Charles R. Goulding and Preeti Sulibhavi explain how grim statistics can help encourage out-of-the-box thinking to break the failure cycle and ensure a project’s ultimate success.
In 2023, Fabbaloo published a comprehensive discussion of the extraordinary failure rate of large projects — a figure of 99.5 % that comes from the work of Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner in How Big Things Get Done. Their analysis of nearly 16,000 projects across infrastructure, technology, energy, and beyond shows that only a tiny fraction of large endeavors are completed on budget, on schedule, and deliver the intended benefits. Most are over budget, late — or both — falling into what researchers call the iron law of megaprojects: “over budget, over time, under benefits, over and over again.”
This grim statistic captures the persistent challenges that come with complexity, scale, and risk. Even outside-of-the-box proponents of project management techniques concede that these systemic shortfalls continue largely because decision-makers underestimate complexity, rush into execution, and fail to integrate robust risk and design planning up front.
With an unprecedented lineup of new large US projects now underway across critical sectors — from energy infrastructure to military systems and digital infrastructure — it is worth revisiting why so many go off track and what recent trends might offer lessons to break the cycle.
Why Success Is So Rare — and What the Exceptions Share
The small fraction of projects that do succeed share several key features: extensive pre-project planning, use of experienced project managers, and detailed digital models or simulations before physical construction begins. In megaprojects that hit their marks, leaders invest heavily in early design validation and integrate advanced modelling akin to digital twins — virtual replicas of planned infrastructure that allow planners to anticipate clashes, material needs, and scheduling bottlenecks far earlier than traditional blueprints would allow (Fabbaloo).
In megaproject contexts, modular construction has become one of the more reliable ways to reduce uncertainty. By breaking a large whole into well-defined, buildable segments, teams can standardize processes, manage supply chains more predictably, and reduce labor-intensive coordination on the critical path. The construction industry’s growing interest in 3D printing — not just of parts but of entire building components — is part of this modular, digitally driven planning trend.
Recent innovations in 3D printed construction highlight how modular additive techniques can reduce material waste, shorten on-site assembly time, and integrate digital design seamlessly with fabrication — factors that can mitigate overruns. For example, projects like 3D-printed barracks at Fort Bliss, Texas, completed in 2025, demonstrate how large-scale additive techniques can produce livable structures with fewer site dependencies and predictable timelines, suitable for both military and commercial infrastructure (AMFG – Tomorrow’s Manufacturing Today).
Likewise, 3D printing of structural housings and bridge components has matured in several countries into near-industrial applications. In the Netherlands, a 29-meter pedestrian bridge was 3D printed off-site and assembled with substantial material savings, showcasing how digital manufacturing can align with modular construction principles.
These real-world examples — housing, bridges, military barracks — point to the growing role of additive manufacturing not only as a tactical tool but as a strategic enabler of predictable execution.
Start: 100% of Large Projects
⬇
~70% fail due to poor planning
⬇
~20% fail due to design changes & scope creep
⬇
~9% fail due to supply chain & execution issues
⬇
~0.5% succeed (on time + on budget)
The Megaproject Failure Funnel [Source: AI]
Ship Building
The U.S. is making a major commitment to re-establishing its shipbuilding industry after decades of reliance on legacy yards and foreign production for many vessel classes. For decades, major U.S. naval shipbuilding focused primarily on submarines and aircraft carriers built by legacy players like Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls Industries. These programs have consistently struggled with schedule and cost due to complex integration and supply chain bottlenecks.
Recently, there has been a pivot in the industry as global shipbuilders — particularly from South Korea — enter U.S. shipyard markets. Firms such as HD Hyundai and Hanwha have begun acquiring or partnering with U.S. yards, bringing deep experience in efficient modular ship assembly and digital production workflows (Fabbaloo).
Crucially, these emerging shipbuilding strategies include advanced 3D printing for ship components, spares, and even subassemblies. For instance, both Korean and U.S. yards are deploying additive manufacturing at scale for maritime spare parts, maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) tasks, greatly reducing lead times and logistical complexity compared to traditional supply chains (Fabbaloo).
This combination of experienced global workforce practices and digital/additive manufacturing tools could considerably improve outcomes for complex naval programs — provided project owners invest sufficiently in planning, digital modelling, and systems integration.
Nuclear Plant Construction
Nuclear power generation is poised for growth in the U.S., with multiple new units in planning and early construction. Historically, however, nuclear construction has one of the most challenging performance records among capital projects, including decades-long delays and cost escalations in programs like Vogtle units 3 and 4.
Learning from Scandinavian nuclear programs — often cited for their disciplined planning and strong project governance — could help U.S. efforts avoid repeating historical mistakes. Scandinavian projects have tended to emphasize upfront engineering, standardized designs, and rigorous regulatory coordination (McKinsey & Company).
