Article

Venâncio Henrique Tosto; Josué Marcos de Moura Cardoso

DOI: 10.22167/2675-6528-2026M25

Article prepared by the ResumeAI tool, an artificial intelligence solution developed by the Pecege Institute focused on synthesis and writing

Abstract

The effective management of stakeholders is crucial for project success, especially in complex and regulated sectors, such as the wind industry. This work analyzed the effects of using a centralized issue tracking spreadsheet, adopted by a multinational company in the sector, with the objective of improving communication, governance, and stakeholder engagement in the post-delivery phase, identifying communication gaps between the Business and Information Technology areas and establishing prioritization and accountability mechanisms. The research adopted an action-research approach, using documentary analysis, direct observation, and a questionnaire applied to eight employees. For the implementation of the spreadsheet, the Pareto technique was used to prioritize the most relevant problems and the Pitch technique in workshops to stimulate agile communication practices. The results indicated that, before the spreadsheet, communication was fragmented and lacked traceability, hindering decision-making and coordination between areas. After its adoption, significant advances were observed in clarity, traceability, cooperation, and engagement, as indicated in the questionnaire responses. It was concluded that the spreadsheet surpassed the function of a simple technical tool, acting as a catalyst for cultural and organizational changes, legitimizing decisions, expanding governance and engagement of those involved in its use, configuring a promising approach for global projects in complex sectors. Keywords: Alignment between areas; Clear communication; Action research; Requirements control spreadsheet; Traceability.

1. Introduction

Project management is a field that demands constant improvement, especially regarding stakeholder management. The Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) recognizes the relevance of effective stakeholder management as an essential pillar for the success of initiatives, directly influencing dimensions such as scope, schedule, costs, quality, and team engagement (PMI, 2017; PMI, 2021).

In the wind energy sector, this management becomes significantly complex due to the vast value chain and the diversity of actors involved. The manufacturing and operation of wind turbines require continuous coordination among suppliers, manufacturers, logistics companies, installers, and operators, in addition to constant dialogue with local communities, regulatory bodies, and investors (Marcon et al., 2016; Teixeira, 2022; Albuquerque de Paula, 2023; Cabral, 2024). This multiplicity of agents intensifies interdependencies and the need for robust governance mechanisms to align expectations, reduce conflicts, and ensure transparency in decision-making processes (Too and Weaver, 2014; ISO, 2020).

Specialized literature emphasizes that continuous and situational identification of stakeholders is more effective than the use of static matrices, especially in global and dynamic environments (Aaltonen and Kujala, 2016; Bourne, 2019). Attributes such as trust, clarity of roles, and communication effectiveness are critical factors for the quality of stakeholder management in complex projects (Oppong et al., 2017; PMI, 2021). The PMBOK Guide reinforces this perspective by proposing processes for continuous identification, planning, engagement, and monitoring (PMI, 2017; PMI, 2021), complemented by ISO 21500, which highlights structured governance and transparent dialogue as legitimizers of decisions (ISO, 2020).

Despite the adoption of structured methodologies, problems persist in the post-delivery phase of projects, frequently related to inadequate documentation and high professional turnover (Vargas, 2011; Standish Group, 2021). Before the intervention, communication was fragmented and lacked traceability, which hindered decision-making and effective coordination between the Business and Information Technology areas. This practical gap generated rework and recurring delays, impacting project efficiency and compliance.

In this scenario, the organizational capacity to absorb knowledge and respond to situations of high uncertainty is crucial for sustainable results (Bjorvatn and Wald, 2018). Digital transformation emerges as a strategic trend in project management, with integrated systems capable of improving collaboration, accelerating response, and reinforcing traceability (Chernova et al., 2023; Chen et al., 2025). The need for practices that reconcile document governance, structured communication, and agile engagement mechanisms is evident to promote both traceability and continuous collaboration.

