Keeping It Simple?

A Case Study into the Advantages and

Disadvantages of Reducing Complexity in Mega Project Planning.
Submitted By: Binod Pokharel
Student ID Number: 32119447
Introduction:
Project planning is the process of defining the objectives, scopes, tasks, timelines,
resources and overall strategy required to successfully accomplish a specific goal
within a designated time frame. It serves as a foundational phase in project
management, providing a roadmap that guides the execution and control of the
project from initiation to completion. It is widely recognized that constructing a
large infrastructure project and poor project planning are always risky. Numerous
methods and techniques have been developed over the years on various aspects of
managing project to improve the chances of a smooth arrival (Ashrafi, 2004).
The article “Keeping It Simple? A Case Study into the Advantages and
Disadvantages of Reducing Complexity in Mega Project Planning” authored by
Mendel Giezen begins by addressing the common negative perceptions associated
with mega infrastructure projects, such as high cost, prolonged durations, unmet
expectations and many more. The title of the article is well designed as it
effectively communicates the main concept of the article to the reader. The
problem involves making complex projects simpler for quicker accomplishment
and lower financial input and the title of the article is straight forward. The projects
are usually long and they keep on changing with time. Understandings different
factors like changing goals, purpose and interest can be challenging due to passage
of time. Even though projects may start positively, they can gradually take on a
negative tone, leading to complacency setting in. These projects constantly change
and evolve over time (Javad Bakhshi, 2016).
In the abstract section, it is well described in such a way that can be easily
understood by the reader, include overall aspects of the article & it also helps to
generate curiosity for the reader. The main objective of the article is also discussed
here in a descriptive way which makes the reader easily understandable.
Main Body:
Many cases were discussed here but this article is focused on the Beneluxijn metro
project in Rotterdam, Netherlands, which stands out for the successful adherence to
the budget and schedule. This paper aims to explore whether the project’s success
can be attributed to its simplicity in process, project scope and management.
However, it acknowledges the limitation of defining success solely in terms of cost
and time management, excluding factors like patronage. Mentioning the specific
purpose of the study in the introduction support the reader in better understanding
of the article (Jawaid, 2019). The author tries to change the perception of the
people that not all projects end in disaster by explaining the example of Rotterdam
Metro to prove that well-planned projects can succeed. According to the author,
many large projects fail because of problems in managing cost and time. So, the
author suggests that success in these projects mainly depends on how well cost and
time are handled and the article also describes about how the complexity can be
reduced in mega projects followed by its negative consequences that can happen as
well as benefits of it. The introduction is fully loaded with excessive elaboration.
Its excessive length poses the initial hurdle for the readers to delve into the body of
the text, which may distract from the main focus. However, the introduction
comprehensively addresses all the essential concepts of risk and uncertainty. The
KISS principle, which stands for “Keep it Simple Stupid” is introduced as a
guiding philosophy for project management, emphasizing the reduction of
complexity to enhance project understanding and control (Terano, 2008).
According to the author, simplifying the project reduces uncertainty and makes it
more controllable. However, the article acknowledges the potential trade-off
between simplicity and richness, raising question about the adequacy of reducing
complexity in mega projects. The introduction includes excessive intext citations
which diminishes the overall readability and effectiveness of the article.
The author has discussed various large projects that were completed with limited
financial resources to make the subject matter clear and concise. The article
intricate relationship between political decision making, project management,
budgetary challenging and the time schedules associated with mega projects. The
author is also trying to identifying the factors contributing to cost and time
overruns in mega projects, with a primary emphasis on the accuracy of estimations.
The concepts of “Optimism Bias” and “Strategic Misrepresentation” suggesting
that positive estimations and deliberate underestimations occur due to
psychological inclinations or political motives (Peter E.D. Love, 2011).
