Research areas
Research Areas
Project Management (especially Project Stakeholder Management)
Project Portfolio Management
Managing the Project-oriented Organization
Developing the Project-oriented Organization
Publication list (updated December 2011 - publicatons in Danish can be found at the bottom)
64. Eskerod P & Huemann M (2011) Project Stakeholder Management Practices – in the Light of Modern Stakeholder Theory and Sustainability Principles, presented at the Nordic Academy of Management (NFF) meeting, Stockholm, Sweden, August (16 pages)
It is generally agreed in the project management literature that project stakeholder management is a core activity. At the same time, it is acknowledged that the increasing request in society for sustainability considerations makes stakeholder management more complex. In spite of an overwhelming amount of advice on how to deal with project stakeholders numerous examples of project failures and unsatisfied stakeholders are reported. Based on concepts drawn from general stakeholder theory and from sustainability research, we analysis in this paper project stakeholder practices proposed by the international project management standards literature. Our analysis shows that, firstly, stakeholder issues are treated rather superficially in the project management standards literature, and, secondly, the normative project management practices are mainly within a management-of-stakeholders approach, i.e. making stakeholders comply to project needs, whereas the general stakeholder theory points to the need for a management-for-stakeholders approach. We suggest that project stakeholder management literature would be enriched by including both approaches and by seeing the approaches as extreme positions on a continuum. Finally, we argue that the managing-for-stakeholders approach fits to recent findings of sustainability research, which further encourage to a rethinking of project stakeholder management.
63. Eskerod P & Huemann M (2011) Managing Projects for Stakeholders from a Sustainability Perspective, proceedings for the EISAM 1st Interdisciplinary Conference on Stakeholders, Resources & Value Creation, Barcelona, Spain (10 pages)
A significant part of the global gross domestic product is initiated by projects. Further, projects create value for a number of stakeholders. At the same time an increasing strive for sustainable development can be observed, i.e. a development that incorporates the needs of both the present and the future. Based on literature reviews, we discuss the implications of applying a sustainable perspective when managing projects for stakeholders. By integrating inputs from the Project Management literature, the Stakeholder Management literature, and the Sustainable Development literature we identify three core characteristics: A sustainable perspective implies that (1) the project as a temporary organization as well as the investment initialized by the project are considered; (2) a broad range of project stakeholders are considered and integrated in the project objectives; (3) an integrative approach to stakeholder management instead of an instrumental approach is applied. By offering discussions based on three streams of literature the aim is to contribute to an improved understanding of how to translate sustainable development in projects into action and how to engage with stakeholders in a project context.
62. Vaagaasar AL, Eskerod P & Nikolaisen H (2011) Project Stakeholder Management as Continuous Processes for Re-Creating and Improving Relationships, proceedings for the EISAM 1st Interdisciplinary Conference on Stakeholders, Resources & Value Creation, Barcelona, Spain (20 pages)
This paper contributes to the understanding of processes and strategies involved in effective stakeholder management in a complex development project. It is generally agreed in the stakeholder literature, as well as in the resource dependence literature that stakeholders can be assessed on their potential to threaten (harm) or cooperate with (help) an organization. Further, it is suggested that based on the assessment the organisation should apply certain stakeholder management strategies. It should also seek to transform the relationship with each stakeholder into a favourable one seen from the perspective of the organization. Based on an in-depth longitudinal case study this paper provides thick descriptions of how the project team of a complex development project worked on the relations with its main supplier and its sponsor in order to accomplish the project. The paper shows how each stakeholder’s ability to harm and help the project changed considerably over time and that the project had to balance between planned interaction activities and emergent action patterns in order to cope with these changes. Futher, it shows how the project team developed situation specific competences towards dealing with each stakeholder through trial-and-error processes throughout the project course. Finally, the paper illuminates how various types of trust changed as a result of the interactions with the stakeholders.
61. Eskerod P & Jepsen AL (2011) What Does the Project Stakeholder Value?, PM World Today, April, XIII(IV) (6 pages)
A project is a means to create value for stakeholders. This is a two-way street as contributions from the stakeholders are imperative to create the desired value. The existing project management literature offers advice on how to manage project stakeholders to enhance the likelihood that agreed upon deliverables will be delivered within time and budget by the project team. The literature is based on a notion of a stable environment in which both the project task and the stakeholders are “manageable”. Today’s projects, however, are often faced by unexpected changes in the environment. This means that the project representatives (the project sponsor, the project manager, and the project team members) continuously need to adjust the project plan and thereby potentially affect the stakeholders.
