Understanding Project Complexity: Drivers and Management Techniques

This article discusses the concept of project complexity and the basic notions in relation to projects with lots of interconnections and parts, projects that are heavily time-constrained and projects that contain a great deal of uncertainty. It covers the drivers of project complexity, including size, variety, interdependence, and context-dependence, and explores the different techniques and tools used to help project managers manage complexity.

Complex Project Management1
Complex Project Management
By Name
Course
Instructor
Institution
Location
Date

Complex Project Management2
Complex Project Management
Introduction
A project is a unique and temporary endeavour that is commenced to deliver certain
expected results. The results achieved by a project will always bring a change in the organization
in the product or services, performance or the processes in the organization. A project always
involves a transition from the initial stage and the final state as well as a time gap in between the
two states. In order to successfully produce the required results resources and time are consumed
in the process. These resources could be knowledge and skills, performance improvement or
deliverables. Every project is always unique because the parameter involved in the projects such
as the environment, resources and target always change from one project to another.As projects
become more frequent in organizations, the amount at stake increases and therefore rigorous and
specific methodology is required to govern and control the projects. That is where the role of
project managers come in to plan and control the process involved in a project effectively and
ensure the target results are obtained.
In the recent days, project management has become a professional that has spread and is
practised in so many countries all over the world. There are a set of practices, methodologies,
principles and theories in project management that have been included in knowledge bodies such
as IPMA ( IPMA, 2006) and PMI (PM1, 2004). Recently there is an increasing complexity in
the modern world and this makes it difficult to control and manage complex systems (Cooke-
Davies, 2011).In order for project managers to enhance their ability to control the spontaneous
and complex world they rely on the notion of control and planning to come up with prescriptions
and models to control the interrelated factors in the project (Wood, 2002). Project management
practice is mainly focused on the role project managers play in projects concerning the issue of

Complex Project Management3
scope, cost and time (Cicmil and al., 2006). There several studies that have been for practical
purposes based on surveys and calculations. However, the growing complexity of projects has
posed a challenge since the methods and techniques have their limitations (Cicmil and al., 2006).
In this paper my main aim is to describe the concept of project complexity and the basic notions
in relation to projects with lots of interconnections and parts, projects that are heavily time-
constrained and projects that contain a great deal of uncertainty. The essay will discuss project
complexity by looking into the causes, environments and properties of complex projects, the
different techniques and tools used to help project managers manage complexity and the degree
and nature of complex projects. Projects have a lot at stake and therefore the main role of project
managers is to ensure that projects managed efficiently and effectively.
Literature Review
Currently there is so much information on project complexity that has been made
available due to the continued hard work and efforts of researchers and experienced experts in
project management. Several literature and publications such as Vidal et al, 2002, Boulding,
1956, Le Moigne, 1990 and Penalva, 1997 have discussed the aspect of projects as a system. A
system is an object in a specified environment that is aiming to attain several objectives by going
into an activity as its internal structure continuous evolve but it does not lose its identity.
Therefore any projects as a system it has the teleological aspect, functional aspect, ontological
and the generic aspects therefore a project can be considered as a system. The teleological aspect
of a project comes in since every project strives to achieve certain objectives and this occurs
within a certain environment. A project has to use certain methods, techniques and processes to
achieve a series of activities involved in the project (functional aspect). The ontological aspect
comes in since every project has an internal structure that consists of workers, tools, deliverables,

