Stevens, F J (2016) A comparative analysis of the percentage completion project methodology and the stevens earned value instrument. DBA thesis, Wilmington University (Delaware), USA.
Abstract
This study examined the Stevens Earned Value Instrument (SEVI) against other percentage of completion methods in a comparative analysis. Since the SEVI instrument was modeled for a mechanical contracting business that uses fixed price contracts, the SEVI instrument process can be used as a framework for labor cost reporting and cost to complete calculation. The sample study used quantitative data such as cost, time, labor hours used, estimated budget, and percent complete of construction installation activities in an earned value management system. The SEVI instrument processed this information to determine cost variance, schedule variance, cost performance index, and a schedule performance index. The controlled experiments that the SEVI instrument were subjected to can be independently verified by the standardized EVM calculations. The SEVI instrument outcomes were tested against the EVM calculations. Since there is only 1 independent variable, each dependent variable was tested separately to determine if there was a difference in the two groups. The data set outcomes were found to be substantially the same.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Poplos, C |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cost variance; earned value management; value management |
| Index terms: | dependent variable, methodology, comparative analysis, earned value management, experiment, schedule performance, cost variance, value management, labour cost, cost performance index, independent variable, variance |
| Subjects: | financial analysis, research methods, measurement and scaling, project controls, statistical analysis, cost management, management, financial and cost management, data analysis and analytics, data collection methods, control systems |
| Topics: | Value Management, Procurement, Project Management, Time Control, Research Practice, Cost Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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