60. Riis E & Eskerod P (2010) Knowledge Sharing Activities in Project-oriented Organisations, in Goerner A & Wald A (eds) Advanced Project Management, Germany
Findings from examining eleven knowledge sharing activities in five mature project-oriented organisations are presented. Based on in-depth case studies, we claim that mature project-oriented companies will prefer knowledge sharing activities that contribute to an intra-organisational common frame of reference. Further, activities that are internal to the companies are preferred to external activities, and non-project-/programme-specific knowledge sharing activities are preferred to project-/programme-specific knowledge sharing activities.
59. Dietrich P, Eskerod P, Dalcher D & Sandhawalia B (2010) The Dynamics of Collaboration in Multi-partner Projects. Project Management Journal, 41(4), pp. 59–78
In many project-based industries, there has recently been an increased tendency for collaboration and cocreation of value with the customers. However, many existing studies report inherent challenges and complexities related to multipartner collaboration. This article presents a conceptual framework that explains the focal collaborationrelated elements and their interdependencies in
multipartner projects. The elements in the framework and relations between them are derived from the existing empirical studies and theoretical literature on collaboration, knowledge integration, and project success. Based on the conceptual analysis of the extant literature, we identify eight collaboration antecedents and three collaboration outcome elements. The conceptual framework explains how two collaboration mediators, project-collaboration quality and knowledge-integration capability, relate collaboration antecedents with collaboration outcomes. In addition, based on the literature analysis, we identify 15 mechanisms that enhance the project collaboration quality in multipartner projects. The article provides novel insights on the dynamics of collaboration in multipartner projects by offering the concepts of project-collaboration quality and knowledge-integration capability and explaining their role in collaborative projects.
58. Dietrich P, Eskerod P, Dalcher D & Sandhawalia B (2010) The Role of Project Collaboration Quality and Knowledge Integration Capability in Multi-Partner Projects. Proceedings for the PMI Research and Education Conference, 11-14 July, Washington D.C., USA
57. Eskerod P (2010) Action Learning for Further Developing Project Management Competencies: A Case Study from an Engineering Consultancy Company. International Journal of Project Management, 28(4), pp. 352-360
Competence development of the employees is a core element when it comes to successful implementation of planned change. In this article, findings from an in-depth empirical study in an engineering consultancy are presented. The consultancy wanted to further develop the organization due to changed market conditions. Among other initiatives, top management established a competence development programme for the project managers. Action learning was used as a developmental method in one of the projects in the programme. The research showed that certain preconditions needed to exist in order for the project managers to benefit from participating in action learning, e.g. a proper and respected selection process for participants, proper training of the facilitators, sufficient time spent together in each action learning session, and sufficient follow-up.
56. Riis E & Eskerod P (2010) How to Gain Value from a Project Management Model – a Case Study. Internet article, http://www.maxwideman.com/ (9 pages)
55. Eskerod P & E Riis (2009) Value Creation by Building an Intra-organizational Common Frame of Reference Concerning Project Management, Project Management Journal, Sep, 40(3), pp. 6-13
In this article we suggest that organizations should not spend that many resources on se-lecting specific PM approaches, tools, or behaviours. Instead, we claim that the real bene-fit from PM implementations is the creation of a common frame of reference. Based on four case studies we identify elements that enhance such a common frame of reference: (1) an internal, common PM model, (2) common PM training, (3) common PM exams or certifications, and (4) activities for knowledge sharing. Values created, especially when the application of the elements were mandatory, were e.g. better communication, better customer satisfaction, and easier knowledge sharing.
54. Jepsen AL & P Eskerod (2009) Stakeholder Analysis in Projects: Challenges in Using Current Guidelines in the Real World, International Journal of Project Management, 27 (4), pp 335-343
The authors of this paper investigated the usability of current guidelines regarding stakeholder analysis by letting four project managers apply the guidelines to their renewal projects. The project managers found several challenges in using the guidelines. Especially, the guidelines lack clarity regarding (a) how to identify stakeholders and determine their importance and (b) how to reveal stakeholders’ expectations. Further, the application revealed that the project manager may not have the skills or the resources required to carry out the tasks involved in making the necessary inquiries. Therefore, the stakeholder analysis may be based on superficial rather than deep knowledge. It seems that the current guidelines should be considered as a conceptual framework rather than instructions on how to do a real world stakeholder analysis.
