Link to thesis. - Concept - NTNU

More documents

Recommendations

Info

46———. 2002. St.prp. nr. 1 (2002-2003). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2002. St.prp. nr. 1 (2002-2003). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2002. St.prp. nr. 38 (2002-2003). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2002. St.prp. nr. 60 (2001-2002). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2002. St.prp. nr. 68 (2001-2002). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2003. St.prp. nr. 1 (2003-2004). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2003. St.prp. nr. 67 (2002-2003). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2003. St.prp. nr. 78 (2002-2003). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2004. St.meld. nr. 24 (2003-2004) Nasjonal transportplan 2006-2015. Oslo:Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2004. St.prp. nr. 1 (2004-2005) Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2004. St.prp. nr. 47 (2003-2004). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2004. St.prp. nr. 62 (2003-2004). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2005. St.prp. nr. 1 (2005-2006). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2005. St.prp. nr. 2 (2005-2006). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2005. St.prp. nr. 23 (2005-2006). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2005. St.prp. nr. 28 (2005-2006). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2005. St.prp. nr. 64 (2004-2005). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2005. St.prp. nr. 75 (2004-2005) Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2006. St.prp. nr. 27 (2006-2007). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2006. St.prp. nr. 38 (2005-2006). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2006. St.prp. nr. 65 (2005-2006). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2006. St.prp. nr. 78 (2005-2006). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2007. St.prp. nr. 1 (2007-2008). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2007. St.prp. nr. 41 (2006-2007). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2007. St.prp. nr. 79 (2006-2007). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2007. St.prp. nr. 87 (2006-2007). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2008. St.prp. nr. 40 (2007-2008). Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.———. 2008. St.prp. nr. 45 (2007-2008) Oslo: Samferdselsdepartementet.Sosial- og helsedepartementet 20 . 2002. St.prp. nr. 53 (2001-2002). Oslo: Sosial- oghelsedepartementet.Utdannings- og forskningsdepartementet 21 . 2005. St.prp. nr. 1 (2005-2006). Oslo: Utdannings- ogforskningsdepartementet.20 The Ministry of Health and Care Services21 The Ministry of Education and Research
47Part 2 – Papers1. Magnussen, Ole Morten, and Knut Samset. 2005. Successful Megaprojects: EnsuringQuality at Entry. In EURAM 2005 The European Academy of Management AnnualConference 2005. Munich.2. Magnussen, Ole M., and Nils O. E. Olsson. 2006. Comparative Analysis of CostEstimates of Major Public Investment Projects. International Journal of ProjectManagement 24 (4):281-288.3. Magnussen, Ole M., and Nils O. E. Olsson. 2007. Managing the front-end of projects:An industrial networks theory approach. In EURAM 2007 The European Academy ofManagement Annual Conference 2007. Paris.4. Olsson, Nils O. E., and Ole M. Magnussen. 2007. Flexibility at different stages in thelife cycle of major projects: an empirical illustration of the "freedom <strong>to</strong> maneuver".Project Management Journal 38 (4):25-32.5. Olsson, Nils O. E., and Ole M. Magnussen. 2008. Projects trapped in their freedom:Analyzing flexibility aspects of projects based on results from front-end qualityassurance. In PMI Research Conference. Warsaw.6. Klakegg, Ole Jonny, Terry Williams, Ole Morten Magnussen, and Helene Glasspool.2008. Governance frameworks for public project development and estimation. ProjectManagement Journal 39 (S1):S27-S42.7. Williams, Terry, Ole Jonny Klakegg, Ole Morten Magnussen, and Helene Glasspool.2008. Practical implications of governance frameworks for public projects In PMIGlobal Congress - EMEA. St. Julians, Malta.8. Williams, Terry, Ole Jonny Klakegg, Ole Morten Magnussen, Helene Glasspool.forthcoming. "An investigation of governance frameworks for public projects inNorway and the UK." International Journal of Project Management in press.9. Magnussen, Ole M. 2009. Cost development in quality-assured major infrastructureprojects. Trondheim: Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Submittedfor publication in International Journal of Managing Projects in Business.10. Magnussen, Ole M. 2009. Explaining cost estimate differences in up-frontassessments and quality assurance of large projects. Trondheim: NorwegianUniversity of Science and Technology. Submitted for publication in InternationalJournal of Project Management.11. Klakegg, Ole Jonny, Terry Williams, Ole M. Magnussen. (2009). Governanceframeworks for public project development and estimation. New<strong>to</strong>wn Square, PA,Project Management Institute.
