Bhangale, K; Joshi, K; Gupta, R and Gardas, B (2025) Assessing project complexity factors for railway megaprojects: A Delphi-BWM approach. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 23(3), pp. 973-997. ISSN 1726-0531
Abstract
Purpose: Project complexity (PC) governs project success, but the project management literature primarily focuses on performance measures and rarely examines the complexity factors, especially for megaprojects. This paper aims to determine the most significant complexity factors for the railway megaprojects in India. Design/methodology/approach: A mixed approach using the Delphi and best–worst method (BWM) helped to identify, validate and determine the most critical factors that require intervention to diminish variance from project performance. Findings: The BWM resulted in stakeholder management, followed by organizational and technological complexity as significant complexity factors, and the varied interests of the stakeholder as the most important among the 40 subfactors. Practical implications: The finding indicates the necessity for strategic, tactical and operational-level interventions to effectively manage the complexity affecting project efficiency because of the varied stakeholders. This paper will guide the project and general managers to prioritize their resources to handle complexity for effective project performance measured in terms of time, cost and quality and help them make strategic decisions. The research findings of this study are expected to help researchers and practitioners in better planning and smoother execution of projects. In addition, this study would help the researchers formulate policies and strategies for better handling of the projects. Originality/value: This study adds significant value to the body of knowledge related to PC in megaprojects in developing countries. The result of the investigation underlined that nine complexity factors and seven unique subfactors, namely, the sustainable environment, timely availability of information, communication in both directions, interdepartmental dependency and coordination, design, statutory norms, site challenges, socioeconomic conditions, the tendency of staff to accept new technology and the frequent changes in the requirements of stakeholders are significant in railway megaprojects. The BWM is applied to rank the complexity factors and subfactors in the case area.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | barriers; infrastructure; project complexity; project management; qualitative approach; smart cities; transportation |
| Index terms: | investigation, project performance, coordination, project management, India, new technology, project success, variance, efficiency, critical factor, smart city, qualitative approach, practitioner, methodology, project complexity, megaproject, complexity, norms, stakeholder management, body of knowledge, developing country, manager, strategy, performance measure |
| Subjects: | research methods, development economics, organizational theory, Geography, practitioner, strategic project management, innovation and technology management, knowledge management, performance management, management, performance measurement, project management theory and practice, measurement and scaling, sociology, systems engineering, data collection methods, risk assessment, urban sustainability, participation process |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Project Management, Risk Management, Quality Management, Information Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, International Construction, Urban Studies, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here