53. Eskerod P & E Riis (2009) Project Management Models as Value Creators, Project Management Journal, 40 (1), pp. 4-18
Based on findings from five case studies we discuss benefits obtained by using a common project management model.1 The case studies are part of an international research project aimed at determining the value of project management. All five companies applied a customized project management model. The five models are presented, and their characteristics, similarities, and differences are discussed. Based on interviews and comparisons with literature, the values ob-tained are identified. The values relate to efficiency, legitimacy, power and control, and stakeholder satisfaction. Further, the article points to necessary preconditions (both technical and human factors) in order to harvest the values.
52. Eskerod P (2008) Latest Project Management Implementation, in Thomas J & M Mullaly (eds) Researching the Value of Project Management, Project Management Institute, Pennsylvania, USA p 86 and pp 146-150
51. Eskerod P & A Mosavi (2008) Challenges in Developing Project Portfolio Management – a Case Study, in Proceedings for the 22th IPMA World Congress Project: Management to Run, Rome, Italy, November
More and more companies have realized that in order to stay competitive they need to find a way to link the corporate strategies with their projects and programs. Running Project Portfolio Management (PPM) may be a good choice. However, many companies experience difficulties when trying to implement PPM. Further, only little has been written in the literature about implementing PPM. The aim of this paper is to discuss challenges and solutions related to the development of PPM within a company. Findings from a case study are presented and discussed. The case company developed from having almost a not existing PPM strategy to a strategy involving processes or procedures for project selection and alignment with the overall strategy of the company. Main findings were that to implement PPM with success all organizational dimensions (People, Tasks, Tools, and Structure) and their respective challenges need to be taken into consideration.
50. Blichfeldt BS & P Eskerod (2008) Project Portfolio Management – There’s More to it than What Management Enacts, International Journal of Project Management, 26 (4), pp 357-365
Although companies manage project portfolios concordantly with project portfolio theory, they may experience problems in the form
of delayed projects, resource struggles, stress, and a lack of overview. Based on a research project compromised of 128 in-depth interviews in 30 companies, we propose that a key reason why companies do not do well in relation to project portfolio management (PPM) is that PPM often only covers a subset of on-going projects, while projects that are not subject to PPM tie up resources that initially were dedicated to PPM projects. We address and discuss the dilemma of wanting to include all projects in PPM, and aiming at keeping the resource and cognitive burden of doing PPM at a reasonable level.
49. Eskerod P & E Riis (2008) Creating Value by Building an Intra-Organizational Common Frame of Reference for Project Management, in Proceedings for the PMI Research Conference, Warsawa, Polen, July, Project Management Institute
48. Jepsen AL & P Eskerod (2008) Use of internal communication to market a project which nobody wants, in Podnar K & Zlatko J (eds) Corporate and Marketing Communications as a Strategic Resource, Response to Contemporary Use, Challenges and Criticism, Routledge and Faculty of Social Sciences, Ljubljana, pp 100-101
47. Eskerod P & HJ Skriver (2007) Organisational Culture Restraining In-house Knowledge Transfer between Project Managers – a Case Study, Project Management Journal, 38 (1), pp 110-122
Even though the importance of knowledge transfer within project-oriented organizations is frequently emphasized in the recent project management literature, in practice, knowledge transfer only takes place to a rather limited extent. Based on an in-depth case study, findings from a company, in which several initiatives to promote knowledge transfer between five full-time project managers were taken, are presented. However, the initiatives did not bring the expected outcome. The organizational subculture encompassing project managers may explain reluctance in involvement in knowledge transfer and in sharing of lessons learned. Based on Schein’s notion (1987) six basic underlying assumptions in the organizational culture that limit knowledge transfer are
identified. Further, the authors propose an interaction paradigm underlying project managers’ interactions.
