Faniran, O O; Love, P E D and Li, H (1999) Optimal allocation of construction planning resources. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 125(5), pp. 311-319. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Efficient allocation of resources for construction planning activities requires construction planning resource requirements to be determined on a cost-effective and value-adding basis. However, although some research studies have indicated that increasing resource allocations to construction planning activities will lead to improved project performance, other research studies have indicated that investing in construction planning beyond an optimum point will lead to a deterioration in project performance. This study explored the concept of optimal planning of construction projects by examining 52 building projects undertaken in Australia. The relationships between planning input (ratio of planning costs to total project costs) and the probabilities of achieving poor performance and good performance were modeled using logistic, linear, and curvilinear regression analyzes. A probable optimum planning input based on the sample studied was derived. It is suggested that any additional planning efforts beyond this optimum point would be essentially wasted because the additional planning costs would not achieve any savings in project cost but merely add to the overhead costs and therefore increase the overall project cost. A model for optimal planning is presented and discussed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | project cost, construction project, resource allocation, savings, construction planning, Australia, project performance, deterioration |
| Subjects: | project management theory and practice, economics, resource management, material degradation and durability, production management, construction planning, Geography, economic analysis |
| Topics: | Site Management, Construction Materials, Project Management, Cost Management, Geographical Context, Business Strategy |
| 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