Al-Hasan, M A A (2007) A parametric model for the estimation of construction project labour productivity. PhD thesis, Liverpool John Moores University, UK.
Abstract
The extensive literature review of the cost estimating practice indicated that labour productivity is subject to most variability due to being influenced by numerous factors. These factors can be classified into two major groups, technological factors and administrative factors. When assessing labour productivity to judge the effect of these factors, estimators rely upon their personal experience, which is a human cognitive process and could lead to errors, biases and inaccurate estimate. Accordingly, this research aimed to develop a parametric model from actual production data that has the capability to identify the key influencing variables and mathematically explore their effect on labour productivity. This research adopted a two-phase approach. Phase one refers to mail questionnaire survey and phase two refers to single holistic case study. The mail questionnaire survey was distributed to 1000 mechanical and electrical organisations working within the UK in June 2005 and aimed to investigate the current practices of cost estimating within M&E organisations. The resultant data set was analysed using descriptive, bivariate and multivariate statistics with the aid of SPSS V14 software package. The analysis of the survey data informed the selection of the most appropriate organisation size where the second phase could take place. In the second phase, 616 labour productivity data points were collected from two projects undertaken by the investigated organisation in the UAE. The data was collected using specifically designed data collection forms for a total period of approximately 3 months during 2007. The data set was analysed using multiple linear regression techniques and concluded with a parametric model that identifies the key influencing factors and mathematically express the extent of their effect on labour productivity of the investigated activity. The model was then externally validated using a sample collected from different organisation sizes in the UAE, indicating that the model could be generalised beyond the immediate case study. The research has developed a productivity estimating relationship between labour productivity of the Fire Protection Piping activity and the key factors hypothesised to influence it, which, if implemented, could minimise estimators' reliance upon their personal experience and produce more accurate estimates. It could also be utilised by different organisation departments including estimating, planning, monitoring and accounting.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | UAE; UK; case study; cost estimating; estimating; labour productivity; monitoring; productivity; questionnaire survey |
| Index terms: | survey, software package, literature review, cost estimating, estimating, accounting, questionnaire, estimator, bias, construction project, estimation, productivity, case study, influencing factor, variability, estimate, statistics, labour productivity, monitoring |
| Subjects: | production management, economic analysis, probability and distributions, management, software systems, statistical analysis, control systems, profession, risk assessment, data collection methods, mathematical modelling, data analysis and analytics, financial and cost management |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Site 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