Islam, M S; Nepal, M P and Skitmore, M (2019) Modified fuzzy group decision-making approach to cost overrun risk assessment of power plant projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 145(2): 04018126, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Cost overrun risk assessment in the preliminary stages of a power plant project is laden with subjectivity, uncertainty, imprecision, and the vagueness of expert judgment. Current fuzzy approaches to risk assessment in such projects specifically require improvements in the reliability and aggregation process of experts' judgments as well as the incorporation of project phase-based risk assessment to comprehend the sources of the risks and their corresponding effects on cost overruns. In response, this study proposes a modified fuzzy group decision-making approach (FGDMA) and assesses cost overrun risks considering different project phases [(1) design and procurement, and (2) construction and commissioning] of the power plant projects of varying types, sizes/capacities, and contracts. The proposed methodology is applied to 10 different project scenarios to better understand the context of project risks and their profile and identify the critical cost overrun risks involved. This study will aid the comprehensive assessment of risks and increase the accuracy of project budgeting and contingency allocation decisions.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cost overrun risks; fuzzy logic; power plant projects; risk assessment |
| Index terms: | methodology, decision-making, commissioning, subjectivity, accuracy, risk assessment, project budgeting, judgment, fuzzy logic, power plant, cost overrun |
| Subjects: | completion, infrastructure and transport systems, decision analysis, professional development, financial risk, research methods, financial and cost management, cost planning, data science, dispute resolution, human factors and perception |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Cost Management, Research Practice, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Legal Issues, Digital Applications, Quality Management |
| 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