Skitmore, M and Ng, S T (2002) Analytical and approximate variance of total project cost. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 128(5), pp. 456-460. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The statistical variance of total project cost is usually estimated by means of Monte Carlo simulation on the assumption that exact analytic approaches are too difficult. This paper tests that assumption and shows that, contrary to expectations, the analytic solution is relatively straightforward. It is also shown that the coefficient of variation is unaffected by the size (floor area) of the project when using standardized component costs. A case study is provided in which actual component costs are analyzed to obtain the required total cost variance. The results confirm previous work in showing that the approximation of the second moment (variance) under the assumption of independence considerably underestimates the exact value. The analysis then continues to examine the effects of professional judgment, and, with the simulated data used, the approximation is shown to be reasonably accurate - the professional judgment absorbing most of the intercorrelations involved. An example is also given in which the component unit quantities are priced by their average unit costs and which again shows the approximation to be close to the true value. Finally, this is extended to show how the exact total project cost variances may be obtained for each project.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction; correlation; costs; simulation |
| Index terms: | project cost, judgment, variation, unit cost, case study, Monte Carlo simulation, cost variance, variance |
| Subjects: | dispute resolution, data collection methods, measurement and scaling, economics, contractual condition, financial analysis, financial and cost management, modelling and simulation |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Research Practice, Legal Issues, Cost Management |
| 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