Managing change in the delivery of complex projects: Configuration management, asset information and ‘big data’

Abstract

As we enter an era of 'big data', asset information is becoming a deliverable of complex projects. Prior research suggests digital technologies enable rapid, flexible forms of project organizing. This research analyses practices of managing change in Airbus, CERN and Crossrail, through desk-based review, interviews, visits and a cross-case workshop. These organizations deliver complex projects, rely on digital technologies to manage large data-sets; and use configuration management, a systems engineering approach with mid-20th century origins, to establish and maintain integrity. In them, configuration management has become more, rather than less, important. Asset information is structured, with change managed through digital systems, using relatively hierarchical, asynchronous and sequential processes. The paper contributes by uncovering limits to flexibility in complex projects where integrity is important. Challenges of managing change are discussed, considering the evolving nature of configuration management; potential use of analytics on complex projects; and implications for research and practice.

Applying systems engineering in the civil engineering industry: an analysis of systems engineering projects of a Dutch water board

“…In this research, the cases were analysed in two ways, the 'within case analysis' and 'cross case analysis' (Eisenhardt 1989;Yin 2009). The first way -within case analysis -is to look at each case as a whole and determine the application of SE within that case (vertical analysis in Table 2).…”

“…To assess the SE processes at the water board, a case study method has been conducted (Yin 2009;Eisenhardt 1989). This method is discussed next and consists of data collection, data analysis, and a comparison of the results with existing literature (literature reflection).…”

“…These SE improvements are mentioned in literature as well (INCOSE 2015;Locatelli, Mancini, and Romano 2014;Sheard 1996;De Graaf, Voordijk, and Van den Heuvel 2016;Whyte, Stasis, and Lindkvist 2016;Elliott et al 2012). For example, in literature it is suggested to establish a verification and validation role in the project by making someone responsible for it.…”

Conceptualising a multidimensional model of information communication and technology project complexity

“…These factors are arguably related to the elements and features discussed within environmental complexity. Change management is the core element of this construct with focus on the change process, number of changes, scope of changes, frequency of changes, impact of changes and change over time (Geraldi & Adlbrecht 2007;Geraldi et al 2011;Love et al 2002;Muller, Geraldi & Turner 2012;Remington & Pollack 2007;Whyte et al 2016).…”

Project manager and systems engineer: a literature rich reflection on roles and responsibilities

“…In particular, the increasing complexity and dimensions (both physical and economical) of modern systems raise the complexity of their design and delivery (Whitty & Maylor, 2009) (Locatelli & Mancini, 2010) (Vidal, et al, 2011) (Bosch-Rekveldt, et al, 2011) (Whyte, et al, 2016). The boundaries of PM are no longer limited to the delivery project itself between agreed time, cost and budget since there are strong links at program and portfolio level and lasting sustainability impacts over the operation and even the decommissioning (Locatelli & Mancini, 2012) (Brook & Pagnanelli, 2014).…”