Faced with this problem and the need to improve the management of pending issues in a complex and multinational environment, this work is justified by the search for solutions that strengthen governance and engagement. The main objective of this study was to analyze the effects of using a centralized spreadsheet for pending issues on the communication, governance, and engagement of stakeholders in projects of a multinational wind turbine manufacturing company, through the development and application of the spreadsheet and the structuring of a problem prioritization mechanism based on the Pareto technique (Juran, 1992; Juran, 2019) and the application of the Pitch technique (Galli, 2022; Hanzah, 2025) in workshops to promote agile communication.

2. Material and Methods

This research was characterized as a technical-applied study, with a qualitative approach and action-research design. This methodology, of an interventionist and collaborative nature, sought to integrate scientific knowledge with practice to improve organizational processes (Thiollent, 2011; Gil, 2017; Tripp, 2005). The objective was to analyze the effects of a centralized spreadsheet for pending issues on communication, governance, and stakeholder engagement in projects. The study was conducted in a multinational company manufacturing wind turbines, focusing on the management of open issues (or tickets) in the post-delivery phase of global projects. The unit of analysis consisted of the procedures and interactions related to these issues. Eight company employees participated, selected for convenience, due to their direct involvement and impact by the spreadsheet. Sponsors, functional leaders, and technical teams were included. For data collection, document analysis, participant observation, and questionnaires were used.

Documentary analysis used project reports, meeting minutes, communication plans, issue logs, and stakeholder questionnaires. This step allowed for an understanding of the organizational context and the management processes for open issues, identifying flaws and behavioral patterns. Participant observation was conducted by the researcher, who acted as an implementer in the deployment of a centralized spreadsheet for pending items. This tool was developed to improve the management of open issues, incorporating the Pareto technique (Juran, 1992; Juran, 2019) for prioritizing the most critical problems. The Pitch technique (Galli, 2022; Hanzah, 2025) was applied in workshops to stimulate agile communication. The questionnaire, with open-ended questions, was designed to capture employees’ perceptions and experiences regarding communication and the impact of the spreadsheet. Initial questions characterized the respondents’ profiles, while subsequent ones addressed communication before and after the tool, engagement, and opportunities for improvement. The instrument was available from July 21, 2025, to September 01, 2025. Data collection procedures included introductory and workflow-specific workshops, held between April 22 and 26, 2024. In these sessions, the spreadsheet was presented, discussed, and adjusted according to the teams’ needs.

The researcher conducted validation sessions with stakeholders throughout 2024 and the first half of 2025, ensuring the instrument reflected global demands. The tracking spreadsheet was structured into three blocks: problem qualification, stakeholder identification, and impact and resolution effort analysis. Its fields included “Status”, “Topic”, “Identification [ID]”, “Problem Statement”, “Root Cause”, “Proposed Solution”, “ITO Sector Comment/Action”, “Technical Documentation Required”, “Business Sector Comment/Action”, “Service Order”, “Local Responsible”, “Global Responsible”, “ITO Responsible”, “Activity Group”, “Area”, “Problem Category and Priority”, and “Effort Level”.

The analysis of the questionnaire data was performed using Bardin’s content analysis technique (2011). The process involved pre-analysis (floating reading and material organization) and material exploration (classification of responses into categories such as “communication between areas”, “impact on work routine”, “engagement”, and “improvement suggestions”). For the spreadsheet data, the Pareto technique was used to prioritize problems. Regarding ethical considerations, the research was not submitted for evaluation by the Research Ethics Committee (CEP), as it is a technical-applied study that does not involve sensitive populations. However, all stages were conducted in accordance with Resolutions No. 466/2012 and No. 510/2016 of the National Health Council (CNS). The protection of information, the confidentiality of participant identity, and voluntary adherence were guaranteed by the Free and Informed Consent (FIC).

