- Page 1 and 2: ISBN 82-471-8121-5 (printed ver.)IS
- Page 3: Preface and AcknowledgementsThe wor
- Page 8 and 9: Figures and TablesFiguresFigure 1.
- Page 10 and 11: viii
- Page 12 and 13: studies of related issues into acco
- Page 14 and 15: .xii
- Page 16 and 17: 1. IntroductionPollack relate ‘ha
- Page 18 and 19: 1. Introductionowning an option - t
- Page 20 and 21: 1. Introduction6
- Page 22 and 23: 2. Study designregime was introduce
- Page 24 and 25: 2. Study design10
- Page 26 and 27: 3. Flexibility in different project
- Page 28 and 29: 3. Flexibility in different project
- Page 30 and 31: 3. Flexibility in different project
- Page 32 and 33: 4. Project stakeholders4.2 Incentiv
- Page 34 and 35: 4. Project stakeholdersFigure 6 is
- Page 36 and 37: 4. Project stakeholders22
- Page 38 and 39: 5. Effectiveness and efficiencyHigh
- Page 40 and 41: 5. Effectiveness and efficiency5.3
- Page 42 and 43: 5. Effectiveness and efficiency28
- Page 44 and 45: 6. Project flexibility categorisati
- Page 46 and 47: 6. Project flexibility categorisati
- Page 48 and 49: 6. Project flexibility categorisati
- Page 50 and 51: 7. ConclusionsFlexibility categoris
- Page 52 and 53: 7. ConclusionsDriversIn this contex
- Page 54 and 55:
7. Conclusionsefficiency and effect
- Page 56 and 57:
7. ConclusionsDegreeof freedomto ma
- Page 58 and 59:
7. ConclusionsAs mentioned, the vas
- Page 60 and 61:
7. Conclusions46
- Page 62 and 63:
Christensen, S. & Kreiner, K. 1991.
- Page 64 and 65:
Kunz, J.C., Rivero, C.E. & Levitt,
- Page 66 and 67:
SIS TR 321 Systems development refe
- Page 68 and 69:
Part 2 - AppendicesPaper 1.Olsson,
- Page 70 and 71:
International Journal of Project Ma
- Page 72 and 73:
68 N.O.E. Olsson / International Jo
- Page 74 and 75:
70 N.O.E. Olsson / International Jo
- Page 76 and 77:
72 N.O.E. Olsson / International Jo
- Page 78 and 79:
74 N.O.E. Olsson / International Jo
- Page 80 and 81:
International Journal of Project Ma
- Page 82 and 83:
O.M. Magnussen, N.O.E. Olsson / Int
- Page 84 and 85:
O.M. Magnussen, N.O.E. Olsson / Int
- Page 86 and 87:
O.M. Magnussen, N.O.E. Olsson / Int
- Page 88 and 89:
Paper 3.Olsson, N.O.E. & Magnussen,
- Page 90 and 91:
Projects trapped in their freedom:
- Page 92 and 93:
flexibility is to postpone irrevers
- Page 94 and 95:
Midler (1995) relates the decreasin
- Page 96 and 97:
parliamentary bill. In addition, pu
- Page 98 and 99:
Structured approach toChange manage
- Page 100 and 101:
4.4 Calculating the remaining flexi
- Page 102 and 103:
As Figure 2 illustrates, the extern
- Page 104 and 105:
Engineering traditionSocial science
- Page 106 and 107:
quantified during the life cycle of
- Page 108 and 109:
Mahmoud-Jouini, S.B., Midler, C., G
- Page 110 and 111:
FLEXIBILITY IN ENGINEERING PROJECTS
- Page 112 and 113:
2. RESULTSThe arguments against and
- Page 114 and 115:
Brennan, M.L., Trigeorgis, L., 2000
- Page 116 and 117:
Transport Reviews, Vol. 26, No. 5,
- Page 118 and 119:
Impact Analysis of Railway Projects
- Page 120 and 121:
Impact Analysis of Railway Projects
- Page 122 and 123:
Impact Analysis of Railway Projects
- Page 124 and 125:
Impact Analysis of Railway Projects
- Page 126 and 127:
Impact Analysis of Railway Projects
- Page 128 and 129:
Impact Analysis of Railway Projects
- Page 130 and 131:
Adjustments, effectiveness and effi
- Page 132 and 133:
number of dimensions and are useful
- Page 134 and 135:
A project such as the new St. Olavs
- Page 136 and 137:
employees at different levels in th
- Page 138 and 139:
REFERENCESBadiru, A. B. and Ayeni,
- Page 154 and 155:
Paper 8.Olsson, N.O.E. 2006.‘Flex
- Page 156 and 157:
3. Research approachIn this paper,
- Page 158 and 159:
Incentives faced by stakeholders af
- Page 160 and 161:
Two explanations are proposed to th
- Page 162:
References[1] Karlsen, J. T, (1998)