Mathematical model and intelligent system for analyzing the intensity of megaproject changes: the role of temporary change management hubs

Keywords: megaproject, “Nord Stream 2”, stakeholders, integration activity, uncertainty, intensity of changes, temporary change management center, mathematical model, large language model, neural network analysis, information system

Abstract

Megaprojects represent large-scale investment programs with complex organizational structures, uniting a multitude of stakeholders whose interactions lead to the redistribution of power and the creation of temporary management centers. In conditions of unstable and uncertain external environments, such stakeholder behavior can result in the failure to achieve the set goals of the megaproject. An important scientific task is the development of mathematical models and methods for managing changes in megaprojects caused by the integrative actions of stakeholders under complex external conditions. The present study is aimed at creating a mathematical model and developing an information system for neural network analysis of the intensity of changes in megaprojects. Megaproject management is described using a vector-matrix model of a dynamic system with feedback based on the results of changes. To identify recurring patterns of negative events, the event-oriented analysis method was used. This allows for justifying new approaches to management aimed at reducing uncertainty and enhancing the effectiveness of megaproject implementation. Based on the proposed tools, a retrospective neural network analysis of the intensity of changes in the “Nord Stream 2” megaproject was conducted. Within the study, key groups of stakeholders were identified whose interactions significantly impacted the project’s implementation: Group 1 – Gazprom PJSC, European companies and the governments of Russia and Germany supporting the project; Group 2 – the governments of transit countries, the USA, environmental organizations and Baltic region countries opposing the project or expressing concern about its consequences. It was demonstrated that the integration of separate stakeholder groups contributes to the formation of temporary management centers with varying interests, leading to an increase in both positive and negative changes within the project. The outcome of the work was the development of an information system for analyzing the intensity of changes in megaprojects in the form of a prototype, which includes: a mathematical model for managing changes in megaprojects; a neural network analysis methodology based on the use of a large language model for processing textual information and generating quantitative assessments; as well as a software interface for uploading documents, automated data processing, and visualization of results. The primary neural network used was the large language model Qwen 2.5-Plus, which, while not specifically adapted for this task, had its parameters calibrated for analyzing the intensity of changes in megaprojects. The system prototype provides users with the ability to analyze stakeholder interactions, assess the intensity of changes and forecast potential risks based on historical data. A promising direction for further research involves applying the model we developed and neural network analysis methodology for comparative studies of various types of megaprojects.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdikeev N.M., Bogachev Yu.S., Bekulova S.R. (2019) Institutional mechanisms for ensuring a scientific and technological breakthrough in the Russian economy. Management Sciences, no. 9(1), pp. 6–19 (in Russian). https://doi.org/10.26794/2304-022X-2019-9-1-6-19

Mitrofanova I.V., Zhukov A.N., Batmanova V.V., Mitrofanova I.A. (2014) Megaprojects of territorial development: The experience of the United States of America and the Russian Federation. National interests: priorities and security, no. 31(268), pp. 28–40 (in Russian).

Daniel E., Daniel P.A. (2019) Megaprojects as complex adaptive systems: The Hinkley point C case. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 37, no. 8, pp. 1017–1033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.05.001

Gil N.A. (2023) Cracking the megaproject puzzle: A stakeholder perspective? International Journal of Project Management, vol. 41, no. 3, article 102455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102455

Floricel S., Brunet M. (2023) Grandstanding? The elusive process of shaping megaproject symbolism. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 41, no. 5, article 102498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102498

Flyvbjerg B. (2014) What Pou should know about megaprojects and why: An overview. Project Management Journal, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 6–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.21409

Baerenbold R. (2023) Reducing risks in megaprojects: The potential of reference class forecasting. Project Leadership and Society, vol. 4, article 100103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plas.2023.100103

Favari E., Cantoni F. (eds.) (2020) Megaproject management: A multidisciplinary approach to embrace complexity and sustainability. Springer Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39354-0

Gusev A.B., Yurevich M.A. (2022) The state management system of megaprojects as a model for restoring sovereignty. Voprosy teoreticheskoj ekonomiki, no. 3, pp. 62–76 (in Russian).

Balatsky E.V., Ekimova N.A. (2021) Phenomenon of megaprojects in multi-contour economy model. Journal of Economic Regulation, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 25–39 (in Russian). https://doi.org/10.17835/2078-5429.2021.12.4.025-039

Bourne M., Bosch-Rekveldt M., Pesämaa O. (2023) Moving goals and governance in megaprojects. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 41, article 102486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102486

Jiang K., Le P., Zheng A., Zhang A., Ouyang L. (2023) Toward a systematic understanding of megaproject improvisation. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 41, article 102529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102529

Machiels T., Compernolle T., Coppens T. (2023) Stakeholder perceptions of uncertainty matter in megaprojects: The Flemish A102 infrastructure project. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 41, article 102437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102437

Martinsuo M., Ahola T. (2010) Supplier integration in complex delivery projects: Comparison between different buyer-supplier relationships. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 107–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.09.004

Sun J., Zhang P. (2011) Owner organization design for mega industrial construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 828–833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.04.005

Zani C.M., Denicol J., Broyd T. (2024) Organization design in megaprojects: A systematic literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 42, no. 6, article 102634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2024.102634

Burton R.M., Obel B. (2018) The science of organizational design: fit between structure and coordination. Journal of Organization Design, vol. 7, article 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41469-018-0029-2

Bakker R.M. (2010) Taking stock of temporary organizational forms: A systematic review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 466–486. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00281.x

Denicol J., Davies A., Pryke S. (2021) The organizational architecture of megaprojects. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 39, no.4, pp. 339–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2021.02.002

Satheesh S.A., Verweij S., van Meerkerk I., Busscher T., Arts J. (2023) The impact of boundary spanning by public managers on collaboration and infrastructure project performance. Public performance & management review, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 418–444. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2022.2137212

Denicol J., Davies A. (2022) The Megaproject-based firm: Building programme management capability to deliver megaprojects. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 505–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2022.06.002

Offenbeek M. A. G., Vos J. F. J. (2016) An integrative framework for managing project issues across stakeholder groups. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 34, no.1, pp. 44–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.09.006

Morkan B., Bertels H.M.J., Sheth A., Holahan P.J. (2023) Building megaproject resilience with stakeholders: The roles of citizenship behavior and critical transition mechanisms. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 41, no. 5, article 102485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102485

Jayasuriya S., Zhang G., Pang R. J. (2024) Towards successful economic infrastructure partnership project delivery through effective stakeholder management. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, vol. 26, article 101173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2024.101173

Mikhnenko P. (2009) Optimization of economic organization adaptation to environment changes. Control sciences, no. 4, pp. 32–38 (in Russian).

Published
2025-06-30
How to Cite
Mikhnenko P. A. (2025). Mathematical model and intelligent system for analyzing the intensity of megaproject changes: the role of temporary change management hubs. BUSINESS INFORMATICS, 19(2), 54-76. Retrieved from https://vo.hse.ru/index.php/bijournal/article/view/27551
Section
Articles