46. Eskerod P (2006) Chapter 10: Managing Human Energy in the Project-Oriented Company, in Cleland D & R Gareis (eds) Global Project Management Handbook, 2. edition, Mc Graw Hill, New York, pp 10-1-10-12
45. Blichfeldt BS & P Eskerod (2005) Project Portfolios - There's More to It than What Management Enacts, in Christiansen JK (ed) Proceedings for the 12th International Product Development Management Conference, Copenhagen, June, Copenhagen Business School, pp 133-144
44. Eskerod P & AL Jepsen (2005) Staffing Renewal Projects by Voluntary Enrolment, International Journal of Project Management, 23 (6), pp 445-453
In this article, we examine a new staffing procedure, in which enrolment is dependent on employees voluntarily responding to
internal advertising of projects. An important issue in voluntary enrolment is the employee's decision to enrol or not. We develop
a model describing this decision process. The model, called the "Enrolment Readiness Model", is tested in a municipal administration organisation that has staffed projects by voluntary enrolment for a number of years. The study mainly confirms the proposed model, but also clarifies that voluntary enrolment may cause problems in getting a sufficient number of participants in the proposed projects. The article concludes by stressing that voluntary enrolment seems to require more attention and effort from top management than a traditional/conventional staffing procedure and we propose ways that the enrolment readiness model can be helpful in supporting voluntary enrolment.
43. Eskerod P & BS Blichfeldt (2005) Managing Team Entrees and Withdrawals during the Project Life Cycle, International Journal of Project Management, 23 (7), pp 495-503
42. Eskerod P, BS Blichfeldt & AS Toft (2004) Too Many Good Projects: Managing Emotions regarding 'Project Overload', in Gareis R & M Huberman (eds) Proceedings for the Conference Project Management Tage '04, Projects and Emotional Intelligence, November, Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien
41. Eskerod P, BS Blichfeldt & AS Toft (2004) Questioning the Rational Assumption Underlying Decision-Making within Project Portfolio Management Literature, in Slevin DP, DI Cleland & JK Pinto (eds) Proceedings for the PMI Research Conference London, Project Management Institute
40. Eskerod P & AL Jepsen (2004) Voluntary Enrolment – A Viable Way of Staffing Projects?, IME Working Paper no. 59/04, Department of Environmental and Business Economics, University of Southen Denmark
39. Eskerod P & BS Blichfeldt (2004) Do Implicit Core Assumptions of the Project Management Community Culture Restrain Intra-Organisational Learning across Project Managers?, in Wikström K & K Artto (eds) Proceedings for the IRNOP VI Conference, Åbo, Finland, Åbo Akademi University & Helsinki University of Technology
38. Eskerod P & AL Jepsen (2003) Manning Renewal Projects by Internal Advertising and Voluntary Enrolment, in Gareis R & M Huemann (eds) Proceedings for the conference pm tage ‘03, Wien, Austria, November
37. Eskerod P & BS Blichfeldt (2002) Managing Team Entries and Withdrawals during the Project Life Cycle, in Gareis R & M Huemann (eds) Proceedings for the conference pm days ’02, University of Economics and Business Administration, Wien, Austria, November
36. Eskerod P & BS Blichfeldt (2002) Redefining the Role of the Project Owner/Sponsor in Product Development Projects, in Turner JR (ed) Proceedings for the IRNOP V conference, Renesse, Holland, June
35. Eskerod P & BS Blichfeldt (2001) Market Orientation and Management of Product Development Projects, in Gareis R & M Huemann (eds) Proceedings for the EUROConference II, University of Economics and Business Administration, Wien, Austria, November
34. Eskerod P & HJ Skriver (2001) Creative ways to enhance knowledge transfer/learning between project managers, in Proceedings for the IPMA International Symposium Project Management Creativity, Stockholm, Sweden, June, pp 169-183
33. Eskerod, P (2000) Managing Virtual Projects in the Project-oriented Society, in Gareis R & M Huemann (eds) Proceedings for the EUROConference I, University of Economics and Business Administration, Wien, Austria, November
32. Eskerod P & K Östergren (2000) Why Do Companies Standardize Project Work?, Project Management, 6 (2), pp 34-39
Many writers argue that every project is unique. Activities undertaken and plans made should therefore be based on the needs of the specific project. Consequently, a situational approach is recommended. However, empirical studies indicate that there is a standardization trend where many companies increasingly apply or require the use of a common, standardized models for running projects. In this paper we focus on the contradiction between the project idea and standardization. We discuss why management in many companies chooses to standardize the way projects are run even when the idea with project work is flexibility. An example of a standard model used in a large company is used to pinpoint the different driving forces behind standardization. The aim of this paper is to contribute to the understanding of projects in relation to their parent organizations, or in other words, we wish to contribute to the understanding of the relation between temporary and permanent organizations.
