Scott, D and Kagiri, M (1992) Choosing the most appropriate method of construction with computer assistance. Construction Management and Economics, 10(2), pp. 153-177. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
A method of analysing costs and durations of alternative methods of construction is presented as a possible way of solving some of the problems of the construction industry, especially in developing countries. The method involves simple use of any commercially available computer database package. The type of data required, the possible sources and the effects of variation of the data are presented. To demonstrate the use of the method three projects have been analysed using data from Kenya. The resulting accurate and fast assessment of the relative merits of alternative methods of construction enables selection of the methods of construction that are most appropriate for any given conditions. The methods are simple and can be applied without specialist computer knowledge.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | computer assistance; construction techniques; developing countries |
| Index terms: | variation, Kenya, developing country, construction industry, duration, package, database |
| Subjects: | project controls, data management, industry analysis, development economics, contractual condition, Geography, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Geographical Context, Procurement, International Construction, Digital Applications, Contract Administration, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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