Thal Jr, A E; Cook, J J and White Iii, E D (2010) Estimation of cost contingency for Air Force construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(11), pp. 1181-1188. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Risk and associated cost overruns are critical problems for construction projects, yet the most common practice for dealing with them is the assignment of an arbitrary flat percentage of the construction budget as a contingency fund. Therefore, our goal was to identify significant variables that may influence, or serve as indicators of, potential cost overruns. We analyzed data from 203 Air Force construction projects over a full range of project types and scopes using multiple linear regression to develop a model to predict the amount of required contingency funds. The proposed model uses only data that would be available prior to the award of a construction contract. The variables in the model were categorized as project characteristics, design performance metrics, and contract award process influences. Based on the performance metric used, the model captures 44% of actual cost overruns versus the 20% captured by the current practice. Furthermore, application of the model reduces the average contingency budgeting error from 11.2 to only 0.3%.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction costs; contingency |
| Index terms: | construction contract, overrun, estimation, construction budget, budgeting, actual cost, construction cost, construction project, cost overrun, performance metric |
| Subjects: | production management, financial and cost management, performance measurement, project controls, financial management, contract type |
| Topics: | Project Management, Cost Management, Procurement, Time Control, Business Strategy, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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