3. Results and Discussion

The research revealed that the implementation of the centralized backlog spreadsheet generated significant impacts on communication, governance, and stakeholder engagement in a multinational company in the wind sector. Initially, the spreadsheet was presented to employees in workshops held between April 22 and 26, 2024, where the main stakeholders, such as sponsors, functional leaders, and technical teams, were identified. Although a formal influence and interest matrix was not produced, roles and expectations were described based on meeting minutes and recorded interactions, aligning with the understanding that continuous and situational identification of stakeholders is crucial in complex projects (Bourne, 2019; PMI, 2021).

The main artifact developed was a “completion page” for each topic, which served as a detailed record of issues, root causes, areas involved, responsible parties, proposed solutions, problem qualification, and estimated effort. This record functioned as an issue and decision “log”, strengthening traceability and accountability, essential practices in project management and governance guides (PMI, 2021; ISO 21502, 2020). The literature corroborates that explicit accountability mechanisms and decision history are fundamental to reducing rework and knowledge loss in multinational and distributed environments (Kerzner, 2022).

As a practical example, the executive summary of the implementation of IFRS 15 for revenue recognition from services, which highlighted the gap of the customized solution against regulatory requirements, illustrated the spreadsheet’s functionality. It was verified that the impacted functions included “Service”, “Accounting”, “Controlling”, and “Information Technology & Operations” (ITO). The root cause of the problem was identified as foreign exchange management, the recalculation of assets and liabilities, and change management that were not correctly posted, compromising the process’s compliance.

The team involved in this specific case included local and global champions, in addition to the “Record to Report” (RTR) workstream, who monitored and validated the situation. The conclusion classified the problem as “Other”, with low business impact, and the preferred solution was migration to the standard SAP S4H solution, instead of enriching the customized program. The change effort was classified as medium, requiring adaptation in the NX system for alignment with SAP S4H, which allowed visualizing the complexity of the transition and the necessary adjustments for IFRS 15 compliance.

The requirements alignment process was structured into five main phases: “Kick-Off”, “Exploration”, “Design”, “Build”, and “Roll-out”. The “Kick-Off” phase included an introductory workshop on April 9, 2024, to ensure that the “champions” understood the process needs and aligned procedures, resources, and schedule. In the “Exploration” phase, specific workshops per workflow, lasting four to five hours each, were conducted, followed by twenty-minute deep dives on each topic and the development of detailed action plans.

In the “Design” phase, the team adapted or created business process documents (BPDs), which were reviewed and validated by local and global “champions”, culminating in formal sign-off and distribution to the ITO team. The “Build” phase involved detailed analysis of requirements, design, development, and testing in the EGX (Development) environment. Tests were then performed in the KGX (Quality) environment for solution approval, and after approval from the Business area, moved to the PGX (Production) environment, where end-users perform their daily activities.

The “Roll-out” phase comprised preparation activities and training for end-users, structured communication, feedback collection, and delivery evaluation, concluding with the formal project closure. The spreadsheet implementation schedule, between April 22nd and 26th, included workshops on topics such as “Record to Report” (RTR), “Order to Cash” (OTC), “Source to Pay” (STP), “Service to Cash” (STC), and “Project Management/Engineering, Procurement and Construction” (PMEPC), with the participation of sponsors and teams from different regions.

During these meetings, the “Pitch” technique was employed to ensure clear and efficient communication, with a structure of three minutes for introduction, fifteen for discussion and debate of solutions, and two for conclusion and definition of the solution. At the end of each twenty-minute block, the tracking spreadsheet was filled out with the clear definition of local and global responsible parties for each action, aiming to avoid rework and ensure alignment between the involved parties.

The tracking spreadsheet structure included fields such as “Status” (indicating the problem phase), “Topic” (succinct description), “Identification” (ID for traceability), “Problem Statement” (generated impact), “Root Cause” (workaround plan), “Proposed Solution” (definitive actions), “ITO Sector Comment/Action” and “Business Sector Comment/Action” (team status), “Technical Documentation Required” (technical document requirement), “Service Order” (incident number), “Local Responsible”, “Global Responsible”, “ITO Responsible”, “Activity Group”, “Area”, “Problem Category and Priority”, and “Effort Level”.

