Assessment of the influence of stakeholders in the development of Lithuanian airports
Abstract
Air transport is the only way to reach Lithuania from abroad in the short and medium term. Despite a well-developed road network in the country, connections to other European capitals are long and inconvenient. 2014 July. Vilnius, Kaunas and Palanga airports were merged into one state-owned company, Lithuanian Airports (LTOU). Since then, the efficiency and overall profitability of LTOU operations have increased significantly. However, maintaining the airport’s current infrastructure is costly and needs upgrading and further investment. The company has repeatedly asked itself whether it can get more benefits by building one new Lithuanian airport or focusing on developing the existing three airports net. Stakeholders’ views and recommendations should be heard to make timely and appropriate decisions without a new airport’s technical and financial feasibility. An in-depth interview and secondary data analysis were selected for the empirical study. Thirteen employees of SE Lithuanian Airports and three of the Ministry of Transport and Communications of the Republic of Lithuania participated in the research. The following was used to analyse secondary data: SE Lithuanian Airport strategic plan, the material of strategic sessions, and a survey of the country’s population on the need for a new airport. The study found that stakeholders positively assess the long-term development projects of SE Lithuanian Airports, fully understanding the importance of airports and their contribution to the welfare of the state. Stakeholders can significantly impact results, so airport managers must consider whether they effectively involve stakeholders and, if not, how they can improve or encourage stakeholder involvement.
Keyword : stakeholder involvement, influence, key stakeholders, airport development, airport development project
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Barrow, B. (2017). Stakeholder management – 50 ways that you can become brilliant at project stakeholder management, or how to engage, inspire and manage even difficult stakeholders. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
Brunet, M., & Aubry, M. (2016). The three dimensions of a governance framework for major public projects. International Journal of Project Management, 34(8), 1596–1607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.09.004
De Pascale, A., Arbolino, R., Szopik-Depczyńska, K., Limosani, M., & Ioppolo, G. (2021). A systematic review for measuring circular economy: The 61 indicators. Journal of Cleaner Production, 281, Article 124942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124942
Di Maddaloni, F., & Davis, K. (2017). The influence of local community stakeholders in megaprojects: Rethinking their inclusiveness to improve project performance. International Journal of Project Management, 35(8), 1537–1556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.08.011
Flick, U. (2014). An introduction to qualitative research (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
Freeman, R. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.
Gaižauskaitė, I., & Valavičienė, N. (2016). Socialinių tyrimų metodai: kokybinis interviu. Mykolo Romerio universitetas.
Gil, N. (2021). Megaprojects: A meandering journey towards a theory of purpose, value creation and value distribution. Construction Management and Economics, 40(7–8), 562–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2021.1946832
Gil, N. (2023). Cracking the megaproject puzzle: A stakeholder perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 41(3), Article 102455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102455
Greco, A., Annovazzi, C., Palena, N., Camussi, E., Rossi, G, & Steca, P. (2022). Self-efficacy beliefs of university students: Examining factor validity and measurement invariance of the new academic self-efficacy scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 498824. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.498824
Herremans, I. M., Nazari, J. A., & Mahmoudian, F. (2016). Stakeholder relationships, engagement, and sustainability reporting. Journal of Bussines Ethics, 138, 417–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2634-0
Kujala, J., Sachs, S., Leinonen, H., Heikkinen, A., & Laude, D. (2022). Stakeholder engagement: Past, present, and future. Business & Society, 61(5), 1136–1196. https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503211066595
Loučanová, E., Olšiaková, M., & Štofková, J. (2022). Open business modelof eco-innovation for sustainability development: Implications for the open-innovation dynamics of Slovakia. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(2), Article 98. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8020098
Luo, L., He, Q., Jaselskis, E. J., & Xie, J. (2017). Construction project complexity: Research trends and implications. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 143(7). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001306
Mok, K. Y., Shen, G. Q., Yang, R. J., & Li, C. Z. (2017). Investigating key challenges in major public engineering projects by a network-theory based analysis of stakeholder concerns: A case study. International Journal of Project Management, 35(1), 78–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.10.017
Ninan, J., Mahalingam, A., & Clegg, S. (2022). Power in news media: Framing strategies and effects in infrastructure projects. International Journal of Project Management, 40(1), 28–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2021.09.003
Ninan, N., Roy, J. C., & Cheriyan, N. K. (2020). Influence of social media marketing on the purchase intention of Gen Z. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, 29(1), 1692–1702.
Parmar, B. L., Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Purnell, L., & de Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 403–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2010.495581
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage.
Porter, M. (2008). The five competitive forces that shape strategy. Harvard Business Review.
Porter, S., & Hawkins, P. (2019). Achieving sustainability through sustainable organizational evaluation systems. Evaluating Sustainability: Evaluative Support for Managing Processes in the Public Interest, 2019(162), 87–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20360
Project Management Institute. (2021, April 16). A guide to the project management body of knowledge – 2000 Edition. http://www.cs.bilkent.edu.tr/~cagatay/cs413/PMBOK.pdf
Sachs, S., & Kujala, J. (2021). Stakeholder engagement in management studies: Current and future debates. In R. J. Aldag, Oxford research encyclopedia of business and management. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.013.321
Sinclair, M.-L. (2010). Developing a model for effective stakeholder engagement management. Curtin University of Technology, Asia Pacific Public Relations Journal, 11.
Tidikis, R. (2003). Methodology of social sciences research. Publishing Centre of the Law University of Lithuania. https://cris.mruni.eu/server/api/core/bitstreams/bc860f08-2e52-404d-a338-0764d4c38f0e/content
Whyte, J., & Mottee, L. (2022). Projects as interventions. International Journal of Project Management, 40(8), 934–940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2022.10.007