Adams, F K (2006) Expert elicitation and Bayesian analysis of construction contract risks: An investigation. Construction Management and Economics, 24(1), pp. 81-96. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Formal risk analysis techniques applied in managing construction project risks tend to focus on risks that lend themselves to 'objective' methods of economic analysis. Although subjective probabilities and Bayesian methods are applied successfully in other industries to manage 'subjective' risks similar to those encountered in construction contracts, very little is reported on the application of such methods for analysing risks in construction contracts. An investigation has been carried out into using subjective expert opinions and Bayesian methods in construction contract risk analysis. The elicitation of expert opinions about the risk of encountering adverse ground conditions on construction sites is examined. Prior distributions of expert opinions about the risk form the critical component in the Bayesian analysis of risk. The conclusion of this is that although construction professionals have difficulty estimating intermediate and tail values of probability distributions, elicitation techniques can be used to develop prior distributions of contract risks which, coupled with sample information on the risks, would enable the Bayesian analysis of risks. Effective strategies for systematically analysing significant individual contract risks often covered under an 'arbitrary' project contingency sum can now be developed to enhance the risk management efforts of contractors and construction experts.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Bayesian analysis; Delphi techniques; elicitation techniques; risk analysis; subjective probabilities |
| Index terms: | ground condition, risk management, Delphi technique, probability distribution, risk analysis, strategy, economic analysis, construction contract, construction professional, investigation, estimating, construction site, Bayesian analysis, construction project |
| Subjects: | professional development, production management, financial and cost management, statistical analysis, design analysis, work location, risk assessment, geotechnical engineering, data collection methods, environmental hazards, contract type, management |
| Topics: | Information Management, Project Management, Cost Management, Procurement, Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Design Practice, Sustainability, Business Strategy, Site Management |
| 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