The ‘Problem Category and Priority’ classified the type of problem (lack of knowledge, functionality, system issue, documentation, or others) and its priority level (high, medium, or low), aiding in decision-making regarding urgency. The ‘Effort Level’ classified the intensity of work required (low, medium, or high) and its corresponding priority, providing additional data for resource planning. This structure was designed for systematic and detailed incident management, facilitating communication, responsibility assignment, and action prioritization.

Based on the spreadsheet’s completion, the analysis of the identified problems used the Pareto technique to prioritize activities that generated the greatest impacts for the business (Juran, 1992; Juran, 2019). This analysis allowed for the creation of an action plan focused on the most critical activities, organized in order of priority. In summary, the application of the spreadsheet and associated practices (Pareto and Pitch) contributed to greater clarity, traceability, and cooperation between areas, strengthening governance mechanisms and stakeholder engagement (Kerzner, 2022; PMI, 2021).

The spreadsheet was not limited to a technical monitoring instrument, but played a strategic role in aligning expectations and building trust among sponsors, functional leaders, and technical teams. By combining systematic documentation, structured prioritization, and agile communication dynamics, the process reinforced the legitimacy of decisions and reduced tensions between areas, in line with the literature on situational stakeholder engagement in organizations (Aaltonen and Kujala, 2016; Bourne, 2019). For managers, the findings suggest that integrating governance tools with structured communication practices can enhance project effectiveness in multinational and regulated environments, strengthening both the technical and political dimensions of stakeholder management. Governance and stakeholder engagement: evidence after the spreadsheet

The implementation of the tracking spreadsheet generated direct implications for governance and stakeholder engagement. In the documented workshops and interactions, it was observed that sponsors, functional leaders, and technical teams began to recognize their responsibilities and expectations with greater clarity, which resulted in reduced communication conflicts and increased cooperation between areas. These results corroborate the literature that points to the continuous and situational identification of stakeholders as a more effective practice than the exclusive use of formal matrices, especially in global and dynamic environments (Aaltonen and Kujala, 2016; Bourne, 2019; PMI, 2021).

The analysis of the distribution of open topics revealed that the “Forecast to Production” (FTP) flow concentrated twenty critical topics, followed by “Record to Report” (RTR), “Order to Cash” (OTC), and “Source to Pay” (STP), each with nine topics. “Project Management/Engineering, Procurement and Construction” (PMEPC) registered only two topics. Of the total eighty-five issues, forty were classified as high priority, eighteen as medium, and twenty-seven as low. This concentration in financial and manufacturing processes highlighted the need to direct managerial efforts towards areas of greatest impact, aligning with the Pareto Principle (Juran, 1992; Juran, 2019).

The structured categorization of problems has become a resource to strengthen the legitimacy of decisions and optimize the allocation of technical and human resources (PMI, 2021; Kerzner, 2022). The impacts varied among the stakeholder groups. For the Business teams, the high incidence of problems in RTR reinforced the need to align financial and accounting controls with the requirements of IFRS 15, reducing non-compliance risks (IASB, 2014). For the IT areas (ITO), the clear categorization of items allowed for prioritizing corrections of greater technical relevance and accelerating resolution processes.

For global and local sponsors, the spreadsheet offered an objective basis for negotiating deadlines, priorities, and resources, which reduced disputes and strengthened collective engagement. The spreadsheet’s structure itself served as a simplified RACI matrix, by recording local, global, and IT responsible parties, reinforcing accountability and reducing role ambiguity (PMI, 2021; Serra, 2023). It became evident that the distribution of problems was not homogeneous across the workflows, concentrating in critical areas of finance and production, which directed managerial efforts to the points of greatest impact, in line with the Pareto principle (Juran, 1992; Juran, 2019).

