Almeida, Y. and Calejo, R. (2026) Innovation in public works management: Proposal for a performance evaluation model based on cost and deadline indicators. Construction Management and Economics, 44(9), pp. 721-740. ISSN 0144-6193
Abstract
This article proposes an objective model for evaluating the performance of public works based on cost and time deviations. In light of recurring challenges related to budget overruns and delays, particularly in public contracts, the study identifies the absence of standardized assessment models as a significant barrier to accountability and efficiency. Drawing on international benchmarking systems and consolidated theoretical frameworks, the authors propose a classification methodology based on three indicators: Cost Seal, Time Seal, and Work Seal. These indicators convert raw data into scalar scores and conceptual seals (ranging from A to F), enabling cross-sectional analyses and supporting evidence-based governance. The model incorporates both direct and indirect costs, conducts time-based analysis regardless of suspensions or extensions, and introduces transparent metrics for comparative diagnostics. It is a methodological framework whose primary contribution lies in the structured development of a classification architecture for public works performance assessment. The model is conceptually validated using a simulated dataset to demonstrate its internal coherence and operational feasibility under controlled conditions. Empirical calibration using real-world datasets is identified as a subsequent research stage, contingent upon improvements in data standardization and availability. The proposal contributes to public governance by establishing a transparent, replicable and standardized evaluation structure capable of supporting systematic monitoring and comparative analysis.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cost overruns; performance evaluation; performance indicators; public works; time delays |
| Index terms: | performance assessment, benchmarking, controlled conditions, evidence, coherence, performance indicator, performance evaluation, monitoring, accountability, drawing, governance, time delay, standardization, cost overrun, budget overrun, comparative analysis, indirect cost, dataset, proposal, deviation, methodology, efficiency, public work |
| Subjects: | evaluation and assessment methods, data management, data analysis and analytics, infrastructure engineering, project planning, testing methods, assessment methods, performance management, financial and cost management, research methods, cost management, project controls, performance measurement, technical documentation, control systems, liability law, human factors and perception, business |
| Topics: | Human Resources, Cost Management, Governance, Digital Applications, Quality Management, Legal Issues, Engineering Principles, Time Control, Project Management, Procurement, Site Management, Research Practice, Design Practice |
| 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