Auditing construction cost from an in-process perspective based on a Bayesian predictive model

Wang, P; Wang, K; Huang, Y; Fenn, P and Stewart, I (2022) Auditing construction cost from an in-process perspective based on a Bayesian predictive model. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 148(4): 04022003, ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

The traditional audit process in construction cost control usually occurs passively at the end of a project life cycle. This calls for a predictive model that provides a framework assembling essential information and predicts construction cost overrun potential during project processes. Unlike previous mechanistic models that reflect the full formation mechanism, the model established in this paper features a fragmentary formation mechanism consisting of shortlisted critical factors. Factors were shortlisted by both theoretical and statistical criticality to construction cost overrun, dictating the factors to pass the initial literature review identification, expert opinion verification, and Pearson's chi-square tests of interdependence. The factor shortlist was compared with the initial long list identified from the literature to understand the longitudinal trend. The trend manifested in this research necessitated a shift of project management focus from technical difficulties to managerial issues, signaled by the shifting emphasis from contractor planning and control to client monitoring and management and from project difficulties to contract qualities. The shortlisted factors and their interrelationships together formed a fragmentary mechanism and gave the model structure, which was quantified with Bayesian belief network analysis. The model automatically can calculate cost overrun potentials with relevant input and use influence diagrams to find optimal decisions maximizing the expected values of construction cost overrun potential. The predictive model achieved an accuracy rate of 92.4%, which is much higher than that of the comparable model established with the full formation mechanism. This demonstrated that mechanistic models featuring a fragmentary formation mechanism well achieved satisfactory prediction accuracy and efficiency. Therefore, this predictive model provides a framework for project auditors and other relevant project management personnel to monitor project cost proactively throughout the project lifecycle.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: Bayesian belief network; construction projects; cost overrun; in-process audit; prediction
Index terms: monitoring, interdependence, project management, efficiency, cost overrun, construction cost, life cycle, project lifecycle, critical factor, audit, construction project, expected value, personnel, process audit, literature review, accuracy, overrun, project cost, bayesian belief network
Subjects: statistical analysis, project controls, organizational analysis, probabilistic model, production management, project management theory and practice, professional development, performance measurement, management, performance management, economics, data analysis and analytics, audit management, financial and cost management, control systems, value management, risk assessment, project completion
Topics: Risk Management, Cost Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Information Management, Time Control, Organizational Design, Site Management, Digital Applications, Quality Management, Human Resources
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