The document discusses the impact of complexity on project outcomes, drawing from studies of 46 and 8 IT-related projects assessing the relationship between complexity and project results. It identifies that complexity is often poorly assessed, leading to significant negative effects on project success, especially as project size increases. Key findings highlight the importance of managing communication, realism, and engagement to effectively handle project complexity.

1. Complexity in
projects
Definitions, impact and determining factors of
complexity
November 2011

2. Complexity in projects (1)
• Complexity affects project
result/value/performance (negatively)
is a widely accepted opinion confirmed
by studies and research
Source:
Managing Project Complexity: PhD dissertation, Marian Bosch-Rekveldt (15 November 2011)
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 2

3. Complexity in projects (2)
• This presentation contains two
studies:
1. Is a study of 46 projects determining the
relation between assessing complexity in IT
related projects and the achieved result
(value)
2. Is a study of 8 projects defining and
determining complexity and elements of
complexity, and how complexity can be
handled
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 3

4. Complexity in projects (3)
• Definitions of complexity are
ambiguous and can be related to
amongst others:
− Competencies (of involved people)
− Technology
− Organisation
− Environment
− Available time
− (Local) circumstances
− .....
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 4

5. Complexity in projects (4)
• Frameworks or concepts that support to
grasp complexity:
− (General) System theory (Bertalanffy, 1956)
− TOE Framework (TU Delft, 2011)
− TOP-mix (Changing IT in six, 2010)
− Temporal Structuring in Organizations (Organization
Science (2002)
Technology
− … • Applications
• Middleware
• Infrastructure
(T,O,P) (O) (P)
(T,O,P) (P) (O) People Organisation
(-) • Attitude
(O) (O) • Knowledge
• Processes
• Structure
(P) (P) (P) • Skills • Location
(T) (O)
TOP-mix
() = Relation from TOE -> TOP)
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 5

6. Content
• Study 1
• Study 2
• Key references and contact
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 6

7. Content
• Study 1
• Study 2
• Key references and contact
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 7

8. Study 1: Background (1)
• 46 projects (or situations) in the context
of IT innovation and organisational change
were faced with the question (in a
questionnaire of over 60 questions):
Do you think that the complexity of changes and
renewals has been assessed well enough?
• Data is collected on a quick scan basis
between 2007 and 2009 from (international)
organisations in the Netherlands in private
and public sector.
Source:
Leading principles of IT related organisational change (2010): http://www.slideshare.net/ldohmen/iba-frame-study-
results-20100416
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 8

9. Study 1: Results and findings (1)
• In the collection of 46 projects
complexity was:
− Not assessed for 14 projects
− Sometimes assessed for 25 projects
− Mostly assessed for 7 projects
− Always assessed for 0 projects
Complexity of
projects has
little/no attention
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 9

10. Study 1: Results and findings (2)
* Aspects of results are amongst others:
- Result is an improvement Relation between result*
- Result fits objective
Relation between result* and
- Result meets expectation achieved and complexity
- Result has direct positive effect on work situation complexity (not/mostly) assessed
- Result is properly absorbed (not/mostly) assessed
- Result score (value) is expressed on a scale from
1 (very poor) to 10 (excellent) 10,0
9,0
8,0
7,0 6.7
6,0
Average result*
(value) achieved 5,0 4.6
4,0
7 projects
3,0
2,0 14 projects
1,0
0,0
Complexity Complexity
not assessed mostly assessed
Some key findings:
- Assessing complexity mostly leads to an
increase of result/value of 46% (average
result 4.6 as reference)
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 10

11. Study 1: Results and findings (3)
Relation between result and complexity of projects not/mostly assessed
Complexity Not assessed Mostly asessed # projects
Result for small* projects 5,8 6,5 5 2
Result for medium-sized* projects 5,0 6,0 4 1
Result for large* projects 3,3 - 4 0
Result for for X* projects 2,0 7,0 1 4
Average result 4,6 6,7 14 7
*Project size is based on number of people involved:
- Small: number of involved people < 100
- Medium sized: number of involved people > 100 and < 500
- Large: number of involved people > 500
- X: number of involved people is unknown
Some key findings:
- The impact (value decrease) of not assessing
complexity increases when project size grows
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 11

