Arthur, A C and Pryke, S D (2014) Are we adding risk to our projects by mixing objective assessments of compound conjunctive and disjunctive project risks with intuitive approaches? In: Raiden, A and Aboagye-Nimo, E (eds.) Proceedings of 30th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2014, Portsmouth, UK.
Abstract
Various forms of quantitative analytical tools and techniques have emerged through the evolution of construction risk management systems but their full benefit on project performance are yet to be realised. Construction risk analysts continue to rely on statistical and probability tools in their risk data presentation whilst risk management decision-making process tends to reflect the use of intuition rather than rationality. Drawing theories and concepts from systems thinking, and behavioural sciences, the implications of applying quantitative analytical tools and techniques within an instinctive construction risk decision-making context is evaluated. The analysis of construction risk management decision making systems, and discussions relating to the instinctive processing of statistics and probability data, reveals evidence associated with the incompatibilities of mixing objective and subjective approaches to project risk assessment and response. The inference being that, effective instinctive construction risk management practices may require data formats that are compatible with instinctive decision processing. In conclusion, the research provides conceptual analytical evidences for stimulating further investigations into the appropriate format for construction risk management data analysis and presentation.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | instinctive decision making; probability prediction; risk; statistical data; systems thinking |
| Index terms: | rationality, data analysis, systems thinking, drawing, decision-making process, science, evolution, decision-making, risk assessment, risk management, investigation, evidence, project performance, statistics, intuition |
| Subjects: | environmental science, data analysis and analytics, analytical methods, technical documentation, specialized education, risk assessment, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, mathematical modelling, decision analysis, cognitive psychology, financial risk, project management theory and practice, decision-making and reasoning |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Education, Project Management, Research Practice, Cost Management, Sustainability, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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