Baccarini, D (2004) Estimating project cost contingency: A model and exploration of research questions. In: Khosrowshahi, F (ed.) Proceedings of 20th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2004, Edinburgh, UK.
Abstract
The cost performance of building construction projects is a key success criterion for project sponsors. Projects require budgets to set the sponsor's financial commitment and provide the basis for cost control and measurement of cost performance. A key component of a project budget is cost contingency. A literature review of the concept of project cost contingency is presented from which a model for the estimating of project cost contingency is derived. This model is then used to stimulate a range of important research questions in regard to estimating project cost contingency and the measurement of its accuracy.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cost contingency; project cost performance; project risk management |
| Index terms: | accuracy, cost control, building construction, estimating, cost performance, literature review, project sponsor, exploration, commitment, project cost, project risk management |
| Subjects: | financial risk, financial and cost management, professional development, sociology, environmental resource management, data analysis and analytics, psychology, economics, building construction |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Cost Management, Sustainability, Research Practice, Construction Technology, Stakeholder Management, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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