Sun, A C S; Zou, P X W; Long, B and Marix-Evans, P (2010) Case studies of return on investment in contruction safety management. In: Egbu, C (ed.) Proceedings of 26th Annual ARCOM Conference, 6-8 September 2010, Leeds, UK.
Abstract
Expressing the benefits of investing in construction safety management in monetary terms will allow project stakeholders to have a better understanding of the significance and effectiveness of the investment. This paper presents the results of case studies of six building construction projects in relation to the return on investment in construction safety management. The paper is built on the research work that the authors have previously published on the development of the return on investment models. It is found that investing in construction safety management will yield positive outcomes and for the six cases studied, the returns on investment were in the range of 46% to 364% with an average of 214%.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | return on investment; construction safety; risk management; cost of accident; investment in safety |
| Index terms: | case study, building construction, effectiveness, project stakeholder, return on investment, risk management, construction safety, safety management |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, risk assessment, economic analysis, performance management, occupational health and safety management, building construction, sociology, environmental health |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Construction Technology, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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