I think that the institutional web in North-Rhine West- School which were both founded to professionalize the
phalia is more polished and accomplished than that in work force for this kind of programming. The cognitive
Berlin. The bureaucracy in Berlin is bloated and therefore
and normative dimensions of the institutional frame-
less able to really take care of an active structural policy.
work are illustrated by the present orientation of many
They are not yet as professional about this as in North-
Rhine Westphalia. . . . W hat is missing is the constant economic and political actors towards this kind of
contact with the industry. It’s not that business should content. While quiz shows and comedy programmes
simply follow the lead of politicians, but that one keeps attract smaller audiences, the institutional framework is
in touch. (economic developer 2) less conducive to the production of diVerent content
and, hence, would need some restructuring.
A lm sponsor in North-Rhine Westphalia described The structuration perspective draws attention to the
co-operation and information exchange between pro- architecture of resource exchange relationships, as well
ducers, distributors, sponsors, and state institutions as as to the prevailing rules of signi cation and legitima-
follows: tion, to explain governance practices. Network actors
I give ourselves most credit for our political engagements. draw on these rules and resources to intervene in and
We go to the state parliament and provide all the impor t- transform exchange relations. In the present study,
ant committees there with infor mation. We also make politically strategic behaviour and asymmetries in the
sure that they get a feeling for the kind of work we do distribution of resources are evident in the successful
and that we do good work. In this respect, we operate intervention of the two major TV stations in Cologne
on more fertile ground than in Berlin. We do that kind
(RT L, W D R) in co-organizing project networks and
of work. I know that this work is done diVerently in
in attempts to produce an institutional framework in
Berlin, but I am also certain that we have it easier here.
the region that suits their interests. RT L and WD R
In reply to the question about what she considers are not only larger and more resource muni cent but
desirable for the further development of Berlin/ also politically more in uential than the two stations in
Babelsberg as a media region, a leading television Berlin/Babelsberg (S F B, O R B). They have been able
producer in Berlin suggested: to powerfully exploit their strategic position in the
region’s institutional connections. The cognitive and
I would like to see more exibility and willingness, as
well as more concrete support coming from the city normative aspects of institutional thickness are thus not
government. I think it’s desirable that the lm economy the only relevant factors explaining the development
is acknowledged as a signi cant and growing economic of project networks.
factor, which is then supported accordingly. Or, if one Existing power diVerentials mean that the co-
does not want to oVer support, one should at least not ordination of strategies and activities in a project
hinder its development. (producer 4) network and/or a region is not accomplished auto-
matically. Governance depends on a minimum degreeInstitutional thickness, in a process sense and seen
from the structuration perspective, is evolutionary and of consensus, but consensus is always contested. Agree-
ment has to be reached on the distribution of rightsdynamic, as re ected, for example, in the creation of
new institutions which are both a medium and a result and obligations, the regulation of con icts, the distribu-
tion of network outcomes, and so forth, even if thereof co-operation among knowledgeable agents. As the
The Institutional Embeddedness of Project Networks 225
is fundamental agreement on the advantages of network maintained. This context involves interorganizational
production relative to other organizational forms. The and social networks, locality and institutional processes.
institutional fram ework can be important if it in uen ces Project enterprises are embedded in co-operative net-
the development of consensus and the regulation of works which support the speedy ow of resources,
con icts by suppor ting common de nitions and information and knowledge. Although projects are
requirements. But the institutions themselves may be limited in time, the networks in which they are embed-
infused with political processes, if the critical resources ded are more enduring, re ecting the fact that the
are distributed asymmetrically. Our data indicate that social practices of project participants are interpreted
the institutional framework in Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf is with reference to past experiences and future expecta-
more conducive to the development of governable tions. The recursive interplay between network struc-
project networks than that in Berlin/Babelsberg. An tures, project activities and the institutional framework
example is the Filmstiftung NR W which plays the becomes particularly evident when seen from a struc-
role of a broker and innovator in Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf. turation perspective.
