Kenley, R (2001) The predictive ability of bromilow's time-cost model: A comment. Construction Management and Economics, 19(8), pp. 759-764. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The study of the relationship between construction time and cost has a long history. This paper reviews the report of Ng, S.T., Mak, M., Skitmore, R.M., Lam, K.C. and Varnam, M. (2001) Construction Management and Economics, 19, 165, and reveals they have made a substantial contribution to the method of analysis but that they have not sufficiently justified their case in light of the literature, and have not understood the role of sample sizes and confidence limits in the interpretation of their results. In particular, the present paper challenges their conclusion that a long term trend of improvement has been identified. This debate raises important epistemological questions for forecasting and modelling trends using generic time-cost models.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction performance; cost; time |
| Index terms: | history, forecasting, sample size, construction performance, time-cost model, construction time, modelling |
| Subjects: | project controls, quantity surveying, performance assessment, analytical methods, architectural and construction history, prediction and forecasting, research design and methodology |
| Topics: | Site Management, Time Control, Risk Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles |
| 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