7. Conclusions46
ReferencesAbbot, A. & Banerji, K. 2003. Strategic flexibility and firm performance: The case ofUS based transnational corporations. Global Journal of Flexible SystemsManagement 4:1-2, 1–8.Arge, K. & Landstad, K. 2002. Generalitet, fleksibilitet og elastisitet i bygninger.Prinsipper og egenskaper som gir tilpasningsdyktige kon<strong>to</strong>rbygninger.[Generality, flexibility and elasticity in buildings. Principles for adaptabilityof office buildings.] Prosjektrapport 336, Norges byggforskningsinstitutt, Oslo.Amram, M. & Kulatlaka, N. 1999. Real Options: Managing Strategic Investment inan Uncertain World. Financial Management Association Survey and Syn<strong>thesis</strong>Series, Harvard Business School Press, Bos<strong>to</strong>n.Arbeids- og administrasjonsdepartementet. 2001. Evaluering av NRH-prosjektet.PTL, SINTEF, Deloitte and Scanteam, Oslo.Bahrami, H. & Evans, S. 2005. Super-Flexibility for Knowledge Enterprises.Springer, Berlin.Ballard, G. & Howell, G.A. 2003. Lean project management. Building Research &Information 31:2, 119–133.Berg, P., Andersen, K., Østby, L.-E., Lilleby, S., Stryvold, S., Holand, K., Korsnes,U., Rønning, K., Johansen, F. & Kvarsvik, T. 1999. Styring av statligeinvesteringer. Prosjektet for styring av statlige investeringer. [Management ofGovernmental Investments.] Finans- og <strong>to</strong>lldepartementet, Department of Finance,Oslo.Blakstad, S.H. 2001. A Strategic Approach <strong>to</strong> Adaptability in Office Buildings. PhD<strong>thesis</strong>, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim.Boehm, B. & Turner, R. 2003. Observations on balancing discipline and agility.Proceedings of the Agile Development Conference ADC’03. IEEE ComputerSociety.Brand, S. 1994. How Buildings Learn, What Happens After They’re Built. VikingPenguin, Penguin Books, New York.Brennan, M.L. & Trigeorgis, L. 2000. Project Flexibility, Agency, and Competition:New Developments in the Theory and Application of Real Options. OxfordUniversity Press, New York.Christiansen, T.R. 1993. Modeling efficiency and effectiveness of coordination inengineering design teams: VDT – the Virtual Design Team. Ph.D.Dissertation, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Stanford University.47
- Page 1 and 2:
ISBN 82-471-8121-5 (printed ver.)IS
- Page 3:
Preface and AcknowledgementsThe wor
- Page 7 and 8:
Table of ContentsPreface and Acknow
- Page 9 and 10: Paper OverviewThe following papers
- Page 11 and 12: AbstractTraditionally, projects ten
- Page 13 and 14: alternative use. There are indicati
- Page 15 and 16: 1. Introduction1. IntroductionThis
- Page 17 and 18: 1. IntroductionFlexible projects ar
- Page 19 and 20: 1. IntroductionA literature review
- Page 21 and 22: 2. Study design2. Study designThe r
- Page 23 and 24: 2. Study designInformation Content
- Page 25 and 26: 3. Flexibility in different project
- Page 27 and 28: 3. Flexibility in different project
- Page 29 and 30: 3. Flexibility in different project
- Page 31 and 32: 4. Project stakeholders4. Project s
- Page 33 and 34: 4. Project stakeholdersmandatory qu
- Page 35 and 36: 4. Project stakeholdersBased on res
- Page 37 and 38: 5. Effectiveness and efficiency5. E
- Page 39 and 40: 5. Effectiveness and efficiencyconf
- Page 41 and 42: 5. Effectiveness and efficiencyDegr
- Page 43 and 44: 6. Project flexibility categorisati
- Page 45 and 46: 6. Project flexibility categorisati
- Page 47 and 48: 6. Project flexibility categorisati
- Page 49 and 50: 7. Conclusions7. ConclusionsThis th
- Page 51 and 52: 7. ConclusionsProject phasesFlexibi
- Page 53 and 54: 7. ConclusionsEnablersThis thesis r
- Page 55 and 56: 7. Conclusions16, Figure 17, and Fi
- Page 57 and 58: 7. Conclusions4. AbsorptionAbsorpti
- Page 59: 7. ConclusionsThere appears to be a
- Page 63 and 64: Gareis, R. 2004. Maturity of the Pr
- Page 65 and 66: Miller, R. & Lessard, D. 2000. The
- Page 67 and 68: Part 2.
- Page 69 and 70: Paper 1.Olsson, N.O.E. 2006. Manage
- Page 71 and 72: N.O.E. Olsson / International Journ
- Page 73 and 74: N.O.E. Olsson / International Journ
- Page 75 and 76: N.O.E. Olsson / International Journ
- Page 77 and 78: N.O.E. Olsson / International Journ
- Page 79 and 80: Paper 2.Magnussen, O.M. & Olsson, N
- Page 81 and 82: 282 O.M. Magnussen, N.O.E. Olsson /
- Page 83 and 84: 284 O.M. Magnussen, N.O.E. Olsson /
- Page 85 and 86: 286 O.M. Magnussen, N.O.E. Olsson /
- Page 87 and 88: 288 O.M. Magnussen, N.O.E. Olsson /
- Page 89 and 90: Projects trapped in their freedom:
- Page 91 and 92: 1. IntroductionThe purpose of this
- Page 93 and 94: project phases: preparation, freezi
- Page 95 and 96: establish realistic cost and time f
- Page 97 and 98: 4. ResultsIn the following, the emp
- Page 99 and 100: lowered the quality but the volume
- Page 101 and 102: Percent ofproject onSize of remaini
- Page 103 and 104: flexibility is introduced by the us
- Page 105 and 106: 100 %First official estimateApprova
- Page 107 and 108: ReferencesAndersen, B., Fagerhaug,
- Page 109 and 110: Paper 4.Olsson, N.O.E. 2004. ‘Fle
- Page 111 and 112:
The concept of project flexibilityF
- Page 113 and 114:
3. CONCLUSIONSWhat seems to be impl
- Page 115 and 116:
Paper 5.Olsson, N.O.E. 2006. ‘Imp
- Page 117 and 118:
558 N. O. E. Olsson et al.ex-post s
- Page 119 and 120:
560 N. O. E. Olsson et al.Table 1.O
- Page 121 and 122:
562 N. O. E. Olsson et al.and actua
- Page 123 and 124:
564 N. O. E. Olsson et al.Table 3.
- Page 125 and 126:
566 N. O. E. Olsson et al.Table 7.S
- Page 127 and 128:
568 N. O. E. Olsson et al.with a wi
- Page 129 and 130:
Paper 6.Henriksen, B., Olsson, N. &
- Page 131 and 132:
In this paper we use the process an
- Page 133 and 134:
PROCESS ANALYSIS IN THE PLANNING OF
- Page 135 and 136:
final framework for expected patien
- Page 137 and 138:
User involvement also generated exp
- Page 139:
Paper 7.Olsson, N.O.E. & Samset, K.
- Page 155 and 156:
Project flexibility and front-end m
- Page 157 and 158:
uncertainty. External flexibility c
- Page 159 and 160:
5.2. Flexibility in decision proces
- Page 161 and 162:
Degree of redundancySlackPrecisionC