Link to thesis - Concept - NTNU

3. Flexibility in different project phasesreductions are described. In the studied projects, even though it was not a formalrequirement, many of the consultants chosed to add due dates for the scopereductions, to indicate when decisions had to be made to realise any cost saving fromthe reductions.Reductions in quality or functionality were proposed in almost half of the studiedprojects. These were reductions that lowered the quality, but the volume of coredeliveries from projects remained the same as planned. For road projects, the lengthof the new road was not changed. A common type of reduction for roads was toreduce planned improvements of existing roads, in connection with the newconstruction. Adjustments of ambitions related to the aesthetic quality of the projectdeliveries were common. Examples of this category include planting fewer trees,establishing smaller lawns and reducing the aesthetic quality of concrete walls.Reduction lists provide an illustration of the reductions that were judged to bemanageable from a project management point of view. The need for fast decisionsregarding possible reductions was very commonly emphasised. As a rule of thumb,reductions in system architecture and quality standards have to be made early in theprojects. It is possible to make reductions in volume and visual impression at laterstages, depending on the contract structure. Another comment was that the potentialvolume of the reductions was so small that it did not justify setting up a system tomanage the reductions. Finally, it was frequently commented that the due dates for thereductions typically came before it was realistic for project management to haveupdated cost estimates that could indicate any potential overruns.A quantitative analysis of flexibility in different project phases is included in Paper 3,using data from reduction lists in quality assurance reports for major governmentalinvestments. For about half of the projects, the reduction lists also included due datesto define when the window of opportunity closed for each item on the reduction list.Based on the reduction lists and due dates, it was possible to illustrate how the duedates of the items on the reduction list expired as time passes. This means that a partof the curve for the freedom to manoeuvre in Figure 2 could be drawn based on theempirical data presented in Paper 3.The relative size of the remaining open reductionscan be seen as an illustration of the ‘room for manoeuvring’. Figure 3 shows the curvegenerated from the reduction lists in relation to a whole project time span. The size ofreduction list is indicated by the grey area in Figure 3. At the time of parliamentaryapproval, the total value of all possible reductions on the reduction lists was in therange of 5–7% of total project costs. It should be noted that the size of remainingitems on the reduction lists drops relatively sharply after this point. The size andshape of the grey area in Figure 3 supports the illustrative models used in manytextbooks, which were referred to in relation to Figure 2.13