Love, P E D; Wang, X; Sing, C P and Tiong, R L K (2013) Determining the probability of project cost overruns. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139(3), pp. 321-330. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The statistical characteristics of cost overruns experienced from contract award in 276 Australian construction and engineering projects were analyzed. The skewness and kurtosis values of the cost overruns are computed to determine if the empirical distribution of the data follows a normal distribution. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Anderson-Darling, and chi-squared nonparametric tests are used to determine the goodness of fit of the selected probability distributions. A three-parameter Frechet probability function is found to describe the behavior of cost overruns and provide the best overall distribution fit. The Frechet distribution is then used to calculate the probability of a cost overrun being experienced. The statistical characteristics of contract size and cost overruns were also analyzed. The Cauchy (<A$1 million), Wakeby (A$1 to 10 million, <A$101 million) and four-parameter Burr (A$11 to 50 million) tests were found to provide the best distribution fits and used to calculate cost overrun probabilities by contract size. Ascertaining the best fit probability distribution from an empirical distribution at contract award can produce realistic probabilities of cost overruns, which should then be incorporated into a construction cost contingency.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Australia; cost overrun; distribution fitting; probability; probability distribution |
| Index terms: | Australia, probability distribution, construction cost, cost overrun, project cost, overrun |
| Subjects: | financial and cost management, economics, statistical analysis, Geography, project controls |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Cost Management, Time Control, Research Practice |
| 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