Project management: does a shared document mean shared understanding?
In a cross-functional project, a deliverable can be thoroughly documented yet remain difficult for its recipient to use. The management question is specific: how can we check whether a shared document actually helps coordinate work across functions?
What the literature establishes
Paul R. Carlile (2002, Organization Science) examines knowledge boundaries between functions through a field study of new product development. His analysis shows how shared objects, such as representations or prototypes, can help make dependencies and differences between practices visible. Their usefulness therefore lies not only in the information they contain, but also in the examination of differences they enable.
Transferring, translating or transforming
Paul R. Carlile (2004, Organization Science) proposes a framework distinguishing the transfer, translation and transformation of knowledge across functional boundaries. A common vocabulary may suffice when the problem concerns transmission; divergent interpretations require translation. When interests and practical consequences differ, coordination may require changes to the knowledge being used and to existing arrangements, rather than simply clearer terminology.
The premature conclusion
One might conclude that imposing a single document template on every project is enough. These studies instead suggest that a shared resource becomes useful when it allows functions to articulate their constraints and address their disagreements. Standardising the format without examining the consequences for each party can leave the coordination problem intact. (our executive and employee training programmes)
What these studies cannot promise
The field study is not a comparative trial of project management methods, and the second article develops a conceptual framework. These works therefore cannot quantify time savings or establish that one type of document is superior across all sectors. In regulated activities, shared understanding does not replace formal validation or decision traceability.
A practical check in Bâle
Within SHR’s « Gestion de projet » programme, one possible exercise is to examine a handover between international R&D, pharmaceutical quality and a Rhine logistics partner on a Basel-based life sciences project. For two weeks, ask the sender and recipient of each selected deliverable, separately, to state the acceptance criterion, the critical constraint and the next expected action, then compare their answers before any clarification. Measuring the proportion of handovers with at least one discrepancy requiring clarification, while retaining the initial answers and recorded discrepancies, provides a verifiable indicator of shared understanding. Repeating the measurement after adapting the document makes it possible to track local change, without automatically attributing that change to the document alone. To go further: explore the Project Management training in Basel, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: Project Management in Basel
- project management
- Basel
- research
- training basel