Complex Project Management4
resources and other interrelated components. A project also has a generic aspect since as time
goes by, a project usually evolves in terms of change of members, experience gain, product
delivery and resource consumption without losing its identity. Basing our reasoning on these
articles we have to consider a project as a process and a process is always associated with
complexity due to the interrelation of components. Project complexity therefore results because
every project is a unique system with several interrelated components and processes.
Research shows that complexity is virtually everywhere in project management and it is
continuously growing at a high rate. The research that has been conducted on project complexity
by researchers and experts for several years has resulted into various concepts and notions on
this topic. According to Schlindwein et al., 2005, historically there are two main scientific
approaches of complexity. The first approach is known as the field of descriptive complexity.
This approach considers complexity as an essential component of a system. This vision by the
approach triggered researchers and experts to focus on trying to measure or quantify complexity.
The work of Baccarini in (Baccarini, 1996) is an example of this vision. In this article, Baccarini
uses the concepts of organizational complexity and technological complexity as a basis to
consider project complexity. Baccarini comprehensively explains why he considers
organizational complexity and technological complexity as the core constituents of project
complexity. The second scientific approach to complexity is known as the field of perceived
complexity. Since the complexity of a project is not clearly understood from the observer’s
perspectives, this approach considers complexity as subjective. All this two approaches can both
be applied in project complexity as well as in project complexity management. In practical
purposes, project managers usually deal with the perceived approach of complexity since in real
life situations project managers don’t understand the real complexity of the project. This article

Complex Project Management5
has discussed on how these two approaches of complexity have to be linked in order to
understand the topic of complexity in projects. On the basis that project managers have to deal
with the perceived complexity, the best way to resolve this is by defining, modeling and
describing the real project complexity. This will offer a new frame of reference for project
managers who have the notion of perceived complexity to clearly perceive the reality of the
project.
It becomes difficult to deal with complexity in a project since there is no consensus
among experts on what complexity really is. As it is said by Sinha et al, “there is no single
concept of complexity that can adequately capture our intuitive notion of what the word ought to
mean” Sinha et al, 2001). Complexity concept can be understood or perceived in different ways
in the same field or even in different fields or professions (Morel and al., 1999). Though some
experts such as Edmonds have offered their contribution on what complexity is as an overview
for several fields and professions (Edmonds, 1999). He gave a general definition of complexity
as: “Complexity is that property of a model which makes it difficult to formulate its overall
behavior in a given language, even when given reasonably complete information about its atomic
components and their inter-relations”. This definition is largely associated with the modeling of
project systems and the definition is quite suitable as it allows for accommodating all the aspects
of project complexity. The model is considered to be the first layer of the project that is followed
by the perception when the manager is trying to gain an understanding of the project.
The concepts followed by Marle in (Marle, 2002) is similar to the concepts
The Genelot followed in his article in 2001 Genelot (2001). Complexity is the property that
causes a new property of a project that none of the constituents of the project initially had and

Complex Project Management6
also it causes the vision of occurrences that could not be foretold due to them, even complete,
sole knowing of the interactions and behaviour of the components of the system. Complexity can
therefore be seen to have both a positive effect on the project system (this is because new
opportunities emerge) and a negative facet (in relations of the struggle to be controlled or
understood). In general regardless of whatever definition of complexity one may have, the
project can always be seen as a complex system. There is a lot of work done by the expert to help
clarify the concept of project complexity so as to efficiently help project managers deal with
projects efficiently and effectively. There are several concepts and definition of project
complexity that are almost similar to each other although there is lack of consensus on these
visions and concepts among researchers and experts hence in the literature an agreed list of the
drivers of project complexity does not exist. However, the key drivers and factors of project
complexity have been identified and explained in most of the literature on this topic. For us to
clearly understand the concept of project complexity we have to discuss project complexity by
looking into the causes, environments and properties of complex projects, the different
techniques and tools used to help project managers manage complexity and the degree and nature
of complex projects.
Characteristics and Factors of Project Complexity
Arguably, there are several factors that can b used to classify project complexity into to help
people get a deeper understanding and perspective of project complexity. These factors can be
classified into four categories and in this chapter we are going to look at these factors. This is
more of going deep in analyzing the causes, environments and properties of complex projects.
All these factors are non-sufficient but very necessary components of understanding project
complexity. The first category involves the factor of project size while the second factors look at