This foundation has over the years initiated the forma- Our analysis suggests that the media region of
tion of new training institutes, co-sponsored funding Cologne/Du
¨sseldorf is institutionally thicker, in a struc-
arrangements and organized discussion groups and turation sense, than the one in Berlin/Babelsberg, as
social gatherings. Because of its contribution to the re ected by h igher degrees of mutual awareness, levels
development of a viable media industry, it is supported of contact and intensity of information exchange.
not only by players in the industry but also in polity. Dense network relationships enable the initiation of
As a member of Filmstiftung N R W suggested, ‘it is new rules and practices, including more eVective co-
expected that we reinvent the wheel continuously, that ordination mechanisms. Cognitively and normatively
we create like magic new things and develop new dense interaction across all levels in the media sector
ideas, to get things rolling all the time’. ( rm, network and region) contributes to the spread
The fact that local institutions are important does of rules and practices, although they also increase the
not mean that project networks are spatially xed. As risk of inertia.
noted above, the production of T V movies, documen- The relationships between project networks and the
taries and lms for science programmes is only partially institutional environment are recursive in character.
bound to a locality. The episodes are often recorded in This means that network practices not only respond to
diVerent locations. Only post-production and more the existing institutions but also shape these institutions,
standardized activities, such as lm cutting and editing, intentionally and strategically, but often with un-
tend to take place in one location. While collaboration intended and unknown consequences. Institutional
with authors, directors and other agents ‘above the thickness cannot be created entirely at will. Further-
line’ is not restricted to the region, locality is of major more, although the degree of institutional thickness is
importance in the case of artistic and technical media an important factor, it is not the only factor explaining
services and their ‘below the line’ personnel. But this the diVerent developmental paths and economic poten-
location could, in principle, be wherever these facilities tials of the two media regions. The organizational and
are available. Asked if it would matter if the series is nancial endowments of the key actors matter as well.
produced in Berlin, Cologne, Hamburg, or Munich, a We conclude with two general observations. First,
producer of a well-known soap opera responded: ‘In local embeddedness does not preclude the possibility of
principle, it would be possible. But I would exclude spatial mobility. While project networks depend on the
Munich because the region is focused on the produc- general provision of institutional resources, in particular
tion of feature lms, and I would exclude Hamburg the collective structures of signi cation and legitimation
because is has too few productions. So there is even a that support the co-ordination of project activities, they
lack of actors. They would have to be brought in from are not tied spatially to a particular institutional context.
Berlin’ (producer 21). The present study illustrates less the spectrum of pos-
If stations did not normally commission a local sible levels of local embeddedness of project networks
producer, an entire production network with all the than the inherently fragile character of this embed-
necessary facilities would have to be built in a diVerent dedness. The structuration perspective suggests that the
location. For that, however, choices are limited even relationships of network actors with local institutions
in a country like Germany, as the above comment are always in a state of becoming, re ecting processes
indicates. And the personal involvement of many pro- of interpretation and re-interpretation, as well as
ject members in institution-building processes ‘on site’ attempts to change the power constellation of the net-
provides an additional bar rier to the unlimited spatial work. The outcomes of relational dynamics are to some
mobility of this organizational form. extent open-ended, not only because of diYcult-to-
predict institutional processes, but also because the
C O N C L U S I O N actors may at some point wish to relocate activities
outside the region. A regional project network is thus
This study indicates the importance of the institutional
context in which project organizations evolve and are always at risk of dissolution, because of the dynamics of
226 Jo
¨rg Sydow and Udo Staber
network relations and the (potential) competition from (C O OK E et al., 1997), as our data indicate. We argued
from the structuration perspective that the institutionalother regions attempting to develop a thriving media
embeddedness of project networks, as re ected in dis-
sector.
tinctive conventions, associational rules, social practices
Second, project network relationships are character-
and collective organizations, can have enabling or con-
ized by a fundamental tension between exibility and
straining consequences, depending on how rules,
stability. Flexibility is necessary for achieving the opera-
resources and facilities are played out by the agents.
