Link to thesis. - Concept - NTNU

More documents

Recommendations

Info

101 IntroductionProjects are increasingly used to organize and perform tasks in the private and public sectors. Butas projects have grown more commonplace and larger, the problems associated with them havebecome more complex. Despite recent emphasis on improved methods of analyzing andmanaging projects, fundamental problems remain, including inadequate needs assessments, initialpoor designs, insufficient tactical budgeting by planners and decision makers, inadequate costestimation and risk assessment, etc. Project management is by definition primarily concernedwith planning and controlling project execution. In recent years, authors in the field havehighlighted the importance of improving the design process to ensure project success, and thefocus has expanded from factors associated with the implementation of projects to also includelong-term effects and the fulfilment of overall objectives. Conceivably, efforts to improve theinitial and fundamental designs and to avoid some of the common problems encountered in theimplementation of projects may bring about savings and enhance added value.1.1 Research objective including research questionsThis research was initiated to explore the up-front assessment and quality assurance of majorinvestment projects.Choice of conceptDecision gate 1QA1Decision to finance and buildDecision gate 2QA2Front-endCommissionNeedsPre-study Pre-planning Implementation OperationEffectCP1 CP2 CP3 CP4Assessment of efficiencyAssessment of effectivenessFigure 1 The project life cycle, including main decision points, quality assurance timing, data collectionpoints and possible assessmentsAs illustrated in Figure 1, a project may be considered to start with the identification of needs andprogress in contiguous phases to finish with an effect. As shown, the phases are pre-study, preplanning,implementation and operation. The overall scope of studies of projects is enormousand clearly beyond the scope of this thesis. Accordingly, the focus here is on the front-end phase,which includes activities until the final decision to finance and build is made, underpins thebusiness case, with a focus on the effects of the project after it is commissioned, which here iscalled the project’s effectiveness. The strategic perspective and choice of project concept are the
11main concerns. The implementation phase includes detailed planning and engineering thattogether make ready for delivering the project as efficiently as possible. In it, project scope, cost,quality and progress are the main concerns. The quality assurance assessments studied in thiswork (labelled QA1 and QA2 in the Figure) are conducted at two major decision gates: thechoice of concept (Decision gate 1) and the decision to finance and build (Decision gate 2).A comprehensive study of an entire project would collect information at successive stages of it,designated CP1, 2, 3 and 4 in Figure 1, which would enable researchers to study the aspects ofefficiency and effectiveness.However, the study of the whole of a project is beyond the scope of this research, which focusesprimarily on the assessment of costs in the early stages of projects, because they are believed tobe decisive in determining future performance. Hence the work presented here builds principallyon data acquired at CP2, just before the final decision to finance, and consequently is confined toissues concerning efficiency, that is, matters related directly to the project outputs. To the extentpossible (only a few projects had been commissioned), data were also acquired at CP3, the pointat which the result of the project is delivered and immediate outputs may be observed. Finally,some information around CP1 also has been gathered. However, data that describe intendedbenefits after the project has been in operation for some time (CP4 in Figure 1), were not soughtin the work presented here. Consequently, the scope of this study concerns questions related towhether the projects are successful in terms of time, cost and quality (efficiency). Other,ostensibly more essential questions regarding the projects’ feasibility and long-term effects(effectiveness) remain to be investigated by future research efforts.The projects included in this study are considered “major”. The term “major” is of courserelative, as a project may be “major” for reasons other than having a large budget, such as itscomplexity, risks, and technical difficulties. A more detailed discussion of these issues follows.“Major” projects may also include those presumed to offer substantial opportunities but to entailgreater than average risks.A study of up-front assessment and quality assurance may involve a number of questions.Perhaps most important is the question of the extent to which such practices enhance projectperformance. Key relevant questions include:What are the essential features of effective up-front assessment and quality assurance?What is the impact of such practices on projects?Clearly, this entails in-depth examination of such practices more in-depth and observation ofresponses in projects subjected to them.A more detailed examination would include a study the effects of such practices on thedevelopment of project plans, estimates and project implementation:To what extent does up-front assessment and quality assurance guard againstunderestimation of cost?To what extent are agreed boundaries for cost development followed in practice?To what extent is improved budgetary compliance encouraged?This section comprises an overview of the key issues addressed in the research work. For furtherinformation, see Part 2 as well as the following sections that present some of the findings in thepapers. In any doctoral dissertation there’s a need for careful clarification regarding data
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 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 and 44: 45List of government documents 11Fi
Page 45 and 46: 47Part 2 - Papers1. Magnussen, Ole
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 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
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?