Cattell, D W (2012) An overview of component unit pricing theory. Construction Management and Economics, 30(1), pp. 81-92. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Component unit pricing (CUP) theory presents a fresh approach to item pricing, described as the process of distributing the overall price among its constituent component items. This theory provides explanation and proof that different distributions of mark-up among the items of a project produce different levels of reward for contractors, while exposing them to different degrees of risk. The theory describes the three identified sources of these rewards, namely those of improved cash flow, escalation in compensation and valuations of likely variations. In addition, it also provides the first explanation of the three risks involved, namely the risk of 'rejection', the risk of 'reaction' and the risk of 'being wrong'. In combination, it provides a means by which both the rewards as well as these risks can now be measured given any pricing scenario. This theory gives effect to fuzzy constraints on the price of each item, providing a scientific basis by which to identify more extreme prices when pursuing more profit and more restrained prices when seeking to reduce risk. Overall, it provides a basis by which to moderate these two objectives in the pursuit of the maximization of a contractor's utility. A test on a hypothetical project indicates an improvement of more than 150% on utility, if a contractor applies this theory, compared to the position when balanced prices are used instead.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bidding; mark-up; pricing; risk analysis; risk management |
| Index terms: | risk analysis, compensation, risk management, maximization, variation, bidding, cash flow, mark-up, profit, pricing |
| Subjects: | algorithms, environmental hazards, contractual condition, dispute resolution, bidding, risk assessment, price determination, financial management, economic analysis |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Procurement, Sustainability, Contract Administration, Digital Applications, Business Strategy, Risk Management, Cost Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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