Negotiating construction contracts through practical cash flow planning and analysis model

Jiang, A (2012) Negotiating construction contracts through practical cash flow planning and analysis model. International Journal of Construction Management, 12(2), pp. 23-33. ISSN 1562-3599

Abstract

Under-capitalization, difficulties in getting credit, substantial cost of getting financed, etc. cause contractors to complete projects with negative ending balances. Predictability and control of the cash flow through negotiating financial provisions of construction contracts mean differences between success and failure of a project or a contracting company. Despite many practical insights provided by professionals, structured procedures and tools are seldom used, and few contractors take advantage of the existing techniques which can enable them to identify the effects of their decisions on negotiating contract terms. In addition, commercial finance software is expensive and complicated. This paper presents the multi-period dynamic model on the project level which maximizes final cash balance through negotiating financial terms of contracts without time-consuming data collection and with reasonable accuracy. This allows industrial practitioners to define the cash flow planning horizon, as well as predict and maximize the final cash balance. Microsoft's Excel spreadsheet software with its add-in optimization programs is used in solving these models. Through scenarios and sensitivity analysis on contract financial provisions, contractors can predict the impact on project cash inflows and outflows. The approximate solution of this deterministic model gives decision makers an excellent insight for making the optimal decisions.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: dynamic optimization model; billing period; cash flow; contract negotiation; initial capital; retained percentage
Index terms: contract negotiation, cash flow, construction contract, accuracy, spreadsheet, contract term, sensitivity analysis, practitioner, program, negotiating
Subjects: environmental hazards, professional development, software systems, data science, contract management, practitioner, contract type, contractual condition, financial management, conflict resolution
Topics: Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Digital Applications, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Information Management, Contract Administration, Cost Management, Procurement
Descriptive scope: 2 PC

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