12. Study 1: Data on project level
Complexity not assessed Complexity mostly assessed
Project size Projects / cases Result achieved Result achieved Projects / cases Project size
Small projects Project 1 7,0 5,0 Project 15 Small projects
Project 2 6,0 8,0 Project 16
Project 3 5,0
Project 4 5,0
Project 5 6,0
Average result small 5,8 6,5 Average result small
Medium size projects Project 6 6,0 6,0 Project 17 Medium size projects
Project 7 4,0
Project 8 5,0
Project 9 5,0
Average result medium 5,0 6,0 Average result medium
Large projects Project 10 1,0 Large projects
Project 11 2,0
Project 12 4,0
Project 13 6,0
Average result large 3,3 - Average result large
Not known Project 14 2,0 7,0 Project 18 Not known
8,0 Project 19
6,0 Project 20
7,0 Project 21
Average result unknown 2,0 7,0 Average result unknown
Number of projects: 14 Average result * 4,6 6,7 * Average result Number of projects: 7
* Average result is calculated based on result achieved per individual project
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 12

13. Content
• Study 1
• Study 2
• Key references and contact
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 13

14. Study 2: Background
Within many organisations changes are made by means of
projects. IT projects are notorious for their low success rate. In
recent years a link was made between project complexity and
project failure. Logica is interested in this connection and offered
a position to research complexity in IT projects. This research
focuses on analyzing which literature about project complexity is
available and which frameworks for measuring project complexity
already exist. Eight cases have been analyzed, each of which
focused on a project in the financial services sector. The case
studies were performed by keeping interviews with project
managers and analyzing project documentation. The main
research question is:
Which (combination of) factors determine the complexity of IT
projects and how can these successfully be managed?
Source:
Complexity in IT-projects (Master thesis Jorden van Helvoort – TU Delft (November 2011)
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 14

15. Study 2: Findings and conclusions
• Findings and conclusions are based on the TOE Framework of the TU Delft (slide #5)
• To successfully manage these dominant complexity elements in IT projects, a project
manager has three main management measures at his disposal:
1.Manage communication: This is achieved through face‐to‐face communication, formal
information exchange, stakeholder management, interface management, or
committing information to paper or digital format, like repositories and knowledge
bases.
2.Manage realism: This is achieved through strict agreements on changes to the project
scope or quality, making smart choices in selecting technology, standardizing software
tools, limiting conversions of data, limiting the amount of different systems and always
testing solutions extensively to ensure added‐value to the client.
3.Manage engagement: This is achieved through reducing the team size wherever
possible, building relationships based on trust, always use monitoring and control,
replacing project members or stakeholders with the wrong attitude, creating a sense of
a common goal, knowing the organization, finding multiple project sponsors, being
aware of early warning signs of project failure, timing stakeholders participation and
looking for intrinsic motivation among the project team and stakeholders.
Source:
Complexity in IT-projects (Master thesis Jorden van Helvoort – TU Delft (November 2011)
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 15

16. Content
• Study 1
• Study 2
• Key references and contact
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 16

17. Key references
• Managing project complexity
http://repository.tudelft.nl/view/ir/uuid%3Aa783e581-bc7a-4efa-adcb-7e9201840367/
• Kampioen organisatieverandering
http://www.unibook.com/nl/Leon-Dohmen/Kampioen-organisatieverandering
• Leading principles of IT related organisational change
http://www.slideshare.net/ldohmen/iba-frame-study-results-20100416
• Master thesis Jorden van Helvoort: Complexity in IT projects
• Regie voeren over organisatieverandering met ICT
http://www.sdu.nl/catalogus/9789012125895
• Changing IT in six
http://www.vangorcum.nl/EN_toonBoek.asp?PublID=4552
• It’s About Time: Temporal Structuring in Organizations
http://orgsci.journal.informs.org/content/13/6/684.abstract
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 17

18. For questions and special requests – Contact
Management of (Information) Technology
Leon Dohmen | Principal Management Consultant –
IT Management Consultancy
T: +31 40 2957 777 | M: +31 6 1737 6636
leon.dohmen@logica.com
© Logica 2011. All rights reserved No. 18

19. Logica Nederlands B.V.:
Consultancy and
Professional Services -
Practice IT management
Logica is a leading IT and business services company, employing 39,000 people across 36 countries. It provides business consulting, systems integration,
and IT and business process outsourcing services. Logica works closely with its customers to release their potential – enabling change that increases their
efficiency, accelerates growth and manages risk. It applies its deep industry knowledge, technical excellence and global delivery expertise to help its
customers build leadership positions in their markets. Logica is listed on both the London Stock Exchange and Euronext (Amsterdam) (LSE: LOG; Euronext:
LOG). More information is available at www.logica.com