The article examines the implementation of a work breakdown structure in multidisciplinary projects and its role in ensuring consistency in planning, budgeting, and quality control. The relevance of the study is justified by the need to coordinate diverse engineering and scientific schools accustomed to their work‑structuring templates, which, without a common decomposition language, leads to package duplication, hidden interfaces, and risks of resource overrun. The objectives of the article are to analyze existing standards and practices, identify empirical patterns in how WBS quality influences project timeliness and budget compliance, and formulate methodological recommendations for harmonizing codes, terminology, and integration packages. The novelty of the research lies in the systematic comparative analysis of NASA guidelines and construction case studies, in the content analysis of buffer tasks according to the schedule margin methodology, and in the proposal of a classification of interface tasks along three axes (technical, contractual and organizational); the study demonstrates how to link the WBS‑dictionary with digital PDM, PLM and PPM platforms to enhance transparency and adaptability of project structures. The main conclusions show that a properly constructed WBS functions not only as a work map but also as a mechanism for translation between professional languages, ensures traceability of budget, schedule and requirements, and that integration and interface packages, defined as autonomous elements, transform hidden dependencies into manageable planning objects; the applied empirical threshold rules (8/80, 4%, 40 hours), the RACI role model and schedule margin buffer tasks create a dynamic yet predictable framework capable of adapting to evolving requirements. The article will be helpful to project managers, systems engineers, integration management specialists, and all those involved in planning and control of multidisciplinary projects.

work breakdown structure, WBS, multidisciplinary projects, hierarchical coding, interface management, RACI, integration packages

Asuzu, C. M., Cheng, K., & Olechowski, A. (2024). The Personas of Cloud CAD Collaboration: A Case Study of a Team of CAD Professionals. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, PP(99), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2024.3409178

Azar, A. D., Militaru, C., & Mattar, C. P. (2018, July 1). Construction Design-Phase Errors and Their Impacts on Project Performance: Case Study of Lebanese Local Applications. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343382254_Construction_Design-Phase_Errors_and_Their_Impacts_on_Project_Performance_Case_Study_of_Lebanese_Local_Applications

Cretu, V. G. (2025). Planning Engineering - Principles and Memories (English). Amazon.

GAO. (2020). Best Practices for Developing and Managing Program Costs. GAO. https://www.gao.gov/assets/710/706933.pdf

Grand View Research. (2023). Project Management Software Market Size. Grand View Research. https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/project-management-software-market-report

Ho, N. (2016). Process Change Assessment Techniques. Aerospace. https://aerospace.org/sites/default/files/maiw/TOR-2016-02187.pdf

Interface Management. (2022). Interface Management Improves On-Time, On-Budget Delivery of Megaprojects. Interface Management. https://www.interfacemanagement.com/im/resources/interface-management-research/research/Interface-Management-Improves-On-Time-On-Budget-Delivery-of-Megaprojects

ISO. (2018). ISO 21511:2018. ISO. https://www.iso.org/standard/69702.html

KPMG. (2024). Addressing the Strategy Execution Gap in Sustainability Reporting. KPMG. https://kpmg.com/kpmg-us/content/dam/kpmg/pdf/2024/kpmg-2024-esg-organization-survey.pdf

Matthews, B. (2024, April 19). Understanding the responsibility assignment matrix (RACI matrix). Project Management. https://project-management.com/understanding-responsibility-assignment-matrix-raci-matrix/

Narváez, A. C., Fernández, A. P., Mateo, M. O., & Pérez, P. B. (2020). Integration of Cost and Work Breakdown Structures in the Management of Construction Projects. Applied Sciences, 10(4), 1386. mdpi. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/10/4/1386

NASA. (2023). NASA Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Handbook. NASA. https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/nasa-work-breakdown-structure-handbook.pdf

Newbold, R., Budd, C., & Budd, C. (2010). Protecting Earned Value Schedules with Schedule Margin. Prochain. https://www.prochain.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/ProtectingEVSchedules.pdf

PMI. (2024). Managing the complexity of engineering interfaces through ecollaboration. PMI. https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/managing-complexity-engineering-interfaces-ecollaboration-1460

Roland Wanner. (2020, May). How to Determine the Right Work Package Size and Duration. Roland Wanner. https://rolandwanner.com/determine-the-right-work-package-size-and-duration/

Rukayat, P. O., Waliu, O., & ibrahim, olateju olawale. (2023, September 14). Work Breakdown Structure and Timely Project Delivery. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373902508_Work_Breakdown_Structure_and_Timely_Delivery_of_Project_A_Study_of_Lagos_State_University

Taylor, M. (2015). How to Develop Work Breakdown Structures. Project Coach. https://projectcoach.com.mx/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/How-to-Develop-Work-Breakdown-Structures.pdf