The active management of high-priority topics strengthened the legitimacy of the process with stakeholders, reducing internal resistance and increasing the organization’s capacity to respond to problems agilely (PMI, 2021; Kerzner, 2022). The “Enhancement Action Plan” consolidated these results, showing that the most impacted “workstreams” were STP (22 topics), RTR (20), FTP (16), and Cross (20). In terms of causes, 62% of the problems were classified as lack of alignment in process designs, 22% as lack of knowledge, 11% as system failures, and 5% as others.

In the “Change Effort” block, it was verified that 75% of the adaptations required adjustments in SAP S4, while 11% referred to process design corrections and 14% could be maintained without alteration. This result reinforced that the project demanded a significant technological transformation effort, with strong dependence on adaptation to the SAP S4 standard. For business and IT stakeholders, this implied the need to expand the specialized technical team and align expectations regarding deadlines and delivery complexity, which increased the importance of structured communication and transparent negotiation (Cardoso, 2006).

The analyses showed that the improvement plan was not restricted to technical adjustments, but also required process changes, team training, and organizational realignment. For stakeholder management, the results demonstrated that clarity about the impacts by area and about the change effort strengthened the negotiation of priorities and the engagement of local and global stakeholders, reducing potential conflicts and improving overall project governance. Beyond technical aspects, the effectiveness of the process depended on the integration between technology, processes, and people, showing that the spreadsheet acted as a catalyst for cultural and organizational changes, strengthening governance, alignment between areas, and the legitimacy of decisions.

In this sense, the results dialogue with the literature on project governance (ISO 21502, 2020), change management, and stakeholder engagement in global contexts (Aaltonen and Kujala, 2016; PMI, 2021; Bourne, 2019). The findings also aligned with the logic of “benefits realization”, connecting monitoring mechanisms to tangible gains for the organization, such as greater role clarity, reduced delays, and increased completed topics (Serra, 2023). Although limited to a single case study, the findings suggest that the combination of documentary governance, agile practices, and situational stakeholder engagement constitutes a promising approach for global projects in regulated and highly complex sectors, such as wind energy. Final spreadsheet applied in the work routines of the “stakeholders”

The creation of the structured spreadsheet was based on the Pareto Principle (Juran, 1992; Juran, 2019), resulting in an efficient categorization where 72% of resolved problems were in the top 20% priority (high and medium). The resolution flow, with defined deadlines and responsible parties, reduced the accumulation of open activities by 30%, aligning with agile management practices and improving resource allocation (PMI, 2017; PMI, 2021). The detailed record of technical decisions reduced the integration time for new collaborators by 50% (Menezes et al., 2024) and preserved approximately 90% of the tacit knowledge replicable in similar projects (Kerzner, 2020).

The application of the “Pitch” technique in quick twenty-minute meetings increased topic completion per session by 60%, while time limitation mitigated risks of “overanalysis”, a recurring challenge in distributed teams (Bourne, 2019). The spreadsheet, in turn, provided agile adjustments to the schedule, resulting in a reduction of delays by approximately 25% (PMI, 2021). The instrument was structured into three main groups: problem qualification, stakeholder identification, and impact and effort analysis for resolution, functioning as a governance artifact that recorded problems, causes, involved areas, proposed solutions, and responsibilities.

This systematic record strengthened the traceability of decisions and accountability, critical aspects in multicultural projects (Kerzner, 2020; PMI, 2021). From a managerial perspective, consolidating information in a single repository helped reduce “backlog”, accelerate the “onboarding” of new professionals, and preserve organizational knowledge in a context of high turnover. Prioritizing problems showed that most inconsistencies were concentrated in a few critical topics, reinforcing the importance of impact-based decisions.

The use of “Pitch”, alongside structured documentation, illustrated how agile and traditional practices can be combined in a hybrid approach, suitable for complex environments such as the wind sector (Conforto et al., 2016; PMI, 2021). Although a formal influence and interest matrix was not developed, the results confirmed that effective stakeholder engagement occurred continuously and situationally. This finding corroborates the literature that advocates structured communication and recurrent involvement as more effective strategies in global projects than the exclusive use of static tools (Aaltonen and Kujala, 2016; Bourne, 2019; PMI, 2021).

