Nguyen, L D and Ibbs, W (2008) Flora: New forensic schedule analysis technique. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(7), pp. 483-491. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
While various factors such as float ownership, logic change, and resource allocation (FLORA) affect results of delay analysis, existing delay analysis techniques tend to ignore most if not all of them. To address this insufficiency this paper proposes a new schedule analysis technique called FLORA that simultaneously captures the dynamics of float, logic, and resource allocation in its analyses. FLORA analyzes not only the direct impact of a delay but also its "secondary" effect. The analysis process follows ten rules that are flexible and customizable. A case study is employed to illustrate its application. FLORA yields different and more reasonable outcomes compared to the window analysis technique. Each single analysis may also yield different or even conflicting results. By properly dealing with the current issues of schedule analysis, FLORA can be more reliable. Practitioners may readily accept its analyses and outcomes because they are able to specify, modify, and consent to the rules for schedule analysis to fit into a specific context in advance. Researchers may further evaluate the impacts of different factors on delay responsibility or apply FLORA to real projects to assess its strengths, weaknesses, and potential improvements.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | claims; delay time; forensic engineering; litigation |
| Index terms: | practitioner, delay analysis, window, litigation, case study, resource allocation, ownership, dynamics |
| Subjects: | resource management, data collection methods, dispute resolution, practitioner, project controls, systems engineering, economics, architectural elements |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Legal Issues, Design Practice, Organizational Design, Site Management, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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