Adafin, J; Rotimi, J O B and Wilkinson, S (2016) Risk impact assessments in project budget development: Architects' perspectives. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 12(3), pp. 189-204. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
Knowledge of how risks combine to impact variability between design stage elemental cost plans and final tender sums, in traditionally procured commercial building projects, from the architects' perspectives in NZ is yet to be investigated. This study therefore evaluates identified risk factors through risk measurement, in order to determine the most significant. Data for the study were collected through an online questionnaire survey of 82 practising architects in NZ. Responses to the survey were analysed using descriptive statistics, risk mean analysis, degree of risk and Spearman's correlation. A ranking of the mean and degree of risk values enabled the most significant risk factors during design development to be determined. The findings revealed the top 10 risk factors impacting the variability observed. Armed with this information, architects may be better able to provide information on the influence of design- and construction-related risks on building project performance and, consequently the client's cash flow position. Moreover, as risk elements are inherent in construction projects globally, these findings have ramifications for commercial projects by expanding existing knowledge on what is needed for reasonable budgetary performance and successful delivery of construction projects. Knowledge of how risks combine to impact variability between design stage elemental cost plans and final tender sums, in traditionally procured commercial building projects, from the architects' perspectives in NZ is yet to be investigated. This study therefore evaluates identified risk factors through risk measurement, in order to determine the most significant. Data for the study were collected through an online questionnaire survey of 82 practising architects in NZ. Responses to the survey were analysed using descriptive statistics, risk mean analysis, degree of risk and Spearman's correlation. A ranking of the mean and degree of risk values enabled the most significant risk factors during design development to be determined. The findings revealed the top 10 risk factors impacting the variability observed. Armed with this information, architects may be better able to provide information on the influence of design- and construction-related risks on building project performance and, consequently the client's cash flow position. Moreover, as risk elements are inherent in construction projects globally, these findings have ramifications for commercial projects by expanding existing knowledge on what is needed for reasonable budgetary performance and successful delivery of construction projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | New Zealand; risk impacts; elemental cost plan; variability; architects; final tender sum |
| Index terms: | cash flow, New Zealand, elemental cost plan, survey, risk impact, commercial building, construction project, architect, risk factor, design stage, project performance, questionnaire, final tender sum, statistics, design development, variability |
| Subjects: | statistical analysis, environmental hazards, project management theory and practice, design process, Geography, production management, financial management, financial and cost management, bidding, professional practice, mathematical modelling, construction type, profession, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Procurement, Sustainability, Cost Management, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice |
| 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