Bayraktar, M E; Hastak, M; Gokhale, S and Safi, B (2011) Decision tool for selecting the optimal techniques for cost and schedule reduction in capital projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 137(9), pp. 645-655. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Projects must meet budget, schedule, safety, and quality goals to be regarded as a success. Many factors come into play, and many decisions are made that influence a project's outcome. Today, owners are often faced with deciding between an execution strategy that emphasizes either project cost or project schedule. Such a decision may be made not once, but throughout the life of the project. Project teams, when required by the owner to make a cost-schedule trade-off, generate common sense ideas, best practices, and other means of achieving the desired trade-off through brainstorming sessions. This paper offers a tool for systematically identifying the techniques which are most effective in achieving the trade-off goal. Project teams can then use these techniques in a timely fashion to increase the likelihood of project success.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | decision support systems; project management |
| Index terms: | project team, project management, strategy, decision support, project success, best practice, project cost, owner, capital project |
| Subjects: | project delivery, decision analysis, management, business, economics, strategic project management, project management theory and practice, sociology |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Project Management, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Business Strategy |
| 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