UNDERSTANDING COMPLEXITY WITHIN ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE DELIVERY SYSTEMS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: ADOPTING A VIABLE SYSTEMS APPROACH
Main Article Content
Keywords
Infrastructure Delivery Systems, Project Complexity, Viable Systems Model, Developing Countries
Abstract
Infrastructure delivery systems involve high complexity. This stems from numerous factors: a diverse range of skilled professionals, diverse cultural affiliations, incomplete contracts and complex contractual relationships among stakeholders, government policies, finance and regulatory issues, and high levels of asset specificity. The degree of complexity is enhanced in projects requiring high levels of specialization. Energy infrastructure projects can be described as possessing a relatively high degree of complexity. The ability to understand and manage such complexity directly affects project performance. Previous studies into the failure of most of these projects have traced project failures to several factors such as corruption, lack of transparency in the procurement process, lack of proper regulatory frameworks, and lack of political willpower. Surprisingly, few studies have attempted to spearhead a concise understanding of the inherent complexities in delivery systems. This paper attempts to contribute to the literature on project delivery process and its inherent complexities. This study proposes a viable systems model approach to understanding complexities in energy infrastructure delivery systems in developing countries. This is based upon the premise that a system must be understood properly to enable effective diagnosis. It argues that whereas the aforementioned factors adversely affect the performance of the infrastructure projects, a better understanding of the delivery process would allow for timely and appropriate solutions to be proffered. The viable systems model is premised on the concept of systems thinking and cybernetics-science of communication and control. It has proven effective in diagnosing organizations. It is hoped that this study, which forms part of an on-going PhD study, would elicit further discourse in the application of the viable systems model in diagnosing and re-designing infrastructure delivery systems within the energy sector of developing economies.
Article Metrics Graph
References
250.
Agenor, P. R. & Moreno Dodson, B. 2006. Public infrastructure and growth: new channels and policy implications. Available at SSRN 2005043.
Awuzie, B. O. & McDermott, P. 2012. Using a Systems Viability Approach to Investigate The Social And Economic Impact Of Energy Infrastructure Investments On Local Construction Supply Chain Development--A Case Of Nigeria's Niger Delta Region. In: JAVERNICK--WILL, A. & MAHALINGAM, A. (eds.) Engineering Project Organisation Society Conference. Rheden, Netherlands.
Baccarini, D. 1996. The concept of Project Complexity--a review. International Journal of Project Management, 14, 4.
Beeson, I. & Davis, C. 2000. Emergence and accomplishment in organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 13, 178--189.
Bertelsen, S. 2003. Complexity-- Construction in a new perspective. IGLC--11. Blacksburg: International Group for Lean Construction.
Brocklesby, J. & Cummings, S. 1996. Designing a Viable Organization Structure. Long Range Planning, 29, 9.
Checkland, P. B. 1981. Rethinking a systems approach. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 8, 117--131.
Dessy, S. 2007. Client power, citizen participation, institutions and services delivery: Theory and Evidence with special emphasis on Africa. AERC Project on Institutions and Service Delivery. http://aercafrica. org/documents/isd_workingpapers/DessyS_ClientPowerCitizenParticipationISD. pdf.
Devine, S. 2005. The viable systems model applied to a national system of innovation to inform policy development. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 18, 491--517.
Diallo, A. & Thullier, D. 2005. The success of international development projects, trust and communication: an African perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 23, 237--252.
Espejo, R. 1994. What is systemic thinking? System Dynamics Review, 10, 14.
Espejo, R. & Bendek, Z. M. 2011. An argument for active citizenship and organisational transparency. Kybernetes, 40, 477--493.
Espejo, R. & Gill, A. 1997. The Viable System Model as a framework for understanding organizations. Phrontis Limited & SYNCHO Limited.
Flyvberg, B., S., M. K. & Buhl, S. L. 2003. How common and how large are cost overruns in transport infrastructure projects? Transport Reviews, 23, 71--88.
Foster, V. 2008. Overhauling the engine of growth: infrastructure in Africa. Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic.
Foster, V. & Pushak, N. 2011. Nigeria's infrastructure: a continental perspective. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series, Vol.
Gidado, K. 1996. Project complexity: The focal point of construction production planning. Construction Management & Economics, 14, 213--225.
Jackson, M. C. 1988. An appreciation of Stafford Beer's ‘Viable System’viewpoint on managerial practice. Journal of Management Studies, 25, 557--573.
Leonard, A. 2000. The viable system model and knowledge management. Kybernetes, 29, 710--715.
Mason, R. B. 2007. The external environment's effect on management and strategy: a complexity theory approach. Management Decision, 45, 10--28.
Mitchell, M. 2009. Complexity: a guided tour, Oxford University Press, USA.
Okonjo--Iweala, N. & Osafo--Kwaako, P. 2007. Nigeria's economic reforms: Progress and challenges. Policy Research Series. Washington: World Bank.
Paraskevas, A. 2006. Crisis management or crisis response system?: A complexity science approach to organizational crises. Management Decision, 44, 892--907.
Polese, F., Giuseppe, R. & Carrubbo, L. 2009. The contribute of Viable System Approach in directing and managing inter--firm relationships. Annual Euromed Conference [Online].
Rhee, Y. P. 2000. Complex systems approach to the study of politics. Systems research and behavioral science, 17, 487--491.
Schwaninger, M. 2001. Intelligent organizations: an integrative framework. Systems research and behavioral science, 18, 137--158.
Schwaninger, M. 2006. Theories of Viability: a Comparison Systems Research and Behavioural Science 23, 11.
Sherif, K. 2006. An adaptive strategy for managing knowledge in organizations. Journal of Knowledge Management, 10, 72--80.
UNIDO 2010. Energy Infrastructure and Industrial Development. In: ISAKSSON, A. (ed.) Research and Statistics Branch Working Paper 12/2009. Vienna: United Nations Industrial Development Organisation.
Van Marrewijk, A., Clegg, S. R., Pitsis, T. S. & Veenswijk, M. 2008. Managing public––private megaprojects: paradoxes, complexity, and project design. International Journal of Project Management, 26, 591--600.
Vidal, L., Marle, F. & Bocquet, J. Modelling project complexity. 2007.
Wood, H. L. & Ashton, P. 2010. Modelling project complexity. In: EGBU, C. (ed.) Proceedings 26th Annual ARCOM Conference. Leeds, UK: Association of Researchers in Construction Management.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
The Journal of Construction Project Management and Innovation (JCPMI) is committed to the principles of Open Access publishing and upholds the ethos of freely disseminating research findings to enhance knowledge and understanding within the field of construction project management and innovation.
In accordance with our commitment to open scholarly communication, all articles published by JCPMI are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC). This licensing agreement allows others to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the original author and source are credited. The license also ensures that authors retain copyright over their work while allowing the wider community to access, use, and build upon the content.
The terms of the CC BY-NC license are designed to facilitate the following:
- Attribution: Users must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. This can be done in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses the user or their use.
- Non-Commercial: Users may not use the material for commercial purposes.
- No Additional Restrictions: Users may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
By publishing with JCPMI, authors agree to these terms and ensure that their work is accessible and reusable under the conditions of the CC BY-NC license, thereby contributing to the ongoing exchange of knowledge and information in an Open Access environment.
Creative Commons CC Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License