Large scale projects increasingly operate in complicated settings whilst drawing on an array of complex data-points, which require precise analysis for accurate control and interventions to mitigate possible project failure. Coupled with a growing tendency to rely on new information systems and processes in change projects, 90% of megaprojects globally fail to achieve their planned objectives. Renewed interest in the concept of Artificial Intelligence (AI) against a backdrop of disruptive technological innovations, seeks to enhance project managers cognitive capacity through the project lifecycle and enhance project excellence. However, despite growing interest there remains limited empirical insights on project managers ability to leverage AI for cognitive load enhancement in complex settings. As such this research adopts an exploratory sequential linear mixed methods approach to address unresolved empirical issues on transient adaptations of AI in complex projects, and the impact on cognitive load enhancement. Initial thematic findings from semi-structured interviews with domain experts, suggest that in order to leverage AI technologies and processes for sustainable cognitive load enhancement with complex data over time, project managers require improved knowledge and access to relevant technologies that mediate data processes in complex projects, but equally reflect application across different project phases. These initial findings support further hypothesis testing through a larger quantitative study incorporating structural equation modelling to examine the relationship between artificial intelligence and project managers cognitive load with project data in complex contexts.

In this paper I explore the scaffolding of normative assumptions that supports Sabina Leonelli's implicit appeal to the values of epistemic integrity and the global public good that conjointly animate the ethos of responsible and sustainable data work in the context of COVID-19. Drawing primarily on the writings of sociologist Robert K. Merton, the thinkers of the Vienna Circle, and Charles Sanders Peirce, I make some of these assumptions explicit by telling a longer story about the evolution of social thinking about the normative structure of science from Merton's articulation of his well-known norms (those of universalism, communism, organized skepticism, and disinterestedness) to the present. I show that while Merton's norms and his intertwinement of these with the underlying mechanisms of democratic order provide us with an especially good starting point to explore and clarify the commitments and values of science, Leonelli's broader, more context-responsive, and more holistic vision of the epistemic integrity of data scientific understanding, and her discernment of the global and biospheric scope of its moral-practical reach, move beyond Merton's schema in ways that effectively draw upon important critiques. Stepping past Merton, I argue that a combination of situated universalism, methodological pluralism, strong objectivity, and unbounded communalism must guide the responsible and sustainable data work of the future.