Complex Project Management7
the issues of project variety. There are always interrelations and interdependent factors in a
project as a system and the third factor mainly focuses on this aspect of the project. The fourth
and final category concentrates mainly on the context-dependence of the project system.In this
section we are going to look at the factors and characteristics of project complexity
comprehensively and in fine detail to help us easily understand complexity in relation to projects
with lots of interconnections and parts, projects that are heavily time-constrained and projects
that contain a great deal of uncertainty. The figure below illustrates the four key drivers of
project complexity.
Figure 1. Major Project Complexity Drivers
The Size of the Project System
In order for us to understand the complexity of a project the size of the project plays an
important role and it is necessary to consider this aspect of the project. According to Corbet et al,
there is a minimum critical size that any project must attain in order for it to be safely regarded
as a complex project system(Corbett and al., 2002). Therefore, the size of the projection system
is a major factor of project complexity as it determines the magnitude and impact of the factors
and components of the project to the organization. The size of the project determines the parts
involved in the project and the interconnections. Large projects always have very many parts and
interconnections that are dependent on each other and this makes it hard for project managers to

Complex Project Management8
predict some activities. Unforeseen factor that is totally new from the existing components of the
projection system may emerge from the many interrelated parts of a large project and this makes
it be classified as a complex project. Complex not in the sense that it is difficult to run the project
but in the sense that it is not easy to predict due to a lot of parts and interconnections in the
project system. Small projects always have few parts and interrelations and this becomes easy for
project managers to predict and plan for future events and there are fewer chances of emergence
of new factors different from the project components therefore these projects are regarded as not
being complex due to their small size.Therefore the first driver of project complexity is the size
of the project and the size can be identified by looking at the parameters for measuring the
magnitude of a project.
The Variety of the Project System
Another drive for project complexity appears to be the project system variety. Anderson
and Sherwood mention in (Sherwood et al., 2005) that diversity is an essential condition for
project complexity and diversity diligently relates to the amount of developing properties in a
project. Corbett also emphasized in the article (Corbett et al, 2002) that complexity is tied up
with variety intermingles and that this is something that comes out very loud and clear regardless
of the field of study be it manufacturing, construction, biology or even physics. This drive or
factor of complexity mainly focuses on how all the variety of the components of a project
interact and the impact it has on the complex aspects of the project system. This aspect is closely
related to the third aspect of interdependence and interrelations of a project system. The
components of a project are always dynamic and they vary with time and this makes it very hard
for project managers to predict and focus on the future plan of the project in terms of the
resources such as time and capital required. Any slight variation in the components of the project

Complex Project Management9
is going to introduce new factors that were not planned for and this makes a project to be
complex to understand.
Projects that contain a great deal of uncertainty have high expectation for variety making them
very complex for project managers to control and plan for them. Due to a great deal of
uncertainty, the probability of the emergence of new factors in the system is very high and this is
going to affect the project system since the activities are related (Williams, 1999). This applies
for projects that are heavily time-constrained since a slight variation in the factors is going to
interfere with the allocated time for the project to be completed especially if this variety occurs
for the activities in the critical path of the project life cycle. The variety of the components of the
project cannot be easily predicted and this interacts with all the components of the project thus
making it difficult to understand a project. Therefore, variety becomes another driver the
determines the complexity of a project.
Interdependence Within the Project System
According to several famous researchers and project complexity experts, the greatest drivers of
project complexity are the interdependencies within the project system. Rodrigues et al in an
article published in 1996 say that experience advocates that the interrelations between the
components of a project are more complex compared to how traditional project network structure
has outlined it (Rodrigues et al, 1996). In this article the authors unanimously suggested that the
reality of interdependence in the components of a project cannot be comprehensively and
exclusively be captured by the traditional tools of project management. This is a challenge that
has been taken in by innovators to come up with modern project management tools that will

