Ahiaga-Dagbui, D; Smith, S D; Love, P E D and Ackermann, F (2015) Spotlight on construction cost overrun research: Superficial, replicative and stagnated. In: Raiden, A and Aboagye-Nimo, E (eds.) Proceedings of 31st Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-9 September 2015, Lincoln, UK.
Abstract
Construction projects routinely overrun their cost estimates. A plethora of studies have thus been dedicated to investigating the root causes, sizes, distribution and nature of overruns. The causes range from a poor understanding of the impact of systemicity and complexity projects, unrealistic cost targets and misguided trade-offs between project scope, time and cost to suspicions of foul play and even corruption. In spite of the vast attention dedicated to the problem of cost overrun, there has been limited evidence to support the claim that the size or occurrence of cost overruns is reducing in practice. A review of the literature reveals that it may not be an exaggeration to claim that the bulk of our current cost overrun research may be largely inadequate and deficient to deal with the complexity posed by construction projects. This paper provides a critique of current cost overrun research and suggests that the adoption of systems thinking is required to better understand the nature of cost overruns. We explore some of the embedded methodological weaknesses in the approaches adopted in a majority of cost overrun research, particularly the lack of systems thinking and demonstrable causality. We reach the following conclusion - cost overrun research has largely stagnated in the refinement and advancement of the knowledge area. It has largely been superficial and replicative. A significant paradigm and methodological shift may be required to address this perennial and complex problem faced in construction project delivery.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | causality; cost overrun; cost control; project performance; replication; research method; systems thinking |
| Index terms: | project scope, cost control, construction project, paradigm, project performance, evidence, corruption, cost estimate, complexity, systems thinking, construction cost, cost overrun, construction project delivery, critique, overrun |
| Subjects: | scope management, evaluation and assessment methods, analytical methods, financial and cost management, project management theory and practice, production management, education and knowledge transfer, systems engineering, professional ethics, project controls |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Research Practice, Legal Issues, Time Control |
| 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