Kishk, M (2005) On the mathematical modelling of whole-life costs. In: Khosrowshahi, F (ed.) Proceedings of 21st Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-9 September 2005, London, UK.
Abstract
Published mathematical whole-life costing (WLC) models are investigated to identify their strengths and weaknesses. Various models have been evaluated against five evaluation criteria including: scope of application, ease of implementation, computational effectiveness, transparency, and theoretical soundness. The first evaluation criterion look sat the applicability of WLC models in various whole life phases. The second criterion evaluates ease of implementation in terms of data requirements and ease of computer implementation. The third criterion assesses the computational efficiency of models to do basic WLC calculations. The fourth criterion assesses models in terms of clarity of definitions, the type of the cost breakdown structure and the ease of tracking WLC contributions of various cost elements. The fifth criterion looks at various assumptions and simplifications employed within various models. Results of the study have shown that most of published WLC models use the same basic equation. However, they differ in the breakdown of cost elements. Besides, each of these models seems to have some advantages and disadvantages regarding specific WLC applications. The paper concludes by discussion how existing models can be developed to offset their inherent weaknesses.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | financial management; whole-life costing; whole-life management; modelling |
| Index terms: | efficiency, financial management, effectiveness, mathematical modelling, whole-life costing, whole-life management, transparency, implementation, modelling, simplification |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, economic analysis, analytical methods, occupational health, asset management, professional development, management, performance management |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Procurement, Quality Management |
| 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