Complex Project Management10
consider the high interdependence within the various components of a projection system (Zack,
2007). In every project, there exists a complete interdependence within its components and
therefore any variation in one component can completely interfere with the complete project
system.
Projects with lots of interconnections and parts, projects that are heavily time-constrained
and projects that contain a great deal of uncertainty are very much going to be considered to be
complex based on the high interdependencies within the project components. The lots of
interactions and interrelations in a project imply that every component influence and depend on
the other hence predicting any activity will involve considering all the numerous components
which are almost impossible to do. A great deal of uncertainty in a project means that the
probability of emergence of new factors in the project system is high and since all the
components of the system are dependent on one another this is going to affect the entire project
as a whole (Schlindwein and Ison, 2005)). If such a project is heavily time-constrained it means
that the projected time limits for the individual activities are going to be affected since some
activities cannot start before others get completed. These interdependencies within the
components of a business system make it very difficult to understand a project, therefore , the
interdependencies within project system components become another driver of project
complexity.
Context –dependence
According to Chu et al, complexity is a common denominator of a projection system and
based on this consideration we realize that contextuality is an important aspect of complexity
(Chu et al., 2003). The concept of context-dependence has been outlined by several researchers
and complexity experts such as Koivu et al. Koivu et al gives a perception that “the practice and

Complex Project Management11
contexts that are applicable to one project are not directly transportable to other projects that
have different cultural and official configurations, which have to be taken into account in the
leadership and project management process (Koivu and al., 2004). Every project is unique in its
own way and we cannot just assume that whatever plan or strategy worked in one project can
work on another project. Project managers have to gain the ability to analyse and comprehend
every project they come around and use their experience as a basis for critical thinking but not
just use a similar approach in different projects. The components of a project may vary from one
project to another as well as the environment in which the project is going to be executed thus
the project managers should consider all this for every individual project. The fact that every
project system has its own unique context makes it difficult to execute projects since the project
manager and their team have to be specific in analysing each and every project that comes in
their way (Little, 2005). Therefore, context-dependence becomes our fourth and final major
driver of project complexity.
Table I. Classification of Project Complexity Factors
Project System Project System Interdependencies Elements of
Size Variety within the project context
system
Organisational  Duration of the Diversity of staff 
Availability of
people,  Competition
complexity  project (experience,
social
material and of any  Cultural

Complex Project Management12
Largeness of span …).
resources due to
sharing
configuration
and
 
capital
investment Geographic
Combined
transportation variety
 Number of location of the 
Dependencies
between  Environment
activities stakeholders (and schedules complexity
 Number of they're mutual 
Dependencies with
the (networked
companies /

disaffection) environment

environment)
projects sharing
Variety of
financial 
Dynamic and
evolving Institutional

their resources

resources team structure

configuration
Number of Variety of  Interconnectivity and Local laws and
decisions to be
hierarchical
levels
feedback loops in the
task regulations
made within the and project networks  New laws and
 Number of

organisation 
Interdependence
between regulations
deliverables Variety of actors  Organisational
 Number of information 
Interdependence
between
degree of
innovation
departments systems to be sites, departments and
involved

combined companies
 Number of Variety of  Interdependence of
hierarchical
levels organisational information systems

Complex Project Management13
 Number of

Interdependencie
s  Interdependence of
information Variety of objectives
systems
organisational
skills Level of interrelations
 Number of

needed between phases
investors
Variety of
project 
Number of interfaces
in
 Number of management
the project
organization
objectives
methods and
tools 
Processes
interdependence
 Number of

applied 
Relations with
permanent
stakeholders
Variety of the
organizations
 interests of theNumber of 
Stakeholders
interrelations
structures /
groups
stakeholders
Team cooperation and
 Variety of the
/ teams to be communicationstakeholders’
statuscoordinated
 Staff quantity
Technological  Number and  Variety of 
Interdependence
between  Competition

Complex Project Management14
complexity
quantity of resources to be the components of the  Cultural
resources manipulated product
configuration
and
  Largeness of Variety of the
Resource and raw
material

variety
scope (number
of product

interdependencies Demand for
components,

components Specifications creativity
etc…) Variety of

interdependence  Environment
technological
Technological
processes complexity

dependencies dependencies (networked
Variety of environment)
technological
skills  Institutional

needed configuration
Variety of the  Local laws and
technologies
used regulations
during the
project  New laws and
regulations
 Scope for

