Kim, B C and Kim, S J (2015) Credibility evaluation of project duration forecast using forecast sensitivity and forecast-risk compatibility. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 141(8): 04015023, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper presents a credibility evaluation framework (CEF) that analytically evaluates deterministic project duration forecasts to detect false early warnings and misleading trends. The CEF consists of forecast sensitivity evaluation, forecast-risk compatibility check, and independent sanity checks using probabilistic models. New concepts of the forecast sensitivity index and threshold are defined and used to establish an unrealistically sensitive prediction zone as a graphical tool for quick and quantitative credibility evaluation. The forecast-risk compatibility check assesses the consistency of schedule variability predicted by deterministic forecasts and by standard risk assessment techniques. A hierarchical decision structure based on the compatibility check is also presented. Practical implementation and effectiveness of the CEF are demonstrated using both a notional and a real project. The framework would positively contribute to improving the effectiveness of deterministic schedule forecasts and would be best employed at both project and program levels prior to taking interruptive and burdensome control actions in order to identify false warning signals.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cost and schedule; earned value management; forecast sensitivity; kalman filter forecasting; schedule forecasting; schedule risk analysis |
| Index terms: | risk analysis, program, kalman filter, early warning, earned value management, evaluation, variability, implementation, duration, effectiveness, risk assessment, forecasting |
| Subjects: | project controls, statistical analysis, environmental hazards, performance management, software systems, financial risk, contractual arrangements, data analysis and analytics, prediction and forecasting, control systems |
| Topics: | Procurement, Sustainability, Research Practice, Project Management, Cost Management, Time Control, Quality Management, Digital Applications |
| 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