The emerging trend toward modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) — small, factory-built units — also seeks to embed modularity into the nuclear sector’s DNA. By shifting much of the construction off-site into controlled, repeatable production environments, developers can reduce uncertainties, improve quality, and potentially lower capital costs.
Thus nuclear projects demonstrate both the scale of risk in large projects and the potential remedies — modular design, disciplined planning, and digital project controls — that echo themes seen in digital and additive manufacturing.
Data Center Construction
To meet the computing needs of AI and cloud services, the world’s largest tech companies are building massive new data centers — some powered by unconventional energy sources like nuclear, solar, or hybrid systems. These facilities often run into schedule and energy integration complexity because most technology firms lack deep experience with large-scale capital projects.
The scale of data center programs — often billions of dollars in infrastructure — combined with fast-changing hardware and energy requirements has exposed firms to typical megaproject risks: vendor delays, engineering changes, and energy integration challenges. Recognizing these risks, some developers are adopting building information modelling (BIM), integrated supply chain planning, and digital twin platforms to anticipate clashes between electrical, mechanical, and structural systems before construction begins.
Given their intense energy demands, data centers are also under increasing scrutiny for power consumption and sustainability. Projects that integrate renewable or alternative generation systems — or that require continuous cooling infrastructure — add layers of complexity requiring rigorous planning and coordination.
Defense Contracts
Defense contracts — especially for major platforms like aircraft, ships, and land systems — have a long history of delayed completion and cost overruns. A consistent challenge is that Tier 1 and Tier 2 suppliers often struggle to deliver key components on time, in part because of design changes, insufficient planning, and contract mismanagement (acqirc.org).
To address these weaknesses, the defense industry has increasingly turned toward improved supply chain planning and additive manufacturing. Deploying 3D printing to produce parts on demand — including repair spares, custom assemblies, and tooling — dramatically shortens lead times and reduces dependency on fragile global logistics networks. Recent defense initiatives, including US Army supply chain modernization efforts unveiled at the 2025 AUSA meeting, emphasize “point-of-need production,” where parts can be printed locally at depots or even in deployed environments.
In addition, major additive manufacturing firms like 3D Systems are scaling their aerospace and defense businesses, expanding facilities and advanced material capabilities specifically to serve defense OEMs and tiered suppliers.
These shifts illustrate a broader trend in defense project execution: blending proven planning and systems engineering with agile, digital manufacturing to reduce risk and stabilize delivery performance.
Special Note: Frank Gehry’s Legacy
In Fabbaloo’s previous megaproject article, we highlighted the repeated successful performance of architect Frank Gehry, whose projects often succeeded because of extensive pre-planning and digital modelling that resembled early forms of digital twin creation. Gehry’s meticulous use of computer modelling — long before BIM was mainstream — helped ensure his ambitious designs could be realized in the real world (Fabbaloo).
Legendary structures like the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao are well remembered not just for their artistry but for how early adoption of detailed 3D design tools helped anticipate structural and constructability issues before breaking ground.
Frank Gehry passed away in late 2025 at the age of 96, leaving a legacy as one of the most influential architects of the modern era. His work demonstrated that complex projects can succeed when leaders commit to digital rigor from the outset (AP News).
The Research & Development Tax Credit
The now permanent Research & Development Tax Credit (R&D) Tax Credit is available for companies developing new or improved products, processes and/or software.
3D printing can help boost a company’s R&D Tax Credits. Wages for technical employees creating, testing and revising 3D printed prototypes can be included as a percentage of eligible time spent for the R&D Tax Credit. Similarly, when used as a method of improving a process, time spent integrating 3D printing hardware and software counts as an eligible activity. Lastly, when used for modeling and preproduction, the costs of filaments consumed during the development process may also be recovered.
Whether it is used for creating and testing prototypes or for final production, 3D printing is a strong indicator that R&D-eligible activities are taking place. Companies implementing this technology at any point should consider taking advantage of R&D Tax Credits
Conclusion
The monumental failure rate of large projects — approaching 99.5 % by traditional definitions — should not be dismissed as inevitable. It reflects patterns of insufficient planning, under-resourced early phases, fragmented supply chains, and poor integration of digital design and project controls.
Across sectors like naval shipbuilding, nuclear power, data centers, and defense procurement, there are promising signs of change: modular construction, detailed digital models, and additive manufacturing are increasingly part of project playbooks.
As these techniques continue to scale — from 3D printed building components to on-demand defense supply parts — the most successful projects will be those that treat planning, modelling, and iterative design not as luxuries, but as essential risk-mitigating practices.
Only by combining rigorous upfront strategy with modern digital tools can project owners hope to move more ventures out of the 99.5 percent category and into predictable, beneficial delivery.
