It has become increasingly common to use projects as a form of organization when implementing public policies in the area of social welfare, and in other policy areas as well. The EU, along with its various structural funds, is a key player behind this development in Europe, but the same trend can also be found at national and regional levels in other countries. In previous research, we have identified political, administrative, and organizational motives behind this trend toward more project-based organizations within public administration (Jensen et al. 2013). The problem with this trend is that this form of project organization carries inherent challenges when these projects are intended to be implemented in permanent organizational structures.
The purpose of this paper is to identify problems and challenges that public administrations face when the project is used as a structural form of organization (i.e., as a policy tool) when implementing public policy.
This article takes as its starting point the policy implementation research and especially the seminal work of Richard Matland (1995), who bases his implementation analysis on the variables policy conflict and policy ambiguity. The use of these important variables makes it possible to identify various paradigms in implementation research, as well as factors that can explain the implementation results. This research tradition is complemented by research on temporary organizations. Our analysis shows that the use of project organization puts special demands on the players involved; and that if these demands are not taken into account, there is a high risk that projects designed to bring about social change risk becoming isolated events that do not produce the intended effects.