1

Delivery & Commercial Capability Programme

Understanding Complexity

2

The Killer Question...

• Are "complex projects" real or are they simply a result of poorly defined scope. How can one distinguish between a genuinely complex project and one that has not had its scope and context sufficiently developed?

Complexity & Capability

Helmsman performance cliff model A project’s performance/complexity rating

ComplexityCliff

Projects this side of the cliff are within the host organisation’s

inherent capability

Projects this side of the cliff need a greater maturity than

current organisation al capability

Note: Diagram is illustrative. Not TfL data.

Increasing maturity level raises the complexity cliff

Complexity v Performance for Company X Project portfolio

Why Assess Complexity?

Complexity rating

Maturity requirement of

host organisation

Degree of rigour to apply

Lifecycle/Gates

Process / Techniques

Authority approval level

Assurance strategy

Monitoring/Reporting

Strategies to treat complexity drivers

De-scoping

Feasibility studies

Agile

Choice of Team Appointments

Choice of Delivery Model

These are factored into Pathway and will continue to be used to refine default levels of control

Optioneering

Proof of Concept

Project Teams can use the results to target the factors driving up their complexity

Enables capability gaps to be identified

DECA / Helmsman

Helmsman

Helmsman Increase Capability

Helmsman Model (comprehensive)The Helmsman model measures both hard and soft factors

Results for Project ‘X’

Comparing similar projects

C ontext S oc ial Ambig uity Technical P roject Manag ement

C omplex ity R ating

B aker S treet S tation Improvement 5.3 5.0 5.0 3.1 5.4 4.8B ond S treet S tation Upg rade 6.7 5.0 6.6 6.2 7.0 6.3C hancery L ane S tation Improvement 4.7 5.3 5.0 3.1 5.3 4.7G reen P ark S F A 5.3 4.5 4.7 3.6 6.1 4.8Marble Arch 5.3 6.0 5.1 4.2 6.3 5.4Notting Hill G ate 5.3 4.0 4.6 3.9 5.4 4.6Tottenham C ourt R oad S tation Improvements 7.0 5.6 4.9 7.3 7.6 6.5V ic toria S tation Upg rade P roject 7.3 5.5 5.3 5.5 7.0 6.1

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

8

• TfL typically has a large number of core disciplines involved in projects.• Timeframes are typically quite long, meaning it is likely that scope will be

ambiguous and/or subject to change and continuity of stakeholders and project personnel is unlikely.

• Project Managers typically are accountable for delivering new capabilities (not just tangible outputs), However, there are typically 4-5 decision-making layers above the Project Manager

• There are generally a lot of stakeholders interested in TfL projects

Multi-dis c iplinary Timeframes S tructure L evel of Accountability

S takeholder Numbers

Averag e R ating 8.1 7.4 7.2 7.1 6.9

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Top 5 Sub-Factors

conflict

The D&CC governance workstream has been helping with this issue, but there’s still more to do: e.g. Only submitting investment papers to the final decision-maker

Complexity & Cost10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

£1-25m £25-£50m

£50m-£100m

£100m-£300m

£300m- £1bn

£1bn+

Generally, the bigger the project by cost, the more complex it is.

But lower value projects have a wider spread of complexity. The ranges shown here cover a 90% confidence interval..

It could be more critical to understand complexity drivers for projects <£100m than in other cost bands.

Variability

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

TfL P ortfolio Averag e S TD E V

Most variableTo be addressedby projects teams

Least variableTo be addressed

corporately

• The least variable complexity drivers should be addressed corporately – e.g. factored into TfL pathway, tools/systems, competency development etc

• The most variable complexity drivers should be addressed locally, and factored into team selection, assurance etc.

Context Approach

What we are doing next...

Source: Ackoff / Senge & Roth

12

The Killer Question...

• Are "complex projects" real or are they simply a result of poorly defined scope. How can one distinguish between a genuinely complex project and one that has not had its scope and context sufficiently developed?

• My experience...– Even for well defined projects

– Some complexity drivers are inherent – Some can be tamed

– Others cannot

– Some complexity drivers are self-inflicted

– For poorly defined projects

– Most complexity drivers are self-inflicted