development
Significance of
public agenda
 Technological

Complex Project Management15
degree of
innovation
The main aim or objective of the project complexity framework is to offers project
managers with a reference to identify and understand the various aspects of project complexity.
This will enable the project manager to effectively understand the stake of complexity in projects
and how he can deal with this complexity that is likely to exist in every project. Other factors
that drive the complexity of projects may exist but this framework illustrates the major factors
and these characteristics cut through in almost all the project in relation to complexity. Any other
factor that affects the complexity of a project can be included to make this framework more
comprehensive and inclusive but the for factors discussed above gives the general guidelines and
major outlines of the characteristics of project complexity. According to Baccarini, he came up
with an irreconcilable difference that is well established and it focuses on the fact that project
complexity is made up of organizational complexity and technological complexity. This concept
has been considered and incorporated in the complexity framework above and this will help
project managers clearly understand the concept of complexity in projects and enable them to
apply the knowledge in real life situations. The factor of interdependencies within the project
system may not appear so much in the project complexity above but it is an important driver of
project complexity when it comes to the day-to-day project management (Marle, 2002). An
interaction between the various components of a project system can be one of the riskiest aspects
of a project as well the greatest factor for value creation in a project system. It can be noticed that

Complex Project Management16
seventy percent of the complexity factors are more related to the organizational aspect of
complexity.
Roots of Complexity in Human Ambition
There is always complexity associated with managing projects in the real world but
several organizations have been able to manoeuvre around and overcome these challenges.
Complex situations always emerge when people are operating in organizations or environments
at the frontiers of capability and knowledge. Terry in his paper Aspects of Complexity gives an
example of how complex it might have been to construct Stonehenge using the technology that
existed roughly 5000 or 4500 years ago. However such as project would never be complex but
straightforward due to the technology that exists currently. This gives the aspects that human
ambition may also be a factor in the complexity of a projection system. The other factors that
contribute to the complexity of a project system include systematic interactions, human
behaviour and roles and relationship.
Role and Relationships in Relation to Project Complexity
The relationship between the project management team members and the other
stakeholders determines how an effectively and efficiently a project will be executed. Quoting
Cicmil et al 2009, “An effective project manager is a participant in…process of relating,
continuously engaged in emergent enquiry into what they are doing and what steps they should
take next and reflexive in thinking about the quality of their own participation in complex
processes of relating in their local project situation” (p. 65). Projects consist of a given kind of

Complex Project Management17
formal relationship that gives an outline of how the different stakeholders of the project should
behave during the execution of a project. A good and interesting insight on the gap between
general practice and good practice from the behavioural point of view is demonstrated in the
article, An international study of communications between the buyer's project sponsor and the
seller's project manager in 100 IT projects (Turner & Müller, 2004). In all projects there is the
need for use of both informality and structure in communications, for alignment of the interests
of the various stakeholders and provision of dependable quantitative data for analysis whenever
the stakeholders require this data (Slevin & Pinto2004). The difficulty and complexity due to
relationship increases as project become more complex due to the several hierarchical layers that
exist between the various stakeholders (principal and agents) in a given project.
Figure 2. Principal-Agent Relationship (Flyvbjerg, Garbuio, & Lovallo, 2009, p. 177).

Complex Project Management18
The figure above shows the relationship structure involved in complex projects. Delusion
and deception are the two specific types of behaviors that are not desired during the execution of
a project. These two behaviors if they are allowed to prevail in a project they combine together
and will result to a project that is "over budget, over time, over and over again" (Flyvbjerg et al.,
2009, p. 171). Dealing with the behavioral aspect of relationships is very important in projects
and project managers have to manage these relationships to ensure projects run smoothly and
efficiently.
Understanding Human Behaviour in Complex Project
In 2002, Daniel Kahneman who is a proffer at Princeton University received a Nobel
Prize for Economics due to his contribution in integrating a psychology research into economics
specifically on the topic of human judgment and decision making under uncertainty. In his work
he successfully demonstrated that human decisions can methodically deviate from the basic
probability principles. The work of Daniel Kahneman has triggered economics researchers to
apply the knowledge of cognitive psychology to enrich economic theory (Sveriges Riksbank
Prize 2002). Something that happens more frequent in complex problems is making economic