tional objectives of projects, given temporal and
Accordingly, institutional thickness can take on diVer-
resource constraints. But networks also require a certain
ent forms in diVerent circumstances, with outcomes
degree of stability and durability, to facilitate co-
for development and change that are diYcult to emulate
ordination and develop a community of practice. Flex-
and predict.
ibility supports the creation of novel combinations of
knowledge from the distinct competencies of diVerent
Acknowledgements – We are grateful to the Deutsche
project participants, and this requires a certain degree Forschungsgemeinschaft (D FG) for nancial support of this
of openness. But too much openness can be a source project (S Y32/2–1), which is part of the S P P 197 on
of error, and eventually stagnation, if it increases the Regulierung und Restrukturierung von Arbeit in den Span-
cognitive distance between the actors (N O O T E B O O M ,nungsfeldern von Globalisierung und Dezentralisierung. We
2000). How this tension is resolved is, to some extent also thank the interviewees for their co-operation, Anja
at least, a function of the speci c institutional environ- Lutz, Arnold Windeler and Carsten Wirth for their valuable
ment in which the project network operates. DiVerent assistence in preparing this paper, and three anonymous
institutional settings are likely to give rise to distinctive reviewers and Gernot Grabher for their comments on an
earlier draft.
forms of the collective social order in diVerent locations
R E F E R E N CE S
AM IN A. and T H RI F T N. (1994) Living in the global, in A M I N A. and T H R IF T N. (Eds) Globalization, Institutions and Regional
Developement in Europe, pp. 1–22. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
AXEL R O D R. (1984) The Evolution of Cooperation. Basic Books, New York.
BRA N O N E R W. (1999) Medienstadt Berlin – Anziehungspunkt fu
¨r innovative Unternehmen, paper presented at the
Medienforum Berlin-Brandenburg Berlin – Capital of Talents: Die knappe Ressource Kreativita
¨t, Berlin.
COOK E P., U R A N GA M. and E TXE B A R R I A G. (1997) Regional innovation systems: institutional and organisational dimensions,
Research Policy 26, 475–91.
DAC I N M. T. and O L I V E R C. (1999) The legitimacy of strateg ic alliances: an institutional perspective, paper presented at the
IESE Conference ‘Competing Through Alliance Networks: Changing Dynamics of Industry Structure’, Universidad de
Navarra, Barcelona.
EKS T E D T E., L U ND I N R. A., S O
¨DE R H O LM A. and W IR D E N I U S H. (1999) Neo-industrial Organising: Renewal by Action and
Knowledge Formation in a Project-intensive Economy. Routledge, London.
GA RG I U L O M. and BE NAS S I M. (2000) Trapped in your own net? Network cohesion, structural holes, and the adaptation of
social capital, Organization Science 11(2), 183–96.
GE S CH W A N DT N E R - A N D RE ß P. (1999) Medienwirtschaft in Ko
¨ln: Theoretische Erkla
¨rungsansa
¨tze und politische Bestim-
mungsfaktoren eines regionalen Produktionsclusters, Working Paper No. 116, Institut fu
¨r Rundfunko
¨konomie, University
of Cologne (www.un-koeln.de/wiso-fak/rundfunk/index.html).
GI DD E N S A. (1984) The Constitution of Society. Polity Press, Oxford.
GRA B H E R G. (1993) The weakness of strong ties: the lock-in of regional development in the Ruhr area, in G R A B HE R G.
(Eds) The Embedded Firm, pp. 265–77. Routledge, London.
HEL L G R EN B. and S TJ E R N B ER G T. (1995) Design and implementation in major investments – a project network approach,
Scand. J. Mgt. 11(4), 377–94.
