Creedy, G D (2006) Risk factors leading to cost overrun in the delivery of highway construction projects. PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Australia.
Abstract
Accurate client budget estimates are critical to the initial decision-to-build process for the highway construction projects. This decision-to-build point in a project's development is seen as the international standard for measuring any subsequent cost estimate inaccuracies involved (National Audit Office/Department of Transport, 1992; World Bank, 1994; Nijkamp and Ubbels, 1999), with accuracy being defined as the difference between the initial project estimate at the decision-to-build stage and the real, accounted project cost determined at the time of project completion. Expressed as a percentage of estimated cost, this is often termed cost escalation, cost overrun or cost growth, and occurs as a result of many factors, some of which are related to each other, but all are associated with forms of risks. The analysis of these risks is often a necessary step for the improvement of any given estimating system and can be used to diagnose trouble spots and to pinpoint areas where project estimating accuracy improvement might be obtained. In this research, highway projects in Queensland, Australia that have suffered significant cost overrun are analysed. The research seeks to address the gap in the knowledgebase as to why highway projects overrun their costs. It focuses on understanding how client projects budgets go wrong, when dealing with project risk. The foundation for this research is drawn from the post-mortem analysis of highway projects, each costing in excess of A$1m and whose final total expenditure exceeded budget by 10% or greater. The research identifies client risk variables which have contributed to significant cost overrun and then uses factor analysis and also expert elicitation, using nominal group technique, to establish groups of importance ranked client risks. Stepwise multivariate regression analysis is then used to investigate any correlation of these risks, along with project attributes such as highway project type, indexed project cost, geographic location and project delivery method to the percentage of cost overrun. The research results indicates a correlation between the reciprocal of project budget size and percentage cost overrun that can be useful in clients determining more realistic decision-to build highway budget estimates when taking into account project size in relation to economy of scale.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accuracy; construction project; highway; audit; estimating; project cost; project delivery; client; Australia; factor analysis; regression analysis |
| Index terms: | highway construction, factor analysis, risk factor, costing, cost estimate, estimate, regression analysis, project delivery, cost overrun, World Bank, audit, Australia, construction project, cost escalation, estimating, Queensland, project cost, accuracy, overrun |
| Subjects: | environmental hazards, statistical analysis, project controls, professional development, production management, Geography, accounting and finance, economics, civil engineering, performance measurement, project delivery, institutional frameworks, financial and cost management |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Sustainability, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Geographical Context, Time Control, Governance, Information Management, Research Practice, Cost 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