Ranasinghe, M (1998) Risk management in the insurance industry: Insights for the engineering construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 16(1), pp. 31-39. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
A probabilistic framework is developed to analyse a risk management approach adopted by an insurance firm. The analysis shows that when the insurance firm classifies a client as 'superior' and 'most acceptable', the probability of the insurer having to pay out on those claims is negligible. Even for a policy that is classified as 'acceptable', the highest probability of a claim is only 12%. When the probability of a claim is over 50%, the client is considered to be 'unacceptable' for an insurance policy. Based on that analysis, the insights that the engineering construction industry can gain from risk management in the insurance firm with respect to project duration and cost are highlighted. It is shown that, in responding to risks and uncertainty, the engineering construction industry should not allocate contingency at a predetermined probability of success for global variables such as project cost or duration as suggested in the literature, but at the input level. It is suggested that the predetermined probability of success value to allocate contingency at the input level should be at least 70%. Then, the contingency available for project cost and duration can ensure a high probability of success in the completion of the project.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contingency; engineering construction; insurance; risk management; target cost |
| Index terms: | project cost, target cost, duration, construction industry, insurance, risk management |
| Subjects: | economics, project controls, industry analysis, risk assessment, economic analysis |
| Topics: | Time Control, Risk Management, Research Practice, Cost Management, Business Strategy |
| 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