JO N ES C. (1996) Careers in project networks: the case of the lm industry, in AR T H U R M. B. and R O U S S EA U D. M. (Eds)
The Boundaryless Career: A New Employment Principle for a New Organizational Era, pp. 58–75. Oxford University Press,
New York.
KUR P M. (1999) Mythos und Modelle im Medienland NRW, Tendenz 1, 16–18.
LUN D I N R. a nd H A R T M A N N F. (2000) Projects as Business Constituents and Guiding Motives. Kluwer, Boston.
LUN D I N R. a nd S O
¨DE R H O L M A. (1995) A theory of the temporary organization, Scand. J. Mgt. 11, 437–55.
LUT Z A. and S Y D OW J. (2002) Content-Produktion in der Region – Zur Notwendigkeit und Schwierigkeit der politischen
Fo
¨rderung einer projektbasierten Dienstleistungsindustrie, in F I S C H ER J. and G E NS I O R S. (Eds) Sprungbrett Region? Analysen
vernetzter Gescha
¨ftsbeziehungen. Sigma, Berlin.
MA LM B E R G A. and MA S KE L L P. (1997) Towards an explanation of regional specialization and industry agglomeration,
Europ. Plann. Studies 5, 25–41.
MI CH E L ME D I E N FO R S C H U N G U N D BER A T U N G (M M B) (1998) AV-Medien in N R W – Arbei tsmarkt und Qu alizie rung, Final
report of the MMB for the Ministry of Science N R W, Du
¨sseldorf.
MI DL E R C. (1995) ‘Projecti cation’ of the rm: the Renault case, Scand. J. Mgt. 11(4), 363–73.
The Institutional Embeddedness of Project Networks 227
NO OT E B O O M B. (2000) Learning by interaction: absorptive capacity, cognitive distance and governance, J. Mgt & Governance
4, 69–92.
RO
¨BE R M. and V O
¨LK E L S. (1999) Szenen einer wilden Ehe: Die Zusammenarbeit zwischen Berlin und Brandenburg nach
der gescheiterten Fusion, Verwaltungsarchiv 90, 112–37.
SAH L I N AN D E R S S O N U. (1992) The use of ambiguity: the organizing of an extraordinary project, in H A G G I. and S E G E L OD
E. (Eds) Issues in Empirical Investment Research, pp. 143–58. North-Holland, Amsterdam.
SCO T T W. R. (1995) Institutions and Organizations. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
STA B ER U. (1998) Inter- rm co-operation and competition in industrial districts, Organization Studies 19, 701–24.
STA B ER U. and SY DO W J. (2002) Organizational adaptive capacity: a structuration perspective, J. Mgt Inquiry 11, forthcoming.
STA R KE Y K., BAR NA T T C. and T E M P E S T S. (2000) Beyond networks and hierarchies: latent organizations in the UK
television industry, Organization Science 11(3), 299–305.
SYD O W J. a nd W I N D E L ER A. (1998) Organizing and evaluating inter rm networks: a structuratio nist perspective on network
processes and eVectiveness, Organization Science 9(3), 265–84.
SYD O W J. and W I N DE L E R A. (1999) Projektnetzwerke: Management von (mehr als) tempora
¨ren Systemen, in E NG E L H A R D T
J. and SI NZ E. (Eds) Kooperation im Wettbewerb, pp. 213–35. Gabler, Wiesbaden.
UZZ I B. (1997) Social structures and competition in inter rm networks: the paradox of embeddedness, Admin. Sci. Quart. 42,
35–67.
WIN D E L E R A. and S Y D O W J. (2001) Project networks and changing industry practices – collaborative content production in
the German television industry, Organization Studies 22(6), 1,035–65.
WIN D E L E R A., WI R T H C. and L U T Z A. (2000) Netzwerksteuerung durch Selektion – Die Produktion von Fernsehserien in
Projektnetzwerken, in SY D O W J. and W I N D E L E R A. (Eds) Steuerung von Netzwerken, pp. 178–205. Westdeutscher Verlag,
Wiesbaden.