31. Eskerod P (1998) Organising by Projects - Experiences from Oticon's Product Development Function, in Morsing M (ed) Managing the Unmanagerable for a Decade, Oticon, Hellerup
30. Eskerod P (1998) Chapter 12: The Human Resource Allocation Process When Organizing by Projects, in Lundin RA & C Midler (eds) Projects as Arenas for Renewal and Learning Processes, Kluwer Academic Publishers, London, pp 125-131
29. Eskerod P & K Östergren (1998) Bureaucratizing Projects? On the Standardization Trend, in Hartmann F (ed) Proceedings for the conference IRNOP III: The Nature and Role of Projects in the NEXT 20 Years: Research Issues and Problems, Calgary, Canada, July
28. Damgaard T & P Eskerod (1998) Enhancing the Competencies in SME’s through Networking, in Proceedings for the conference RENT XII: Research in Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Lyon, France, November
27. Eskerod P (1996) Meaning and Action in a Multi-Project Environment. Understanding a Multi-Project Environment by Means of Metaphors and Basic Assumptions, International Journal of Project Management, 14 (2), pp 61-65
The 'management by projects' strategy chosen by many companies to organize their product development function brings in a need for focusing on multi-project issues. The project management literature on multi-project management put strong emphasis on certain aspects (planning, scheduling and control), because the perception of the multi-project environment in the literature
is based on certain assumptions (stability, predictability, a top-down decision process etc.). This article will question these assumptions due to research done in the product development function of two Danish companies. Here the top managers tried to adapt to highly changing conditions and quite often it led to changed focus points and project priorities. The project
managers did not wait for top-down orders (as implicitly assumed by most of the multi-project theory). Instead they carried out actions themselves to attract resources and attention for their own projects. The relation between the projects could often be characterized by competition leading to suboptimization and an insufficient level of knowledge exchange. Some of the
mentioned observations can be referred to as unintended consequences of a management by projects strategy. In order to change unwanted action patterns in the companies it is important to get to know which perceptions are the underlying assumptions for the actions taken. To shed light on that, a couple of metaphors in use in today's project management theory and in project
management practice are introduced. Furthermore, the aim of the article is to call for more reflection on multi-project issues in turbulent environments.
26. Eskerod P (1996) The Human Resource Allocation Process When Organizing by Projects, in Proceedings for the conference IRNOP II: Aspects of Society and Business Organized by Projects, Paris, Frankrig, June
25. Eskerod P (1994) Attitudes and Behaviour in a Multi-Project Environment. How Meaning and Action are Controlled by Metaphors in our Project World, Gareis R (ed) Proceedings for the Austrian Project Management Day 1994, Wien, Austria, December
24. Eskerod P (1994) The Hidden Side of Project Orientation, in Proceedings for the INTERNET '94 12th World Congress, Oslo, Norway, June, pp 594-599
23. Eskerod P & P Darmer (1994) Lecturer's Guide, in Adam-Smith D & A Peacock (eds) Cases in Organizational Behaviour, Pitman Publishing, London, pp 43-46
22. Eskerod P & P Darmer (1994) Oticon - Spaghetti for the Ears, in Adam-Smith D & A Peacock (eds) Cases in Organizational Behaviour, Pitman Publishing, London, pp 97-103
21. Eskerod P & E Riis (2009) En fælles projektledelsesmodel som værdiskaber, chapter 5.5 in Stuhr S (ed) Børsens Ledelseshåndbog i Projektledelse, Børsens forlag, Copenhagen (in Danish)