Page 1 and 2: 3PrefaceThe research presented in t
Page 3 and 4: 5Table of contentsPART 1 ..........
Page 5 and 6: 7Summary/abstractThe work reported
Page 8 and 9: 101 IntroductionProjects are increa
Page 10: collection and interpretation of th
Page 13 and 14: 15normative agendas, in other words
Page 15 and 16: 17world of projects. The choice of
Page 17 and 18: 19Figure 3 Sources and dataThe proj
Page 19 and 20: 21In line with Flyvbjerg (2006b), t
Page 21 and 22: 233 Concepts and constructs of thep
Page 23 and 24: 25by most BOKs and textbooks in pro
Page 25 and 26: 274 Main topics covered by the rese
Page 27 and 28: 294.2 Empirical indications from ex
Page 29 and 30: 31Budget proposed by the Norwegian
Page 31 and 32: 3330 %Difference (%) from the propo
Page 33 and 34: 3520 00018 000Cost development from
Page 35 and 36: 37In paper 9 (Magnussen 2009a) an a
Page 37 and 38: 395 Conclusions and directions for
Page 39 and 40: 41estimates must be implemented at
Page 41 and 42: 43Klakegg, Ole Jonny, Terry William
Page 43: 45List of government documents 11Fi
Page 47 and 48: Paper 1Magnussen, Ole Morten, and K
Page 49 and 50: AbstractCost overruns and delays ar
Page 51 and 52: Cost effectiveness considerations:
Page 53 and 54: demonstrates another fundamental is
Page 55 and 56: Figure 1 The Extended Quality Assur
Page 57 and 58: Expected effects of the revised qua
Page 59 and 60: ReferencesBerg, Peder, Kilde, Halva
Page 61 and 62: International Journal of Project Ma
Page 63 and 64: O.M. Magnussen, N.O.E. Olsson / Int
Page 69 and 70: Paper 3Magnussen, Ole M., and Nils
Page 71 and 72: MANAGING THE FRONT-END OF PROJECTS:
Page 73 and 74: Olsson, Samset, Austeng and Lädre
Page 75 and 76: 1995; Packendorff, 1995), mainly cr
Page 77 and 78: to a better way of managing the fro
Page 79 and 80: Figure 1 Basic structure of the ind
Page 81 and 82: from empirical investigations has b
Page 83 and 84: among organizations, not individual
Page 85 and 86: actors, the relationships are repro
Page 87 and 88: the network approach has been used
Page 89 and 90: established based on the views of i
Page 91 and 92: IHFJKGAELDMBCA - The focal projectB
Page 93 and 94: the NDEA. The communication strateg
Page 95 and 96:
Directorate for Cultural Heritage (
Page 97 and 98:
the project. The basic activity was
Page 99 and 100:
assumed to be more important than o
Page 101 and 102:
Another interesting observation was
Page 103 and 104:
REFERENCESEngwall, Mats. 2003. No p
Page 105 and 106:
Söderlund, Jonas. 2002. On the dev
Page 107 and 108:
Flexibility at Different Stages in
Page 109 and 110:
Reproduced with permission of the c
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115:
Paper 5Olsson, Nils O. E., and Ole
Page 126 and 127:
PAPERSGovernance Frameworks for Pub
Page 128 and 129:
supporting setting of and achieving
Page 130 and 131:
The study proceeded as follows:•
Page 132 and 133:
y the Chief of Defence Materiel, he
Page 134 and 135:
(within MoD but independent of thep
Page 136 and 137:
Norway U.K. (MoD) U.K. (OGC)Charact
Page 138 and 139:
from the external consultants was s
Page 140 and 141:
governance. International StudiesRe
Page 142 and 143:
Paper 7Williams, Terry, Ole Jonny K
Page 144 and 145:
The development of the frameworksUK
Page 146 and 147:
notable characteristic of the Norwe
Page 148 and 149:
Office to the National Audit Office
Page 150 and 151:
highly complex and changing decisio
Page 152 and 153:
ARTICLE IN PRESSAvailable online at
Page 154 and 155:
ARTICLE IN PRESST. Williams et al.
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Paper submitted to the Internationa
Page 166 and 167:
One constraint is that actual costs
Page 168 and 169:
In other words, the QA scheme is a
Page 170 and 171:
author, there apparently are no stu
Page 172 and 173:
20,0 %15,0 %10,0 %5,0 %0,0 %P50 est
Page 174 and 175:
The pre-eminent result is that the
Page 176 and 177:
Results from the analysis of the de
Page 178 and 179:
more fundamental assessments of pro
Page 180 and 181:
Paper 10Magnussen, Ole M. 2009. Exp
Page 182 and 183:
Explaining cost estimate difference
Page 184 and 185:
changes and external factors. Facto
Page 186 and 187:
30 %Difference (%) from the propose
Page 188 and 189:
Table 2 Areas associated with expla
Page 190 and 191:
agency. In this case, the observed
Page 192 and 193:
ReferencesFlyvbjerg, B., Holm, M.K.
show all

Link to thesis. - Concept - NTNU

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?