Construction Research Congress 2020
Is the Owner’s Construction Contingency Impacted by the Maturity and Accuracy of Front End Engineering Design (FEED)?
Publication: Construction Research Congress 2020: Project Management and Controls, Materials, and Contracts
ABSTRACT
A project owner’s construction contingency is often an amount of funding added to a cost estimate to cover a certain degree of risk or uncertainty. As the name indicates, the owner contingency is controlled by the owner and included in the owner’s project budget. The hypothesis of this study is that the understanding of the maturity and accuracy of front end engineering design (FEED), which is a critical component of front end planning (FEP), would lead a project team to set a better-informed contingency percentage for their project. The levels of FEED maturity and accuracy affect the owner’s ability to make informed and reliable decisions, including cost predictions. Currently, due to the lack of a consistent understanding of FEED maturity and accuracy, contingency values used for a project may not necessarily be correlated with the project’s FEED maturity and accuracy levels. This paper presents the analysis of owner’s contingency versus FEED maturity and accuracy, for the first time, in the large industrial construction sector. The research presented in this paper follows a scientific research method that included a literature review, data collection workshops, and statistical analysis of contingency data. One major finding shows the levels of FEED maturity and accuracy did not impact the level of contingency assigned on projects. This result, combined with earlier findings that FEED maturity and accuracy are significantly impacting cost growth, and other key performance metrics, shows there is considerable room for improvement. Owners can start using FEED maturity and accuracy scores as part of the indicators when assigning contingency for projects.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this chapter.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study was funded by the Construction Industry Institute (CII). The authors would like to thank Research Team 331 and the industry professionals who volunteered time, expertise, and data, which were vital for the successful completion of this study.
REFERENCES
Barraza, G. A., and Bueno, R. A. (2007). “Cost contingency management.” J. Manage. Eng., 23(3), 140-146.
Barraza, G. A. (2011). “Probabilistic estimation and allocation of project time contingency.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 137(4), 259-265.
Bingham, E., and Gibson, G. E. Jr. (2016). “Infrastructure project scope definition using project definition rating index.” J. Manage. Eng., 33(2), 04016037.
Cho, C., and Gibson, G. E. Jr. (2000). “Development of a PDRI for general building projects.” Proc., Construction Research Congress, ASCE, Orlando, FL.
Construction Industry Institute (CII). (2006). “Front end planning: break the rules, pay the price.” Research Summary 213-1, Austin, TX.
Collins, W., Parrish, K., and Gibson, G. E. Jr. (2017). “Development of a project scope definition and assessment tool for small industrial construction projects.” J. Manage. Eng., 33(4).
De Marco, A., Rafele, C., and Thaheem, M. J. (2015). “Dynamic management of risk contingency in complex design-build projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 142(2), 04015080.
Dumont, P. R., Gibson, G. E. Jr., and Fish, J. R. (1997). “Scope management using project definition rating index.” J. Manage. Eng., 13(5), 54-60.
El Asmar, M., Hanna, A. S., and Loh, W., (2013) “Quantifying performance for the integrated project delivery (IPD) system as compared to established delivery systems,” J. Constr. Eng. Manage, 139(11), 04013012-1–04013012-14.
El Asmar, M., Gibson, G. E. Jr., Ramsey, D., Yussef, A., and Ud Din, Z (2018). “The maturity and accuracy of front end engineering design (FEED) and its impact on project performance.” Research Report 331-11, Construction Industry Institute, Austin, TX.
Elzomor, M., Burke, R., Parrish, K., and G, E. G. Jr (2018). “Front-end planning for large and small infrastructure projects: comparison of project definition rating index tools.” J. Manage. Eng., 34(4), 04018022.
Ford, D. N. (2002). “Achieving multiple project objectives through contingency management.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage, 128(1), 30–39.
Gibson, G. E. Jr., and Hamilton, M.R. (1994). “Analysis of pre-project planning effort and success variables for capital facility projects.” Source Document 105, Austin, Texas.
Gibson, G. E. Jr., Kaczmarowski, J. H., and Lore, H. E. Jr (1995). "Preproject-planning process for capital facilities." J. Constr. Eng. Manage, 121(3), 312-318.
Gibson, G. E. Jr., and Pappas, M. P. (2003). “Starting smart: key practices for developing scopes of work for facility projects.” Federal Facilities Council Technical Rep. 146, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.
Gibson, G. E. Jr., Wang, Y. R., Cho, C. S., and Pappas, M. P. (2006). “What is preproject planning, anyway?” J. Manage. Eng., 22(1), 35-42.
Gibson, G.E. Jr., El Asmar, M., and Cho, N., (2019) “The project definition rating index – industrial projects: a front end planning maturity and accuracy total rating system,” PDRI MATRS 5.0 Implementation Resource 113-2, Construction Industry Institute, Austin, TX.
González, V., Alarcón, L. F., Maturana, S., Mundaca, F., and Bustamante, J. (2010). “Improving planning reliability and project performance using the reliable commitment model.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 136(10), 1129-1139.
Günhan, S., and Arditi, D. (2007). “Budgeting owner’s construction contingency.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 133(7), 492-497.
Hwang, B. G., and Ho, J. W. (2011). “Front-end planning implementation in Singapore: status, importance, and impact.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage, 138(4), 567-573.
Moore, D., McGabe, G., Alwan Craig, B., and Duckworth, W. (2010). “The practice of statistics for business and economics (3rd edition).” W.H Freeman and Company, New York, NY.
Morrison, J. (2009). “Statistics for engineers: an introduction.” Chichester, John Wiley & Sons.
National Research Council. (2005). “The owner’s role in project risk management.” National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
Project Management Institute. (2004). “A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK guide)”, Newtown Square, PA.
Thomas, M. U. (2010). “Models for managing contingency construction operations.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage, 136(3), 391-398.
Touran, A. (2003). “Calculation of contingency in construction projects.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 50(2), 135-140.
Wilcox, R. R. (2009). “Basic statistics: understanding conventional methods and modern insights.” Oxford University Press on Demand.
Xie, H., AbouRizk, S., and Zou, J. (2012). “Quantitative method for updating cost contingency throughout project execution.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage, 138(6), 759-766.
Yussef, A., El Asmar, M., Ramsey, D., and Gibson, G. E. Jr. (2017). "Front end engineering design for large industrial projects: industry perceptions and state of practice." Proc., Engineering Project Organization Conference (EPOC), Stanford Sierra Camp, Lake Tahoe, CA.
Yussef, A., Gibson, G. E. Jr., El Asmar, M. E., and Ramsey, D. (2018). “Front end engineering design (FEED) for large industrial projects: FEED maturity and its impact on project cost and schedule performance.” Proc., Construction Research Congress 2018, New Orleans, LA, 1-8.
Yussef, A., Gibson, G. E. Jr., El Asmar, M., and Ramsey, D. (2019). “Front end engineering design (FEED) for large industrial projects: quantifying feed maturity and its impact on project performance.” J. Manage. Eng., ASCE, in press.
Yussef, A. (2019). “Assessing the maturity and accuracy of front end engineering design (FEED) for large, complex industrial projects.” Doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Construction Research Congress 2020: Project Management and Controls, Materials, and Contracts
Pages: 143 - 152
Editors: David Grau, Ph.D., Arizona State University, Pingbo Tang, Ph.D., Arizona State University, and Mounir El Asmar, Ph.D., Arizona State University
ISBN (Online): 978-0-7844-8288-9
Copyright
© 2020 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Published online: Nov 9, 2020
Published in print: Nov 9, 2020
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.