CUI, Yu
Project flexibility in practice : an empirical study of reduction lists in large governmental projects - Exeter, UK : Elsevier, July 2009
This paper analyzes the use of prepared scope changes. To avoid cost overrun and ensure the success of large governmental projects, a Quality-at-entry Regime was introduced and implemented in Norway in 2000. Among other issues, the Quality-at-entry Regime requires an evaluation of potential reductions for governmental projects. This relates to reductions that can be carried out if other parts of the projects turn out to be more costly than planned. Such possible reductions are summarized as reduction lists. We have analyzed the use of reduction lists qualitatively and quantitatively. This paper attempts to answer three questions: (1) How the use of reduction lists varies between projects of different types and sizes? (2) Does the implementation of reduction lists change with time? and (3) Are there differences in the use of reduction lists among different project analysts? Our results suggest that the more uncertainty the project has, the less likely it is to anticipate project flexibility that is to be applied in the future. In addition, different project analysts exhibit quite different preferences to reduction lists. The empirical results in this paper come from a study of reduction lists of 82 public investment projects in Norway.
Project flexibility in practice : an empirical study of reduction lists in large governmental projects - Exeter, UK : Elsevier, July 2009
This paper analyzes the use of prepared scope changes. To avoid cost overrun and ensure the success of large governmental projects, a Quality-at-entry Regime was introduced and implemented in Norway in 2000. Among other issues, the Quality-at-entry Regime requires an evaluation of potential reductions for governmental projects. This relates to reductions that can be carried out if other parts of the projects turn out to be more costly than planned. Such possible reductions are summarized as reduction lists. We have analyzed the use of reduction lists qualitatively and quantitatively. This paper attempts to answer three questions: (1) How the use of reduction lists varies between projects of different types and sizes? (2) Does the implementation of reduction lists change with time? and (3) Are there differences in the use of reduction lists among different project analysts? Our results suggest that the more uncertainty the project has, the less likely it is to anticipate project flexibility that is to be applied in the future. In addition, different project analysts exhibit quite different preferences to reduction lists. The empirical results in this paper come from a study of reduction lists of 82 public investment projects in Norway.
