Resources
ICCPM Online Workshops and Webinars provide you with an easily accessible and engaging option to continue your training from anywhere in the world. To help you sharpen your knowledge and help keep you up to date, ICCPM has teamed up with industry leading project professionals, senior leaders and recognised academics, to share their knowledge and experiences.
PLEASE NOTE: The intellectual property of documents from the ICCPM website cannot be further disseminated, used or reproduced without prior written authorisation, licensing or contractual agreement by ICCPM. “Intellectual Property Rights” means all intellectual property rights anywhere in the world.
Complex Project Leadership
Competency Standards
The International Centre for Complex Project Management (ICCPM) is the review, update, and authorisation authority for the Complex Project Leadership Competency Standards. These standards have been endorsed by the Deputy Secretary Capability Acquisition and Sustainment Group (CASG), Australian Department of Defence, on behalf of the Commonwealth of Australia.
Webinars
ICCPM Online Workshops and Webinars provide you with an easily accessible and engaging option to continue your training from anywhere in the world. To help you sharpen your knowledge and help keep you up to date, ICCPM has teamed up with industry leading project professionals, senior leaders and recognised academics, to share their knowledge and experiences.
ICCPM Podcasts

Previous International Roundtable Series Reports

Please log-in to access this content.
Meaningful communications are well known to be difficult at the best of times. They become more challenging when new languages or even words are employed by one party. Age differences, occupations with special languages, jargon and hybrid versions of these can create misinterpretations. And explanations of complex situations add another layer of challenge to communications effectiveness. A Working Group of complex project practitioners under the auspices of ICCPM has explored the subject of cross-discipline engagement by pursuing the following question: “To better enable risk management of complex projects, what considerations should be addressed to reduce the challenges of cross discipline engagement?”

Please log-in to access this content.
The MRC SIG working group of volunteers explored the subject of defining the elements that should be considered when establishing the initial target for, and final assessment of, project success. The report makes a case for the definition of success in complex projects to include more than the cost of delivering a desired capability against a planned schedule when the project receives formal approval.

Please log-in to access this content.
Complex projects are always by their nature exceptionally busy, as are all the members of the execution team. Amidst the normally high level of ‘noise’ in the volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA) globally interconnected world of business now and in the future, it is often difficult to sense the early and weak signals that indicate the initiation of transition processes that can be detrimental to project delivery. Interestingly, many of the major issues that have detrimentally affected project success are problems that went unnoticed, were underestimated or dismissed until a significant change became obvious which triggered a project crisis.

Please log-in to access this content.
The purpose of this paper is to capture a set of what is considered to be important considerations for those navigating complex projects, as developed based on experience, observation and various source documents employed in the past by members of a small Working Group of the International Centre for Complex Project Management (ICCPM). It should be noted that the Working Group included the involvement of the following people on at least an occasional basis: Richard Barber, Laurie Bowman, Reaiche Carmen, Julia Cianci, Greg Fackender, Alistair Godbold, Tony Graham, Stephen Grey, Michael Hawkins, Daniela Kellett, Rob McMartin, Ian Mack, Denis Mitchell, Andrew Pyke, David Preller, Davin Shellshear, Lizzy Smith and Simon Springate. Furthermore, not all aspects of the content of this paper are necessarily endorsed by the participants of the Working Group.