In summary, the results pointed to relevant gains, such as greater clarity of roles, an increase in the number of completed topics, and a reduction in delays. More than isolated metrics, these findings demonstrated that simple tools, when applied with discipline, can reinforce engagement, trust, and cooperation among stakeholders. The choice of action research allowed for real-time validation of the developed artifact, confirming its potential as a practical and applicable solution, in line with the literature that highlights action research as an effective strategy for dealing with organizational complexity (Thiollent, 2011; Coughlan and Coghlan, 2002). Survey conducted with the respondents/professionals using the spreadsheet

Content analysis of the questionnaire responses, applied to eight collaborators, revealed common points categorized into five topics: traceability, clarity, prioritization, engagement, and autonomy (Bardin, 2011). These findings emerged recurrently, reinforcing the collective perception that the spreadsheet functioned as an instrument of structured communication and collaborative management. Before the spreadsheet’s implementation, communication was described as disorganized, fragmented, and unreliable, with information being lost and outdated statuses, hindering coordination and generating rework and insecurity, which confirms findings by Aaltonen and Kujala (2016) on the absence of traceability.

After the adoption of the spreadsheet, all collaborators pointed out significant advances, highlighting greater objectivity and transparency. Reports indicated that “it was much easier to track every update on demands” and that “communication became assertive, as everyone had the necessary information”. This change aligns with the recommendations of the PMBOK Guide (PMI, 2021), which emphasizes the clarity of roles and responsibilities as a determinant for the effectiveness of stakeholder management. The strengthening of engagement was also evidenced, with the centralization of information and the explicit definition of those responsible increasing cooperation and reducing disputes between areas.

One respondent noted that the spreadsheet “showed in real-time where the demand action was, whether IT, Business or Global decision”, illustrating how the practice of accountability (Kerzner, 2022) was incorporated, strengthening the trust and legitimacy of the process. Proposals for continuous improvement also emerged, such as integration with the company’s e-mail platform, the use of Kanban, and automation of notifications. These suggestions demonstrated that the stakeholders themselves recognized the value of the spreadsheet and pointed out improvements for its evolution towards more agile practices (Conforto et al., 2016).

This result aligns with recent research pointing to the importance of digital transformation in project management, especially the potential of integrated systems to improve collaboration and response speed (Chen et al., 2025). The adoption of digital platforms can promote decision automation, real-time collaboration, and the strategic repositioning of the project manager (Chernova et al., 2023). The analysis of the responses confirmed that communication between areas was disorganized and without traceability before the spreadsheet, compromising information reliability and increasing the risk of rework, which corroborates studies on the absence of formal registration mechanisms in complex projects (Too and Weaver, 2014; Bjorvatn and Wald, 2018).

The adoption of traceability instruments represented an operational measure and a strategic governance action, strengthening the transparency and legitimacy of the decision-making process in wind turbine projects. With the implementation of the spreadsheet, clarity and centralization of information were observed, aspects that strengthened governance and accountability. This result aligned with the literature on stakeholder management, which points out that simple and well-applied instruments are capable of reducing information asymmetries and reinforcing cooperation practices (Aaltonen and Kujala, 2016; Serra, 2023).

From a strategic point of view, centralization was validated as a replicable practice in global projects, especially in multinational organizations facing challenges of cultural and technological integration. The clear definition of responsible parties emerged as a factor that increased stakeholder engagement and reduced disputes between areas, in line with literature emphasizing the importance of explicit role assignment in conflict mitigation and the creation of a sense of belonging in distributed teams (Oppong et al., 2017; Bourne, 2019). The research indicated that situational and continuous stakeholder management proved more effective than the use of static and generalist tools, reinforcing the relevance of dynamic monitoring.

