Wauters, M and Vanhoucke, M (2015) Study of the stability of earned value management forecasting. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 141(4): 04014086, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
In this paper, the authors focus on the stability of earned value management (EVM) forecasting methods. The contribution is threefold. First of all, a new criterion to measure stability that does not suffer from the disadvantages of the historically employed concept is proposed. Second, the stability of time and cost forecasting methods is compared and contrasted by means of a computational experiment on a topologically diverse data set. Throughout these experiments, the forecasting accuracy is reported as well, facilitating a trade-off between accuracy and stability. Finally, it is shown show that the novel stability metric can be used in practical environments using two real-life projects. The conclusions of this empirical validation are found to be largely in line with the computational results.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cost and schedule; earned schedule; earned value management; forecasting; project management; simulation; stability |
| Index terms: | accuracy, experiment, earned value management, stability, validation, forecasting, cost forecasting, project management |
| Subjects: | prediction and forecasting, data collection methods, control systems, structural engineering, economics, project management theory and practice, professional development |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Information Management, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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