Greenwood, D J and Shaglouf, A A (1997) Comparison between planned and actual durations in medium sized building projects. In: Stephenson, P (ed.) Proceedings of 13th Annual ARCOM Conference, 15-17 September 1997, Cambridge, UK.
Abstract
The paper presents current findings from research which is investigating overruns in a sample of 52 building contracts let by a single client in the north East of England. The delays have been identified as culpable ( for which no extensions of time were granted), excusable, (where extensions have been given) and those extended times which were specifically due to variations and therfore could not have been reasonably included in the initial target. Data gathered from the projects includes the value, type and location of each project, the original planned times, delays, extensions of time, and other contractual provisions. From the literature available six models for predicting construction times were identified, of which five were considered further. The client's own original predictions were included with those generated by the theoretical models and these have been compared with the actual outcomes and with one another. The aim of this part of the study is to examine the relative accuracy of different prediction models when compared with actual times.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | project durations; planning; prediction |
| Index terms: | variation, duration, construction time, England, building contract, overrun, accuracy, prediction model |
| Subjects: | prediction and forecasting, contract type, project controls, professional development, Geography, contractual condition |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Geographical Context, Information Management, Procurement, Time Control, Contract Administration |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here