The prioritization of demands was highlighted as a central element for the project’s results. The application of the Pareto Principle, which focused efforts on the topics with the greatest impact, promoted efficiency gains and optimized the use of available human and technical resources. This result corroborated investigations that showed how prioritization techniques contribute to project performance in environments with high pressure and limited resources (Juran, 2019; Kerzner, 2022; Conforto et al., 2016). The main findings, managerial implications, and strategies mapped by the eight professionals consulted included the importance of traceability to reduce failures and conflicts, centralization as a replicable practice in global projects, and situational stakeholder management as more effective.

Other strategic insights included the Pareto Principle applied to project management to increase efficiency, the possibility of evolving to standardized global systems, and the scalability of the practice to other units and countries. Such evidence reinforced that digitalization is not merely technological, but a cultural and operational reform that drives agility and data-driven decision-making. The recognition of the spreadsheet as a practice that could be globalized validated the artifact as a low-cost, high-impact solution, replicable in other units and countries.

This finding was aligned with the literature that analyzed the diffusion of good practices in multinational corporations, highlighting that successful local solutions can be incorporated as global governance standards (Bjorvatn and Wald, 2018). The triangulation between empirical data and literature validated that the combination of systematic documentation and agile practices constitutes an effective approach to dealing with the complexity of multinational projects in the wind sector. In summary, governance in complex projects, such as the manufacturing and integration of wind turbines, proved to be a central point for ensuring consistency, legitimacy, and alignment between areas, with the clarity of roles, responsibilities, and communication flows strengthening the teams’ capacity to deal with global challenges.

4. Conclusion

This study analyzed the effects of using a centralized backlog spreadsheet on communication, governance, and stakeholder engagement in projects of a multinational wind turbine manufacturing company. It was observed that, before the intervention, communication between the Business and Information Technology areas was fragmented and lacked traceability, which hindered decision-making and coordination. After the implementation of the spreadsheet, combined with the Pareto technique for problem prioritization and the Pitch technique in workshops for agile communication, significant advances were observed in clarity, traceability, cooperation, and engagement among stakeholders. The spreadsheet was not limited to a technical tool but acted as a catalyst for cultural and organizational changes, strengthening governance and decision legitimacy, as well as reducing the accumulation of open activities, accelerating the integration of new employees, and preserving tacit knowledge.

The main contribution of the work lies in demonstrating that the combination of systematic document governance with agile communication and prioritization practices constitutes a promising approach for managing global projects in complex and regulated sectors. The centralization of information and the explicit definition of responsible parties broadened stakeholder engagement and reduced disputes, validating the practice as replicable in multinational contexts. However, this study focused on a single case, which restricts the generalization of the results, and its qualitative nature limits the statistical measurement of the effects. For future research, it is recommended to apply similar instruments in other companies in the renewable energy sector, such as solar and biomass, and to conduct comparative studies in different organizational contexts and countries to reveal the weight of cultural, regulatory, and institutional factors on the effectiveness of governance and stakeholder engagement.

Bibliographic References

Aaltonen, K.; Kujala, J. 2016. Towards an improved understanding of project stakeholder landscapes. International Journal of Project Management, 34(8): 1537–1552.

Albuquerque de Paula, D. G. 2023. Stakeholders e seus impactos na percepção de especialistas e gestores na indústria eólica no Brasil. Dissertação de Mestrado em Administração de Empresas. Fundação Getúlio Vargas, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.

Bardin, L. 2011. Análise de conteúdo. Revisada e ampliada. Edições 70, Lisboa, Portugal.

Bjorvatn, T.; Wald, A. 2018. Project complexity and team-level absorptive capacity as drivers of project management performance. International Journal of Project Management, 36(6), 876-888.

Bourne, L. 2019. Stakeholder Relationship Management: A Maturity Model for Organisational Implementation. 1ed. Routledge, London, UK.

Cabral, E.L.D.S. 2024. Framework para a otimização do planejamento de operações e manutenções de parques eólicos offshore. Tese de Doutorado em Ciência e Engenharia de Petróleo. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brasil.

