Governance of Major Public Investment Projects
Principles and Practices in Six Countries
This article compares the Norwegian scheme for quality assurance of major public projects with similar project governance schemes in five other OECD countries. All schemes have been introduced since the turn of the millennium and seem to be fairly consistent with recommendations from the project management literature. There are also a number of differences between the six schemes, for example, with regard to parties and roles, comprehensiveness, flexibility, organization, and whether portfolio management is covered. It is too early to make conclusions about their relative effects, but the evidence thus far indicates that there is much to learn across countries.