Additionally, the attraction to the technological sublime, wherein new technologies
and innovations introduce uncertainty and cost is discussed. Change in project
scope driven by political demands is identified as another significant factor for
leading to overruns. The author has clearly addressed the difference between
temporal delays and long-term expenses. However, equivalent evidence is not
presented to distinguish them. This part contains numerous irrelevant details. As a
result, it becomes less interesting and too lengthy for the readers. The author has
explained the proportional relationship between the different terms such as cost
and time, uncertainty and risk. It will be more cleared and informative, if it were
stated mathematically. The reliance on case studies may limit the generalizability
of findings. Additionally, the dismissal of Flyvbjerg’s argument on strategic
misrepresentation without offering a strong alternative weakens the trustworthiness
of the article. In this article, there is an absence of a clear hypothesis regarding the
circumstances under which project selection leads to success or failure also leaves
a gap in the argument. Furthermore, a more in-depth exploration of successful
cases, like the Beneluxlijn, would enhance the article’s applicability and provides a
more balanced view of the factors influencing mega project success.
The article employs a deviant case study research design to investigates the
atypical success of the Beneluxlijin project in holding to time and cost budgets and
the author has also disclosed the extra methods to structure the study. The author
has used qualitative and quantitative methods for describing the data and carried
out interviews approach from different authorities, background and places as part
of the process by mentioning their names, posts and the roles of all the
interviewers. Research methodology is also beneficial for understanding how the
data has been collected in the study, which makes the article more credible and
informative (Levinsen, 2017). The articles methodology provides readers with a
through insight into the Beneluxlijin initiative. The chosen methods involve
narrative and reflexive interviews with key stakeholders, supplemented by
secondary sources such as newspaper, articles and policy documents. Narrative
interview is the interview conducted from the original person involved in the
research. On the other hand, reflexive is an interview where people are involved by
making inception about communication in the form of signs, signals etc (Alex
Sandro Gomes Pessoa, 2019).
The article under consideration explores the success of the Beneluxlijn project,
which was undertaken in the Netherlands. The author effectively describes the
project’s budget and timeline which provides a clear understanding of how
investment needs evolve over the time. However, the formal language used in the
journal may hinder reader engagement and the numerous grammatical errors
detract from the overall quality. One notable strength is the author’s use of index
citations to convey data from interviews, enhancing the presentations and another
notable strength is the article is its detailed exploration od the political and
strategic considerations that influenced the project’s prioritization (Khan, 2020).
The author strategically uses of italic typefaces to emphasize key sentences in the
diary adds clarity for understanding to the readers effectively. To illustrate project
challenges and management response, the train line according the authors connects
two paths of the same line when describing budgets, the author bifurcates the
figures into two saying that the trend shown here is that the actual cost incurred
was less than planned which makes it a very reliable project to all the stakeholders
involved in the processes. According to the author planning in the initial phase,
critiquing and subsequently evolving the approach becomes crucial for effectively
addressing the inherent risks and uncertainties. According to the author, the main
reasons behind the increasing project’s cost are optimism bias, technology subline,
strategic misrepresentation and the scope creep. The timeline of the Benelixlijin
project is effectively introduced, detailing events with corresponding years. Some
of the sentences are lengthy and complex, which may potentially hinder the
accessibility for a broader audience.
Conclusion and Discussion:
The conclusion and discussion are covered in the final section. The authors
effectively outline how risks and uncertainties were managed throughout the
project, particularly through a conscious effort to minimize the complexity. The
decision to build above ground, employ known technologies and control
procedures contributed to the project’s success (Jayasaegaran Sithambaram, 2021).
The case study of the irregularity in the NOx values in the viaduct construction
illustrates the project team’s adaptability and commitment to safety. The author has
discussed the advantages and disadvantages of the complexity of the big projects.
The author has highlighted several advantages of the challenging projects, such as
fostering close collaboration among the management team and imposing
constraints on both time and budget for completing the entire project. The author
has also mentioned that the effective use of modern technology and infrastructure
can help to shorten the project durations and lower the project cost.
Additionally, the author compares the title of this article with the primary case
study. The author tries to provide the more information on the benefits and
drawbacks of complicated mega projects. There are few grammatical errors and
some of the terms are in different language which creates difficulties and
confusions for the readers. The authors used different statistical data, surveys and
figures which adds effectiveness and makes easily understandable for the readers.
