Complexity-Informed Governance for Complex Projects
Governance Failure is the Symptom, Complexity is the Root
Major projects rarely fail for lack of effort, talent, or oversight. They fail because the way they are governed was never designed for the complexity they actually face. Governance is typically inherited—structures, controls, and reporting lines carried over from simpler projects—and then blamed when things unravel. But governance failure is usually a symptom. The root cause sits upstream: complexity that was never properly understood before decisions about how to govern it were made.
From Complexity to Governance Tension
The Complexity → Tension → Governance chain as the organising spine
Academic Affiliation
Adelaide University
Flinders University
Supporting Organisation
International Centre for Complex Project Management
Industry Partners
Realising Potential Pty. Ltd
Use Cases
The Kwinana Industrial Area - WA
The Mental Health Services Plan 2020-2025
Help us See the Big Picture
Research and publication in academic journals are a key element of our business model. In principle, academic research should inform how projects are managed and the two are meant to feed each other. In reality, the connection often feels strained. The publication cycle is long and demanding, and by the time findings appear, practitioners have frequently already moved on or solved the problem another way.
This raises a bigger question, especially now: in the age of AI: where answers are instant and synthesis is effortless, will academic research play a greater role in practice, or a diminishing one?
This short survey (~5 minutes, anonymous) explores how practitioners actually engage with academic research and aims to provide us with insights on how practitioners access knowledge nowadays.
Your honest perspective — including skepticism — is exactly what's valuable here.
Thank you for taking part.