Skitmore, M and Cheung, F K T (2007) Explorations in specifying construction price forecast loss functions. Construction Management and Economics, 25(5), pp. 449-465. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Typical measures of goodness of construction price forecasts are the mean and standard deviation, coefficient of variation and root mean square of the deviations between forecasted and actual values. This can only be valid, however, if the pain, or loss, incurred as a result of such deviations is directly proportional to the square of their value. Two approaches are used to test this. The first of these analyses 10 sets of data collected from around the world, while the second explores the use of a postal questionnaire survey to elicit construction industry client disutilities. The results of the first analysis mitigate against any general view that projects tend to be overestimated but do clearly suggest asymmetric under/overestimates for the measures used. The second analysis results in an approximated loss function although in ordinal terms only. This also suggests that the functional form varies between building types, with Commercial and Residential being the most asymmetric and Schools and Industrial being less asymmetric. The work to date indicates that, for construction price forecasting, the loss functions involved are asymmetric, with the degree of asymmetry increasing according to the level of commercial financial viability at stake.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction; estimate errors; forecasting; forecasts; loss functions; price; specification |
| Index terms: | specification, survey, questionnaire, variation, exploration, forecasting, pain, financial viability, deviation, estimate, construction industry |
| Subjects: | contractual condition, industry analysis, health conditions and diseases, data collection methods, financial and cost management, prediction and forecasting, business management, environmental resource management |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Sustainability, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Cost Management, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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