Managing Project Complexity: A Systems Approach
Anyone who has been through a major project knows this truth: complexity sneaks up on you. On day one, the plan looks clear. But once execution begins, the moving parts multiply, the interactions tangle, and suddenly you’re not managing a list—you’re managing a living system. As a friend of mine, Frank Engli, says about complex turnaround projects; “Cheer up! It will get worse”
“Cheer up! It will get worse” - Frank Engli, P.Eng.
What Defines Project Complexity?
Not all projects carry the same weight of complexity. At one end of the spectrum are simple projects—straightforward efforts with few parts and predictable outcomes, like replacing a small pump.
A step up are complicated projects, such as a refinery boiler turnaround, which involves many components but remains largely predictable with established procedures. Dynamic projects introduce change as their defining feature, with feedback loops and ongoing adjustments—think of a control-system upgrade that demands continual adaptation as new technology is integrated.
Finally, there are complex projects, which combine both a high number of components and an even higher number of interdependencies, creating emergent behaviors and uncertain outcomes. Large refinery shutdowns with piping tie-ins fall squarely in this category. This “components × interactions” view is a practical way to see why some projects stay tame and others go nonlinear.
Forces that Make Projects Complex - Constraints, Interdependencies & Uncertainty
Several forces make projects complex, no matter their size. Constraints are a primary driver—tight deadlines, budget limits, and resource shortages force trade-offs that ripple across the plan.
Interdependencies add another layer, as one team’s work can’t begin until another is finished or shared equipment becomes available—miss one window and the cascade begins. “We had three projects tied to one piece of equipment,” an STO coordinator told me. “The moment one ran late, it hit the other two, no matter how well we planned.”
Finally, uncertainty is always present: discovery work, shifting regulations, or new software and technology introduce surprises that can’t be fully predicted ahead of time.
Managing Multiple Stakeholders
Among all the elements of complexity, stakeholders are often the most underestimated source of risk—and opportunity. Projects with many internal and external stakeholders (owners, contractors, regulators, suppliers, community representatives) must constantly balance different interests and levels of influence.
One of the most effective tools for managing this is the Stakeholder Interest vs. Influence Matrix. This simple but powerful framework helps project teams categorize stakeholders into four groups:
High influence / high interest: actively engage and manage closely.
High influence / low interest: keep satisfied through periodic updates.
Low influence / high interest: keep informed and involve selectively.
Low influence / low interest: monitor with minimal communication.
By mapping stakeholders this way, leaders can anticipate conflict, tailor communication strategies, and maintain alignment even as priorities evolve. As the Project Management Institute (PMI) notes, “Systems thinking helps leaders see unintended consequences across stakeholder networks.”
Managing Complexity Through a Systems Approach
The answer isn’t to wish complexity away—it’s to manage it as a system. A systems approach reframes projects from isolated task lists into integrated networks of people, processes, resources, and decisions.
That starts with integration—aligning operations, maintenance, inspections, and capital work so handoffs and interfaces are designed, not assumed. It relies on adaptability—building flexibility into schedules and resourcing so teams can pivot when the unexpected happens. On some large plant start-up projects I managed, “our best contingency plan wasn’t in the binder, it was in our people’s ability to adapt on the fly.”
It requires feedback loops—short cycles of sensing and adjusting—to catch weak signals before they become headline problems. It depends on continuous improvement, converting lessons learned during and after execution into better readiness for the next project. And it demands a stakeholder view and communication discipline—mapping relationships, clarifying expectations, and ensuring information flows to where decisions are made.
“Systems thinking tames complexity by shifting the focus from parts to patterns.” – Systems Thinking by Sheffield, Sankaran, and Haslett
Leadership’s Role in Complexity
Ultimately, leadership is what turns theory into results. Effective leaders create clarity amidst competing constraints, helping teams focus on what truly matters. They foster collaboration across diverse stakeholders, turning conflicting priorities into aligned objectives. They encourage adaptability, rewarding flexibility and problem-solving when conditions change. Above all, they maintain a relentless focus on safety and outcomes.
"It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit" – Harry S. Truman
Bottom Line
Complexity isn’t the enemy—it’s the environment. When you treat the project as a system, you transform tangled interactions into integrated solutions, turn uncertainty into adaptability, and harness stakeholder diversity into shared success.
The next time you’re planning a major initiative, ask yourself: are you managing a checklist—or leading a system?
Ron Bettin, MBA, CMC is a Canadian executive and public speaker with more than 25 years of leadership and entrepreneurial experience. He co-founded several companies and provides management consulting through Adduco Inc. to large and small corporations. Ron strongly understands the importance of building value and creating success. He is a Southern Alberta Institute of Technology graduate with an MBA from Queen's School of Business.