20. Eskerod P & BS Blichfeldt (2009) Projektporteføljeledelse – en udfordrende disciplin, chapter 6.5 in Stuhr S (ed) Børsens Ledelseshåndbog i Projektledelse, Børsens forlag, Copenhagen (in Danish)
19. Eskerod P & AL Jepsen (2006) Bemanding af fornyelsesprojekter gennem frivillig tilmelding, in Stuhr S (ed) Børsens Ledelseshåndbog i Projektledelse, Børsens forlag, Copenhagen (in Danish)
18. Eskerod P & HJ Skriver (2006) Videndeling i teori og praksis, in Stuhr S (ed) Børsens Ledelseshåndbog i Projektledelse, Børsens forlag, Copenhagen (in Danish)
17. Mikkelsen H & P Eskerod (2006) Energi er vigtigere end arbejdstimer, chapter 7.1 in Hildebrandt S (ed) Børsens Ledelseshåndbog i Strategi og Ledelse, Børsens Forlag, Copenhagen (in Danish)
16. Eskerod P, AS Toft & H Mikkelsen (2005) Kapitel 7: Energi - drivkraft og formåen, in Mikkelsen (ed) Ledelse af projektmylderet - om virksomhedslederes håndtering af udviklingsaktiviteter, Børsens Forlag, Copenhagen, pp 179-197 (in Danish)
15. Eskerod P, BS Blichfeldt & AS Toft (2005) Kapitel 6: Beslutningsprocessernes organisering, in Mikkelsen (ed) Ledelse af projektmylderet - om virksomhedslederes håndtering af udviklingsaktiviteter, Børsens Forlag, København, pp 165-177
14. Eskerod P & H Mikkelsen (2005) Kapitel 5: Ledelsens rolle, in Mikkelsen (ed) Ledelse af projektmylderet - om virksomhedslederes håndtering af udviklingsaktiviteter, Børsens Forlag, København, pp 145-164 (in Danish)
13. Mikkelsen H & P Eskerod (2005) Energi er vigtigere end arbejdstimer, Dansk Projektledelse, 10 (3), pp 26-27 (in Danish)
12. Eskerod P, AL Jepsen & AS Toft (2004) Projektbemanding ved frivillig tilmelding, Dansk Projektledelse, 9 (1), pp 22-23 (in Danish)
11. Eskerod P (2003) Forskningen skal udfordre “struktureret, sund fornuft” i projektledelsen, Dansk Projektledelse, 8 (3), p 5 (in Danish)
10. Eskerod P & AS Toft (2003) Projektbemanding gennem internt projektudbud og frivillig tilmelding, in Madsen SO & H Tetzschner (red) Fra Organisation til Organisering. Offentlig ledelse i smeltediglen, Børsen, Copenhagen, pp 116-131 (in Danish)
9. Skriver HJ & P Eskerod (2001) Kulturens betydning for overførsel af viden mellem projektledere, in Proceedings for the 16. Nordiska Foretagsekonomiska Ämneskonferens, Uppsala, Sverige, August (in Danish)
8. Eskerod P (1999) Computer ApS – en lille virksomhed vokser, in Blenker P, PR Christensen, HD Jensen & A Larsen (eds) Godt Begyndt. Casesamling om danske iværksættere og deres erfaringer, Systime, pp 27-30 (in Danish)
7. Eskerod P (1999) Gruppesamtalen som redskab til bedre samspil, in Fangel M (ed) Sådan får vi musik i projektet. Håndbog fra Symposierne Projektledelse ’99, Foreningen for Dansk Projektledelse, Hillerød, pp183-189 (in Danish)
6. Eskerod P (1998) Til- og afgange i projektgruppen, Ledelse & Erhvervsøkonomi, 62 (4), pp 265-280 (in Danish)
5. Eskerod P (1997) Nye perspektiver på fordeling af menneskelige ressourcer i et projektorganiseret multiprojekt-miljø, Ph.D. dissertation, Southern Denmark Business School, Sønderborg (in Danish)
4. Eskerod P (1997) Projektorganisering ... men hvordan?, Tidsskrift for Dansk Projektledelse, 2 (1), pp 5-7 (in Danish)
3. Kreiner K & Eskerod P (1997) Hvad kan forskning i projektledelse bruges til?, in Fangel M (ed) Jagten på det effektive projekt. Håndbog fra Symposierne Projektledelse ’97, Foreningen for Dansk Projektledelse, Hillerød, pp 237-241 (in Danish)
2. Eskerod P (1995) Fleksibilitet og forankring i den projektorganiserede virksomhed, Ledelse & Erhvervsøkonomi, 59 (3), pp 175-182 (in Danish)
1. Eskerod P (1995) Udfordringer og dilemmaer i et multiprojekt-miljø. Ledelsesmæssige opmærksomhedsområder, in Fangel M (ed) Proceedings for the Nordic Symposium, Copenhagen, November (in Danish)