Ashton, P and Gidado, K (2004) The practical application of a site investigation risk evaluation system. In: Khosrowshahi, F (ed.) Proceedings of 20th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2004, Edinburgh, UK.
Abstract
Geotechnical data gathered during the design phase of a typical UK construction contract is often made available to bidders, but, with a disclaimer absolving them from risk associated with inadequate or misinterpreted information. Contractors with neither the time nor the expertise to fully appreciate the implications of such data incur substantial difficulties. New guidelines and technical reports, such as the Geotechnical Baseline Report for Underground Construction (Essex 1997), are currently being used on some large infrastructure projects, however, this research aimed to address the problems caused to SME's resulting from an inappropriate allocation of sub-structural risk. A Site Investigation Risk Evaluation System (SIRES) has been developed in order to improve site investigation procedures, thereby, reducing and identifying the risk associated with uncertain site conditions. The SIRES has been used during the site appraisal, design and construction phases on four construction projects, in South East of England. The findings from this research provide overwhelming evidence endorsing the application of SIRES as a means to objectively measure the level of risk associated with inadequate site appraisal data.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | sme's; case studies; risk management; site appraisal procedures |
| Index terms: | large infrastructure project, case study, England, disclaimer, underground construction, appraisal, design phase, design and construction, construction contract, evidence, risk management, bidder, site investigation, construction project |
| Subjects: | bidding, professional practice, contractual arrangements, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, risk assessment, contract type, geotechnical engineering, factor and component analysis, production management, contractual condition, Geography, infrastructure engineering |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Contract Administration, Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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