SECTION A [40 MARKS] Read the case study carefully and answer the questions that follow. THE IMPACT OF EXTERNAL QUALITY ASSURANCE UPFRONT TO IMPROVE GOVERNANCE OF MAJOR INVESTMENT PROJECTS Confronted with the recurring problem of large cost overruns and late delivery of large public investment projects, the Norwegian government initiated a review of such projects and the planning system at the end of the last century. It was done to identify the main causes and suggest means to improve governance of such large investments. The aim was to avoid embarrassing cost overruns in the future, but also the type of flawed investment cases one had seen in the past and improve return on investments. As the result of the study, a quality assurance scheme was established year 2000 under the Ministry of Finance to help strengthen overall governance of large public projects. Megaprojects take many years to prepare and implement. Only today, 13 years after, a sufficiently large number of projects had been completed to allow researchers to document some of the effects of the scheme and its wider impact on government and industry. Megaprojects are recognized as an important part of corporate and public life, but with varying reputations. This is reflected in the media where unsuccessful cases seem to get more publicity than the successful ones. The most common type of failure the media appears to report on is cost overrun. Number two is schedule overrun. That is because information on cost and progress is more easily available than more complex issues regarding relevance, etc. Even if the outcome is seen to be useful, the media tend to focus essentially on the large public construction projects that have suffered huge cost or time overruns, such as Denvers US$5 billion airport 200% overspend (Szyliowicz & Goetz, 1995), or the U.K.s Scottish Parliament coming in 10 times over budget and more than three years late (Tempest, 2004). Measuring success in a megaproject is not simple and straightforward. One reason is that success may be interpreted differently by different individuals and institutions, depending on their preferences, values, and to what degree they are affected by the project. Another is that the degree of success is time-dependent. For instance, Shenhar, Dvir, Levy, and Maltz (2001) offer a chronological sequence of events as a compound definition of project success: (1) Meeting time, budget, and other requirements, (2) impact on the customer, (3) benefit to the performing organization, and (4) preparing the future. The projects stakeholders do not necessarily share the same view of success. The project manager typically sees his or her job successfully accomplished when the project is on time, within budget, and to specifications. The users will be concerned about the immediate effects of the project, and the investor or commissioner will typically be more concerned with the long-term economic viability. The users view on success is essential. Pinto (2007, p. 7) quotes from an Infoworld article describing a U.S. Army study of IT projects [that] found that 47% were delivered to the customer but not used 29% were paid for but not delivered 19% were abandoned or reworked 3% were used with minor changes and only 2% were used as delivered. This is not to say that all megaprojects are managed badlyindeed, the management and governance of many megaprojects has made considerable improvements in recent years (see, for example, HM Treasury (2007) for an upbeat report on the U.K.s Office of Government Commerce). After many decades with developments in the project management profession, there is more expertise now in delivering efficiently and successfully a welldefined pre-specified project within a well-defined constant environment. This has proved very valuable in certain circumstances. But the focus on project management has been much too narrow in the media and the public. Truly, a much wider view needs to be taken on the success and failure of projects. The initial choice of the megaproject concept is of critical importance. This represents the one key decision of many made during the lifetime of a megaproject, which is likely to have the largest impact on long-term success or failure (Williams, Samset, & Sunnevag, 2009). Here, by the project concept, we mean much more than just the technical solution it includes the entire business case, the various organizations involved, and the various mechanisms and arrangements involved in the interorganizational relationships (see also Miller and Hobbs [2009]). 1.1 As highlighted in the case study, measuring success in a megaproject is not simple and straightforward. Against this background advise project stakeholders on the strategies they need to consider when measuring the quality of public sector projects. Your response should include relevant examples. (20 Marks)