Estimating using risk analysis for construction

Mak, S and Wong, L (1997) Estimating using risk analysis for construction. In: Stephenson, P (ed.) Proceedings of 13th Annual ARCOM Conference, 15-17 September 1997, Cambridge, UK.

Abstract

Risk analysis in construction is becoming important as competition, project size and complexity increase. Traditional risk analysis relies on rules of thumb. While this method works, it is not scientific. Research findings by cognitive psychologists revealed that subjective judgenments by human beings are sometimes fallacious and erroneous. Empirical studies with construction professionals, i.e. context-specific subjects making decisions on complex-specific tasks, showed that such judgement were not as fallacious as it suggested. The principles and techniques of risk management for project cost and time are now quite well known. Our professional duty of care reqyuires that we are familiar with the limitations of any technique we use in practice. Hence, this paper aims at (i) highlighting the weaknesses of current approaches to risk management; (ii) focusing on the role of the decision maker as a human being in a social and corporate context by carrying out experimental studies of patterns of risk perceptions; and (iii) model these perceptions by a fuzzy system; and (iv) suggesting some simple , practical approaches which will help to reduce the negative effects of human biases in the risk management of construction projects.

Item Type: Conference Paper (Paper)
Uncontrolled Keywords: risk; fuzzy sets theory; estimating using risk analysis
Index terms: competition, risk management, construction professional, empirical study, bias, construction project, complexity, estimating, duty, risk analysis, becoming, experiment, project cost, fuzzy set, risk perception
Subjects: contractual role, risk assessment, data collection methods, financial and cost management, economics, research methods, professional development, probability and distributions, production management, market analysis, systems engineering, environmental hazards, philosophical process, decision-making and optimization
Topics: Cost Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Risk Management, Sustainability, Contract Administration
Descriptive scope: 4 PCEA

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