Hanna, A S; Russell, J S; Gotzion, T W and Nordheim, E V (1999) Impact of change orders on labor efficiency for mechanical construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 125(3), pp. 176-184. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Change orders have become an everyday occurrence in construction. It is widely accepted by both owners and contractors that change orders have an effect on the labor efficiency, but these effects are difficult to quantify and frequently lead to disputes. Data from 61 mechanical construction projects were collected to develop a statistical model that estimates the actual amount of labor efficiency lost due to the change orders. The input variables needed in the model are as follows: (1) The original estimated labor hours; (2) impact classification; (3) total estimated change hours; (4) number of change orders; and (5) the timing of changes. The results of this study show that impacted projects have a larger decrease in labor efficiency than unimpacted projects. Additionally, the later a change order occurs in the life of a project the more impact it will have on the labor efficiency. The results appear to be consistent with the intuition of experienced professionals. Although each project has unique characteristics, the resultant model provides owners and contractors with a baseline measure of lost labor efficiency.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | construction project, intuition, statistical model, estimate, efficiency, change order, dispute, owner |
| Subjects: | cognitive psychology, sociology, production management, contractual condition, performance management, data science, financial and cost management, dispute resolution |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Quality Management, Legal Issues, Stakeholder Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Cost Management |
| 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