Yiu, C Y; Ho, H K; Lo, S M and Hu, B Q (2005) Performance evaluation for cost estimators by reliability interval method. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 131(1), pp. 108-116. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Most consultant selection models stress the importance of past performance. However, there are so far very few studies on evaluating consultant's performance. It hampers the whole process of the selection model. This paper tries to establish a systematic approach in developing a consultant's performance evaluation model for the evaluation of the performance of cost estimators in the construction industry of Hong Kong. Nominal group technique is adopted in identifying the decision criteria for the evaluation, and a reliability interval method (RIM) is developed to assess the importance weighting of each criterion. The RIM allows statistical analysis and fuzzy assessment of the weight. The results report the weights of each decision criterion and its subcriterion in evaluating cost estimator's performance. Interestingly, the results show that traditional functions of cost estimator are the least treasured from the clients. Proactive and professional advice is considered to be much more important. The study is highly relevant to industry practitioners in assessing performance of costs estimators, as well as to researchers in further developing the consultant selection model.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | consultants; consulting services; cost control; performance evaluation |
| Index terms: | construction industry, cost estimator, decision criteria, statistical analysis, Hong Kong, performance evaluation, cost control, practitioner, estimator |
| Subjects: | performance measurement, Geography, decision analysis, industry analysis, profession, practitioner, data science, financial and cost management |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Cost Management, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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