Stuban, S M F (2011) Employing risk management to control military construction costs. PhD thesis, George Washington University, USA.
Abstract
Systems acquisition inherently contains elements of uncertainty that must be effectively managed to meet project cost, schedule, and performance objectives. While the U.S. Department of Defense has a record of employing systems engineering technical management processes (including risk management) to address these uncertainties for major weapon systems acquisition, the application of risk management to Military Construction (MILCON) projects is a recent development. This research studies the use of a formal risk management program on a MILCON project and assesses whether such use influences the project's total cost growth relative to that of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' historical data. A case study methodology is employed assessing the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA)'s multibillion-dollar NGA Campus East program. Keywords: Risk Management, Military Construction (MILCON), Construction, Risk, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE, COE), National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA)
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Sarkani, S and Mazzuchi, T A |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | systems engineering; uncertainty; military construction; project cost; risk management; case study |
| Index terms: | risk management, military construction, systems engineering, acquisition, engineer, case study, agency, program, methodology, project cost |
| Subjects: | research methods, data collection methods, profession, risk assessment, business, software systems, economics, sociology, infrastructure and transport systems, systems engineering |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Research Practice, Risk Management, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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