Megaprojects redefined – complexity vs cost and social imperatives

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to provide a brief overview from the literature on how best to define megaprojects in contemporary contexts. There is a need for a definition that encompasses a complex matrix of characteristics, inclusive of positive and negative aspects, which are not necessarily industry or sector specific. Whilst megaprojects have often been described and defined in terms of cost, they are more accurately delineated by their convolutions. Intricacies arise from political intrigues surrounding funding of such projects and managing and governing complex social and organisational relations. Points for future research are also identified, including: contexts; procurement; institutional perspectives; constituting megaproject cultures; and sustainability. Design/methodology/approachAn analysis of international megaproject literature over the past five years combined with seminal works was undertaken. Drawing on the broad literature of project and program management combined with elements of organizational theory. Whilst some examples are cited, in depth case analysis has not been covered. FindingsAlbeit that the scale of some megaprojects is comparable to national GDP's, seven more characteristics beyond size have been identified which, distinguish megaprojects from large projects. These include: reach; duration; risks and uncertainties; widely disparate actors; areas of controversy such as dispute resolution; and legal and regulatory issues. Originality/valueRigorous stakeholder engagement is critical for success in megaprojects and collaborative learnings need to be exchanged. The longer term social and economic impacts need to be viewed as an imperative rather than a hindrance to the planning and execution of megaprojects and complexity rather than cost more aptly defines megaprojects.

Planning and Marketing the City for Sustainability:the Madrid Nuevo Norte Project

“…Third is the project construction phase and ultimately is the operational phase of the project. As we can understand, the importance and the complexity of the development of such megaprojects requires a dynamic and ambidextrous way of thinking around the projects and the way they are completed [29].…”

Creating a ‘sustainability sublime’ to enable megaprojects to meet the United Nations sustainable development goals

“…The project management standards have also evolved, because of these developments, paying more attention to softer factors such as human resource management, communications and stakeholder management (PMI, 2016). Recently, the attention of project management scholars and practitioners has turned to the study of the inherent complexity in projects (Pich, Loch, & DeMeyer, 2002) and dealing effectively with complexity in megaprojects (Hu, Chan, Le, & Jin, 2015; Locatelli, Mikic, Kovasevic, Brooks, & Ivanisevic, 2017; Pitsis, Clegg, Freeder, Sankaran, & Burdon, 2018). The need for a systemic approach to deal with complexity in projects has prompted universities teaching project management to introduce courses to project management students that teach various systems approaches such as the iceberg model (events, patterns, structures, mental models), system dynamics (causal loops and stock‐and‐flow diagrams), system archetypes, soft systems thinking, viable systems models and complex adaptive systems (Sheffield, Sankaran, & Haslett, 2015).…”

Governing Government-Project Owner Relationships in Water Megaprojects: a Concession Game Analysis on Allocation of Control Rights

“…What usually distinguishes a water megaproject is not the cost but the complexity (Pitsis et al 2018 ). Complexity is associated with an increased number of unexpected project changes, which affects the project procurement modes and transaction costs (Tadelis 2002 ).…”