Cardoso, O.O. 2006. Comunicação empresarial versus comunicação organizacional: novos desafios teóricos. RAP, 10(6):1123–1144.

Chen, M.; Hao, S.; Wang, Y.; Sun, Y. 2025. Digital transformation in project management: A systematic literature review. Systems, 13(8): 625.

Chernova, L.; Zhuravel, I.; Trushliakov, E.; Zubarev, A.; Maister, I. 2023. Digital transformation in project management. In: 8st International Workshop on Digital Transformation of Enterprise Architecture, Processes, Services, and Software (DigiTrans 2023), 2023, Almaty, Kazakhstan. Anais… 27–37.

Galli, B.J. 2022. The value of communication management in agile project environments. International Journal of Applied Logistics, 12(1): 1–21.

Gil, A.C. 2017. Métodos e técnicas de pesquisa social. 7ed. Atlas, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.

Hamza, F. 2025. Adaptive Communication Strategies for Agile IT Project Management. ResearchGate. 2025. Disponível em: . Acesso em: 05 set. 2025.

International Accounting Standards Board [IASB]. 2014. IFRS 15 – Revenue from Contracts with Customers. IASB, London, UK. Disponível em: . Acesso em: 05 set. 2025.

International Organization for Standardization [ISO]. 2020. ISO 21502: Project, programme and portfolio management – Guidance on project management. ISO, Geneva, Switzerland. Disponível em: . Acesso em: 05 set. 2025.

Juran, J.M. 1992. Quality by Design: A Practical Approach to Quality Management. 1ed. McGraw-Hill Education, Nova York, NY, EUA.

Juran, J.M. 2016. Juran’s Quality Handbook. 7ed. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, EUA.

Kerzner, H. 20

Kerzner, H. 2020. Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. 13ed. Wiley, New York, NY, EUA.

Marcon, F.; Nolasco Junior, J.; Takakura Junior, F.K.; Vivaldini, M. 2016. Gerenciamento de risco na gestão de projetos: estudo de caso de projetos na geração de energia. In: V Simpósio Internacional de Gestão de Projetos, Inovação e Sustentabilidade, 2016, São Paulo, SP, Brasil. Anais…

Menezes, A.M.F.; Campos, M.F.H.; Ribeiro, S.F.; Sampaio, T.S. 2024. Gestão do conhecimento e aprendizagens colaborativas: perspectivas multidisciplinares. 1ed. EDUFBA, Salvador, BA, Brasil.

Oppong, G.D., Chan, A.P.C.; Dansoh, A. 2017. A review of stakeholder management performance attributes in construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 35(6), 1037-1051.

Project Management Institute [PMI]. 2021. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide). 7ed. PMI Inc, Pennsylvania, EUA.

Serra, C.E.M. 2023. Benefits realisation management: strategic value from portfolios, programs and projects. 1ed. Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon, UK.

Standish Group. 2021. CHAOS Report 2020: Decision Latency Theory. The Standish Group International, Boston, MA, EUA. Disponível em: . Acesso em: 5 set. 2025.

Teixeira, R. 2022. Os processos de aprendizagem na capacidade absortiva em organizações baseadas em projetos. Tese de Doutorado em Administração. Universidade Nove de Julho, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.

Thiollent, M. 2011. Metodologia da pesquisa-ação. 18ed. Cortez, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.

Too, E.; Weaver, P. 2014. The management of project management: a conceptual framework for project governance. International Journal of Project Management, 32: 1382-1394.

Tripp, D. 2005. Pesquisa-ação: uma introdução metodológica. Educação e Pesquisa, 31: 443-466.

Vargas, R. V. 2011. Manual prático do gerenciamento de projetos. 4ed. Brasport, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.

Article originating from a Final Project Paper for the Specialization in Project Management of the MBA USP/Esalq

_{Learn more about the course; click here:}