Flanagan, R and Norman, G (1983) The accuracy and monitoring of quantity surveyors' price forecasting for building work. Construction Management and Economics, 1(2), pp. 157-180. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
This paper examines the performance of two public sector quantity surveying departments when forecasting the lowest tender price for proposed projects at the design stage. The reliability of any price forecast is dependent upon professional skill and judgement and the availability of historical price data derived from completed projects. The quantity surveyor also requires an effective feedback mechanism that provides information on the accuracy of previous forecasts. A simple feedback mechanism is developed in this paper which can be used to assess forecasting performance and give an early warning of bias and identify any patterns that may emerge.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accuracy; monitoring; Price forecasting; quantity surveyor |
| Index terms: | surveying, lowest tender, quantity surveying, public sector, early warning, design stage, accuracy, forecasting, bias, monitoring |
| Subjects: | prediction and forecasting, profession, control systems, health monitoring assessment and metrics, professional development, professional practice, administrative law, financial risk, tendering, probability and distributions |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Procurement, Legal Issues, Health and Safety, Design Practice, Information Management, Research Practice, Site Management, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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