Narbaev, T and De Marco, A (2014) Combination of growth model and earned schedule to forecast project cost at completion. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 140(1): 04013038, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
To improve the accuracy of early forecasting the final cost at completion of an ongoing construction project, a new regression-based nonlinear cost estimate at completion (CEAC) methodology is proposed that integrates a growth model with earned schedule (ES) concepts. The methodology provides CEAC computations for project early-stage and middle-stage completion. To this end, this paper establishes three primary objectives, as follows: (1) develop a new formula based on integration of the ES method and four candidate growth models (logistic, Gompertz, Bass, and Weibull), (2) validate the new methodology through its application to nine past projects, and (3) select the equation with the best-performing growth model through testing their statistical validity and comparing the accuracy of their CEAC estimates. Based on statistical validity analysis of the four growth models and comparison of CEAC errors, the CEAC formula based on the Gompertz model is better-fitting and generates more accurate final-cost estimates than those computed by using the other three models and the index-based method. The proposed methodology is a theoretical contribution towards the combination of earned-value metrics with regression-based studies. It also brings practical implications associated with usage of a viable and accurate forecasting technique that considers the schedule impact as a determinant factor of cost behavior.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction management; cost and schedule; cost forecasting; earned schedule; earned value management; growth model; nonlinear regression |
| Index terms: | computation, integration, methodology, construction project, accuracy, earned value management, project cost, estimate, determinant, testing, cost estimate, forecasting, cost forecasting, validity |
| Subjects: | organizational analysis, research methods, economics, production management, professional development, professional practice, financial and cost management, prediction and forecasting, evaluation and assessment methods, risk assessment, computational methods, control systems |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Risk Management, Digital Applications, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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