External quality assurance of defence investment projects – what can we learn?
FFI-Report
2026
This publication is only available in Norwegian
About the publication
Report number
26/024
Size
1.6 MB
Language
Norwegian
Download publication
Major investment projects in the defence sector follow the State project model, which means that both the concept appraisal and the pre‑project phase are subject to external quality assurance before the projects are approved and executed. This study examines what the defence sector can learn from previously conducted external quality assurance reviews. The objective is to generate knowledge and insights that can be used in efforts to further develop methods and templates for investment projects. The study is based on analyses of quality assurance reports prepared for defence sector projects in the period from 2019 to 2025.
The study finds that external quality assurers consistently assess uncertainty as being higher than the projects themselves do. This indicates a more conservative approach to uncertainty in the quality assurance process.
For many of the concept appraisals, the external quality assurers point out that strategic goals should be formulated more precisely and in ways that make it easier to verify achievement. Furthermore, the exploration of the opportunity space frequently provides insufficient descriptions of how the opportunity space has been identified and narrowed. Finally, the analysis of alternatives often lack adequate cost-benefit analyses.
Most comments in the quality assurance of the pre‑project phase concern key governance and implementation issues. External quality assurers particularly highlight shortcomings related to change logs, contract strategy, benefits realisation plans, execution strategy, and organisation, as well as follow‑up of the choice of concept and realisation of expected benefits.
Based on the identified areas for improvement, we recommend that the defence sector take measures to improve the traceability and quality of cost estimates by documenting assumptions more explicitly. Furthermore, we recommend improving project objective formulations, enhancing benefit realisation plans in line with current guidelines, and systematising and making more active use of change logs.
The study finds that external quality assurers consistently assess uncertainty as being higher than the projects themselves do. This indicates a more conservative approach to uncertainty in the quality assurance process.
For many of the concept appraisals, the external quality assurers point out that strategic goals should be formulated more precisely and in ways that make it easier to verify achievement. Furthermore, the exploration of the opportunity space frequently provides insufficient descriptions of how the opportunity space has been identified and narrowed. Finally, the analysis of alternatives often lack adequate cost-benefit analyses.
Most comments in the quality assurance of the pre‑project phase concern key governance and implementation issues. External quality assurers particularly highlight shortcomings related to change logs, contract strategy, benefits realisation plans, execution strategy, and organisation, as well as follow‑up of the choice of concept and realisation of expected benefits.
Based on the identified areas for improvement, we recommend that the defence sector take measures to improve the traceability and quality of cost estimates by documenting assumptions more explicitly. Furthermore, we recommend improving project objective formulations, enhancing benefit realisation plans in line with current guidelines, and systematising and making more active use of change logs.
About the publication
Download publication
Newly published