Complex Project Management19
decisions and according to theory of economics this human behavior is not rational at all times.
According to Daniel Kahneman the “frame” through which a risk is viewed determines the
attitude of that individual towards the risk. People tend to be more willing to entertain risk in so
as to avoid “loss” compared to how they entertain risks in order to raise what they already stood
to “gain.” This concept presented by Daniel has 4 implications namely;
1. If the “frame of reference” through which a risk is viewed fundamentally influences someone's
willingness to take risks, then the “frame” through which someone views other aspects of a
project might influence other aspects of their behavior.
2. There is a psychological aspect to the management of risk that needs to be considered, along
with all quantitative and qualitative risk assessment techniques
3. If the degree of “irrationality” exhibited in decision making is related to how individuals
integrate emotions into their decision-making processes (of which more later), then “emotional
intelligence is particularly important to the managers of complex projects
4. If human beings are irrational about risk, then there may well be other aspects of human
behavior that are not rational;
Tools and Techniques in Managing Complex Projects
Due to the increase in complexity in project the traditional techniques and structure of
project management could not sufficiently clarify the complexity associated with modern
projects. Currently there are several tools and techniques that have been invented to help project
managers to manage the complexity that is associated with the modern complex projects with
lots of interconnections and parts, projects that are heavily time-constrained and projects that
contain a great deal of uncertainty. Technology has been used to develop these tools with the
main aim of promoting effective and efficient project management. The project management
software helps project managers to plan and this result in cost and time saving. These tools
include Gantt-chat, CPM, PERT, Task dependencies and KANBAN.
The Gantt-Flow/ Chart is among the most basic project management tool in the 21st
century. This chart is a graphical presentation showing the sequence of the various activities in a
project including the resources needed and the appropriate timeline. This tool is very useful in
the planning of complex projects since it calculates the optimized work path of a project. PERT
on the other hand is a project control tool that monitors time. Time is a very crucial aspect when
it comes to complex projects and therefore this tool helps managers to ensure projects are
moving according to the allocated time frame. PERT is used to calculate the real time required to
finish a given project. The Critical Path Method (CPM) is used by project managers to help them
analyze the criticality of every task in a project. The date constraints, the dependencies between
activities and the duration are some of the factors used in this tool to determine the criticality of
tasks. These tools and many others help project managers to plan and control complex projects.

Complex Project Management20
Conclusion
The aspect of project complexity is a major topic of concern in project management
among experts and researchers. The role of project managers is to manage and control project but
the increasing complexity in a project is pausing a challenge. The concept and definition of
project complexity are receiving different views from experts and researchers who have given
their perspectives. The complexity of projects is evident in projects with lots of interconnections
and parts, projects that are heavily time-constrained and projects that contain a great deal of
uncertainty. There several techniques that have been put in place to help project managers deal
with the complexity associated with projects.
References
Edmonds B. (1999), Syntactic measures of complexity, Thesis of the University of Manchester
for the degree of doctor of philosophy in the faculty of arts. No. 3
Genelot D. (2001), Manager dans la complexité – Réflexions à l’usage des dirigeants, INSEP
Consulting Editions
Koivu T., Nummelin J., Tukiainen S., Tainio R. and Atkin B. (2004), Institutional complexity
affecting the outcomes of global projects. Published by VTT, VTT Working Papers 14, ISSN
1459-7683. http://www.vtt.fi/inf/pdf
Little T. (2005), Context Adaptive Agility: Managing Complexity and Uncertainty. IEEE
Software, April 2005, Vol. 22, No. 2.
Marle F. (2002), Modèle d’informations et méthodes pour aider à la prise de décision en
management de projets, Thèse en Génie Industriel de l’Ecole Centrale Paris.

