Su, Y and Lucko, G (2015) Optimum present value scheduling based on synthetic cash flow model with singularity functions. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 141(11): 04015036, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Contractors may increase their profit by rescheduling noncritical activities within their floats. Based on this hypothesis, new theory is explored to optimize the present value of the project balance (PVbal) with singularity functions in a synthetic cash flow model. Its contribution to the body of knowledge is threefold: First, PVbal is expanded to a function of activity shifts in analogy to resource leveling. Second, it is found that intuitive front-shifting may not maximize PVbal because of a trade-off between changes in pay (inflow) and interest (outflow). Conditions for front-shifting and back-shifting and the newly discovered phenomenon of scalloping are derived by exploring monotonicity, periodicity, and concavity of the PVbal function. Monotonicity controls front-shifting or back-shifting; periodicity and concavity control if scalloping can exist, whereby shifting a fractional period gives a local optimum of PVbal. It repeats periodically until all float is exhausted. Third, combinations of financial parameters (markup, interest, retainage, and bill-to-pay delay) are examined on how they impact shift decisions to optimize cash flow.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cash flows; cost and schedule; markup; scheduling; singularity functions; synthetic cash flow model |
| Index terms: | scheduling, resource levelling, body of knowledge, cash flow, profit |
| Subjects: | financial management, knowledge management, resource management, economic analysis, operations research |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Time Control, Business Strategy, Site Management, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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