Reinschmidt, K and Trejo, D (2006) Economic value of building faster. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(7), pp. 759-766. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Owners, developers, and engineers are often challenged with determining the value of accelerating the construction of a project. There is a cost for accelerating the construction of a project to reduce the time required to transfer a facility into the operational phase. Determining the cost of acceleration is a difficult challenge with the limited information typically available early in the project development phase. Many unknowns exist (e.g., future revenue, costs, etc.) and the owner, developer, or engineer often make best guesses to justify if building faster is worthwhile. A simple methodology is needed to assess the value of building faster. This paper derives a set of equations that will allow owners, developers, and/or engineers to estimate the percent increase of the baseline project costs to reduce the time to completion of a construction project. The equations were derived such that variables that are easily known or can easily and reliably be determined are required. After the value of accelerating a project is determined (as a percentage of the original baseline budget), owner, developers, and/or engineers can use this information to determine if a project should be accelerated.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction management; economic factors; project management |
| Index terms: | construction project, methodology, revenue, project cost, unknowns, project development, economic factor, estimate, project management, acceleration, engineer, owner |
| Subjects: | sociology, project controls, project management theory and practice, production management, economic concepts, research methods, economics, theoretical framing, financial and cost management, project delivery, economic analysis, profession |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Time Control |
| 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