Odeyinka, H A (2007) Modelling risk impacts on the budgeted cost of traditionally procured building projects. In: Boyd, D (ed.) Proceedings of 23rd Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2007, Belfast, UK.
Abstract
Risk is inherent in construction from the inception to the completion stages of a project’s life. The less information is available at the inception of a construction project, the higher the level of risks and uncertainties. Whilst it is a known fact that the risk factors inherent in a construction project are responsible for the deviation between the budgeted and actual project costs, how these risk factors combine to impact the project cost has not been investigated. This then is the concern of this study. The study identified the risk factors impacting the budgeted cost of traditionally procured building projects through a structured questionnaire survey. Using the mean ranking analysis, the significant risk factors were determined which were used in developing a risk/impact assessment model for evaluating the impacts of risk on the budgeted cost of traditionally procured building projects. The developed model shows a very good predictive ability; indicating that the model could assist in pro-actively determining the likely impacts of identified risks on the budgeted cost of traditionally procured building projects.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction project; model; mean ranking; risk; traditional procurement |
| Index terms: | risk impact, traditional procurement, survey, project cost, deviation, questionnaire, impact assessment, risk factor, construction project, modelling |
| Subjects: | value management, data collection methods, analytical methods, financial and cost management, contractual arrangements, production management, economics, environmental hazards |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Project Management, Cost Management |
| 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