First, there are the internal politics that inevitably occurs in all organizations whether governmental, commercial, industrial or academic, and which manifest itself in the opinions and attitudes of the different stakeholders in these organizations. These stakeholder’s relationships to the project can vary from the very supportive to the downright antagonistic, but depending on their field of influence, they must be considered and managed. Even within an apparently cohesive project, team jealousies and personal vested interests can have a disruptive influence that the project manager has to recognize and diffuse.

The fact that a project relies on clients, consultants, contractors (with their numerous subcontractors), material and service suppliers, statutory authorities and, of course, the end user, all of which may have their own agenda and preferences, gives some idea of the potential political problems that may occur.

Second, there are the external politics, over which neither the sponsor nor the project manager may have much, if any, control. Any project that has international ramifications is potentially subject to disruption due to the national or international political situation. In the middle of a project, the government may change and impose additional import, export or exchange restrictions, impose penal working conditions or even cancel the contracts altogether. For overseas construction contracts in countries with inherently unstable economies or governments, sudden coups or revolutions may require the whole construction team to be evacuated at short notice. Such a situation should be envisaged, evaluated and planned for as a part of the political risk assessment when the project is first considered.

Even on a less dramatic level, the political interplay between national and local government, lobbyists and pressure groups has to be taken into consideration, as can be appreciated when the project consists of a road bypass, reservoir, power station or airport extension.

The internal economics relates to the viability of the project and the soundness of the business case. Unless there is a net gain, whether financial or non-financial, such as required by prestige, environmental, social service or national security considerations, there is no point in even considering embarking on a project. It is therefore vital that financial models and proven accountancy techniques are applied during the evaluation phase to ensure the economic viability of the project. These tests must be applied at regular intervals throughout the life of a project to check that with the inevitable changes that may be required, it is still worthwhile to proceed. The decision to abort the whole project at any stage after the design stage is clearly not taken lightly, but once the economic argument has been lost, it may be a better option in the end. A typical example is the case of an oil-fired power station that had to be mothballed over halfway through construction, when the price of fuel oil rose above the level at which power generation was no longer economic. It is not uncommon for projects to be shelved when the cost of financing the work has to be increased and the resulting interest payments exceed the foreseeable revenues.

The external economics, often related to the political climate, can have a serious influence on the project. Higher interest or exchange rates, and additional taxes on labour, materials or the end product, can seriously affect the viability of the project. A manufacturer may abandon the construction of a factory in its home country and transfer the project abroad if just one of these factors changes enough to make such a move economically viable. Again, changes to fiscal and interest movements must be constantly monitored so that representations can be made to government or the project be curtailed. Other factors that can affect a project are tariff barriers, interstate taxes, temporary embargoes, shipping restrictions such as only being permitted to use Conference Line vessels and special licences.

This may require a public relations campaign to be initiated, which includes meetings, exploratory discussions, consultations at various levels and possible trade-offs. This is particularly important when public funding from central or local government is involved or when public spaces and access facilities are affected. A typical example of a trade-off is when a developer wishes to build a shopping centre, the local authority may demand that it includes a recreation area or leisure park for free use by the public.

Some projects cannot even be started without first being subjected to a public enquiry, environmental impact assessment, route surveys or lengthy planning procedures. There are always pressure groups that have special interests in a particular project, and it is vital that they are given the opportunity to state their case while at the same time informing them of the positive and often less desirable implications. The ability to listen to their point of views and give sympathetic attention to their grievances is essential, but as it is almost impossible to satisfy all the parties, compromises may be necessary. The last things a project manager wants are the constant demonstrations and disruptions while the project is being carried out.

On another level, the whole object of the project may be to enhance the environment and facilities of the community, in which case the involvement of local organizations can be very helpful in focussing on areas which give the maximum benefit, and avoiding pitfalls which only people with local knowledge are aware of. A useful method to ensure local involvement is to set up advisory committees or even invite a local representative to be a part of the project management team.

These and many more technical questions have to be asked and assessed before a decision can be made to proceed with the project. The financial implications of these factors can then be fed into the overall investment appraisal, which includes the commercial and financing, and environmental considerations.

The relationships between the contracting parties must be confirmed by a legally binding contract that complies with the laws (and preferably customs) of the participating organizations. The documents themselves have to be legally acceptable and equitable, and unfair and unreasonable clauses must be eliminated.

Where suppliers of materials, equipment or services are based in countries other than the main contracting parties, the laws of those countries have to be complied with in order to minimize future problems regarding deliveries and payments.

In the event of disputes, the law under which the contract is administered and adjudicated must be written into the contract together with the location of the court for litigation.

Generally, project managers are strongly advised always to take legal advice from specialists in contract law and especially, where applicable, in international law.

The project context includes the established conditions of contract and other standard forms and documents used by industry, and can also include all the legal, political and commercial requirements stipulated by international bodies as well as national and local governments in their project-management procedures and procurement practices.

The location of the project clearly has an enormous influence on the cost and completion time. The same type of plant or factory can be constructed in the United Kingdom, in the Sahara desert, in China, or even on an offshore platform, but the problems, costs and construction times can be very different. The following considerations must therefore be taken into account when deciding to carry out a project in a particular area of the world:

Most countries now have strict legislation to prevent or restrict emissions of polluting substances whether solids, liquids or gases. In addition, noise restrictions may apply at various times and cultural or religious laws may prohibit work at specified times or on special days in the year.

The following list is a very small sample of over 15,000 web pages covering European Economic Community (EEC) directives and gives some idea of the regulations that may have to be followed when carrying out a project.

This means that biological systems have to be studied and developed to ensure that the environment, in the form that we desire it, can endure indefinitely. The preservation of existing ecosystems is not only the responsibility of governments and international agencies, but also of corporations and indeed any organization whose activities impact on the environment or the pool of natural resources.

Programme and project managers must therefore ensure that the projects under their control create minimum (ideally zero) pollution of the atmosphere, water resources including sea water, and minimum contamination of minerals, soils and vegetation (including forests), etc. This involves environmental-impact assessments being carried out at the planning stage and developing a mechanism which ensures that the methods and procedures agreed at these meetings are actually carried out.

For corporations this may (as with safety) require a change in the organization’s culture which has to flow down from the boardroom to the construction staff and operators of the facility. There has to be general awareness that the health and availability of resources of future generations cannot the endangered. In practice all these safeguards cost money, and unless we allocate sufficient funds now to protect the environment and ensure the conservation of limited resources, future generations will pay the price.