The author also has added some quantitative information to the research article
which makes easier to convey information if chart, graph and pie-chart will be
mentioned. The author has used qualitative writing rather than using quantitative
which makes the article full of heavy words. The author of the case study provides
details about project costs but did not include a timeline indicating when
investments were required. The political aspects and how politics can lower the
overall cost and give more time to complete the projects more effectively is not
mentioned by the author.
The conclusion of the article emphasizes the success of maintaining control over
budget and time by deliberately simplifying the Beneluxlijin project. The author is
trying to make clear that, uncertainty within a manageable domain is commended
for its effectiveness in neutralizing optimism bias and strategic misrepresentation.
The author is trying to focus readers on existing techniques and expertise in the
transport infrastructure domain which is the key factor in its success. The author
acknowledges the potential drawbacks of such a simplified approach and also
highlights the potential benefits of reducing uncertainty through simplification but
also introduces the idea of a more strategic phase earlier in the process to
incorporate external influences without compromising control during the
execution. The author has created an interesting title but could not complete the
task through the topic due to which topic become less effective and interesting. It
would be better if the author could have provided more solutions and examples of
the projects that effectively managed complexity, tight budgets and political
pressure. The author has discussed many projects in the article but does not
compare them to the main case study. The language used in this article is very
difficult to understand and the connections between the arguments is very poor
which makes the article less interesting for the readers. It would be better if the
author has mentioned and discussed about the future agendas, latest technology to
minimize the time and cost and the future targets of the mega projects. While
celebrating the project’s success in controlling the time and budget, it also raises
important questions about the trade-offs involved, urging a more context-specific
approach to project strategy. The conclusion encourages a thoughtful consideration
of the strategic vision and goals of a region, promoting a balance between
simplicity and strategic foresights in infrastructure projects.
References
Alex Sandro Gomes Pessoa, E. H. a. M. C. d. S. G., 2019. Using Reflective Interviewing to Foster
Deep Understanding of Research Participants Perpective. International Journal of Qualitative
Methods.
Ashrafi, F. H. a. R., 2004. Development of the SMARTTM Project Planning Framework.
International Journal of Project Management, 22(6), pp. 499-510.
Baccarini, D., 1996. The Concept of Project Complexity-A Review. International Journal of
Project Management, 14(4), pp. 201-204.
Chapman, R. J., 2016. A Framework for Examining the Dimensions and Characteristics of
Complexity Inherent Within Rail Megaprojects. International Journal of Project Management,
34(6), pp. 937-956.
Cristobal, J. R. S., 2019. Complexity and Project Management: Challenges, Opportunities and
Future Research. Volume 2019.
Douglas D. Gransberg, J. S. S. K. S. a. C. L. d. P., 2012. Project Complexity Mapping in Five
Dimensions for Complex Transportation Projects. Journal of Management in Engineering, 29(4).
Giezen, M., 2012. Keeping it Simple? A Case Study into the Advantages and Disadvantages of
Reducing Complexicity in Mega Project. International Journal of Project Management, pp. 781-
790.
Javad Bakhshi, V. I. a. A. G., 2016. Clarifying the Project Complexity Construct: Past, Present and
Future. International Journal of Project Management, 34(7), pp. 1199-1213.
Jawaid, S. A. J. a. M., 2019. How to write Introduction and Discussion. Saudi Journal of
Anaesthesia.
Jayasaegaran Sithambaram, M. H. N. B. M. N. a. R. A., 2021. Issue and Challenges Impacting the
Successful Management of Agile-Hybrid Projects: A Grounded Theory Approach. International
Journal of Project Management, 39(5), pp. 474-495.
Khan, N., 2020. Citation Indices: A Review. Journal of the Pakistan Dental Association, 29(2), pp.
87-93.
Levinsen, R. Ø. a. K. T., 2017. Workshops as a Research Methodology. Electornic Journal of E-
Learning, 15(1), pp. 70-81.
Peter E.D. Love, D. J. E. a. Z. I., 2011. Moving Beyond Optimism Bias and Strategic
Misrepresentation: An Explanation for Social Infrastructure Project Cost Overruns. IEEE
Transactions on Engineering, 59(4), pp. 560-571.
Terano, T., 2008. Beyond the KISS Principle for Agent-Based Social Simulation. Journal of Socio-
Informatics, pp. 175-187.