Complex Project Management21
Rodrigues A. and Bowers J. (1996), The role of system dynamics in project management.
International Journal of Project Management Vol.14, No. 4, pp. 213-220.
Schlindwein S. and Ison R. (2005), Human knowing and perceived complexity:Implications
for systems practice. Emergence: Complexity & Organization Vol. 6, No. 3, pp.19.24
(Sherwood Jones B. and Anderson P. (2005), Diversity as a determinant of system complexity,
GIST technical report G 2005-1. 2nd Workshop on complexity in design and engineering.
Williams T.M. (1999), The need for new paradigms for complex projects. International Journal
of Project Management, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp 269-273.
Austin S., Newton A., Steele J. and Waskett P. (2002), Modelling and managing project
complexity. International Journal of Project Management Vol.20, pp.191-198
Baccarini D. (1996), The concept of project complexity – a review, International Journal of
Project Management, Vol.14, No. 4, pp. 201-204.
Boulding K.E. (1956), General systems theory: the skeleton of science. Management science
Vol.3 No. 3 pp 197-208.
Chu D., Strand R. and Fjelland R. (2003), Theories of complexity – Common denominators of
complex systems. Essays & Commentaries, Complexity, Wiley Periodicals Inc., Vol. 8, No. 3.
Cicmil S. and Hodgson D. (2006), Making projects critical. Palgrave MacMillan Publishing.
Cicmil, S., Cooke-Davies, T., Crawford, L., & Richardson, K. (2009). On the complexity of
projects: Exploring the implications of complexity theory for project management theory and
practice. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
Cooke-Davies, T. Ed. (2011) Aspects of complexity: Managing projects in a complex world.
Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2003, December). Delusions of success: Comment on Dan Lovallo and Daniel
Kahneman. Harvard Business Review, 121–122
Flyvbjerg, B., Garbuio, M., & Lovallo, D. (2009). Delusion and deception in large infrastructure
projects: Two models for explaining and preventing executive disaster. California Management
Review, 51(2), 170–193.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgement of representativeness.
Cognitive Psychology, 3(3), 430–454.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Intuitive prediction: Biases and corrective procedures.
TIMS Studies in Management Science, 12, 313–327.

Complex Project Management22
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (2000a). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. In D.
Kahneman & A. Tversky (Eds.), Choices, values and frames (pp. 17–43). Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (2000b). Conflict resolution: A cognitive perspective. In D.
Kahneman & A. Tversky (Eds.), Choices, values and frames (pp. 473–487). Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Lechler, T. (1998). When it comes to project management, it's the people that matter: An
empirical analysis of project management in Germany. In F. Hartman, G. Jergeas, & J. Thomas
(Eds.), Proceedings of IRNOP III. The Nature and Role of Projects in the Next 20 Years:
Research Issues and Problems. The University of Calgary. Calgary
Livingston Smith, D. (2004). Why we lie: The evolutionary roots of deception and the
unconscious mind. New York, NY: St. Martin's Griffin.
Lovallo, D., & Kahnemann, D. (2003, July). Delusions of success: How optimism undermines
executives’ decisions. Harvard Business Review, 57–63.
Millhiser W.P. and Solow D. (2007), How large should a complex system be? An application in
organizational teams. Complexity, Vol. 12, Issue 4, pp. 54-70.
Morris, P. W. G. (1994) The management of projects. Thomas Telford. London.
PMI – Project Management Institute Standard Committee (2004), A guide to project
management body of knowledge (PMBOK). 2004 ed., Newton Square, PA, USA. Project
Management Institute.
Roth, G. (2008, April). The complex brain and its impact on project management. Paper
presented at the Second Knowledge Sharing Forum of the College of Complex Project
Managers, Frankfurt, Germany.
Slevin, D. P., & Pinto, J. K. (2004). An overview of behavioral issues in project management. In
P. W. G. Morris & J. K. Pinto (Eds.), The Wiley guide to managing projects (pp. 67–85).
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
Stacey R. (2001), a Complex responsive process in organizations: learning and knowledge
creation. London, Routledge. The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of
Alfred Nobel 2002. Nobelprize.org. Retrieved from
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2002
Turner, J. R., & Müller, R. (2004). Communication and co-operation on projects between the
project owner as principal and the project manager as agent European Management Journal,.
22(3), 327–336.

Complex Project Management23
Wood M. (2002), Mind the gap? A processual reconsideration of organizational
knowledge.Organization, 9(1), pp. 151-171.
Zack, J. G. Jr. (2007). The greatest project risk of all. Cost Engineering, 49(5), 3–4.