学霸学习网 这下你爽了
当前位置:首页 >> 其它语言学习 >>


2014 届



学生姓名 学 系 号 别

陈凯锋 0206100102 经济与管理系 工程管理 1001 班 顾晓林 2013 年 11 月

专业班级 指导教师 完成日期

The Application of Risk Management in Infrastructure Construction Projects
Rashed Ali, CCE

ABSTRACT: The demands of society are increasing with increased human knowledge and technological advances. As a consequence, projects are large and getting bigger and they tend to be complex and multidisciplinary. A good example of this is infrastructure oil and gas industry projects, which include the activities of large construction companies. From inception to completion, the construction process is complex and characterized by many uncertainties. Most contractors, however, have developed a series of rules of thumb that they apply when dealing with risk, which is inherently a dynamic problem. Several authors have formulated different risk management approaches. Among all methodologies, risk management process (RMP) methodology provides a logically consistent framework for managing risk. If RMP is applied, not only will project costs be more explicitly known, but also profit will be maximized. An RMP methodology is used in this article to formulate a risk management model, incorporating infrastructure project costs for construction budgeting purposes, and applying it to the project in order to improve the evaluation and control of costs. KEY WORDS: Construction, cost estimation, risk management process and model, and infrastructure project Experiences in developed countries have shown that construction investments and activities increase with the state of economic development of the country. In particular, the Wells study indicates that capital formation in construction as a percentage of GDP, increases with GDP per capita from 8.9 percent for countries below US $350 GDP per capita to 13.6 percent for countries above US $700 GDP per capita. In Singapore, the prospect of a sustained construction boom in the early nineties reaffirms the industry's role as a major economic sector in the nation's economy. It was responsible for safe housing and sanitation in the sixties and an efficient transport and industrial infrastructure that support industrial expansion in the seventies and early eighties. In the nineties, it was called upon to deliver a pro-business environment facility

that will make Singapore a global business center and an attractive location for multinationals to set up their operational bases. The primary goal of every construction project is to meet the owner's functional requirements. Depending upon the nature of the project, aesthetics may also play a role. Quite often, construction projects fail to achieve their time, quality, and budget goals. This is frequently because of the failure of the contractor to analyze and assess unanticipated risks. The trend is toward open competitive tendering. The future will require new innovative financing solutions, backed by rigorous and sophisticated risk management analysis and techniques, and tight contractual structures. Most contractors, however, have developed a series of rules of thumb that they apply when dealing with risk, which is inherently a dynamic problem. These rules generally rely on the contractor's experience and judgment. Rarely do contractors quantify uncertainty and systematically assess the risks involved in a project. Furthermore, even if they assess these risks, they even less frequently evaluate the consequences (potential impact) associated with these risks. One reason might be the lack of a rational, straightforward way to combine all the facets of risk systematically into a prioritized and manageable scheme. As such, better tools are needed to handle the problem. It is apparent that the present approach in preparing cost estimates for construction projects is inadequate and should be reviewed. It is desirable and necessary to research the current theory of risk management, and to examine in detail the risk management techniques available, upon which the implementation of risk management process (RMP) in preparing cost estimates shall be formulated. The scope of this article is to the study of the application of risk management process to formulate a risk management model ? for cost estimation of construction projects and comparison of the results obtained from RMP. Using a traditional deterministic approach and also estimating using a risk analysis (ERA) method. ? to incorporate a cost model which has been applied to the capital budget of a project to construct a new station (building) for an infrastructure project. The forecasted outcome (tender stage) will be evaluated by comparing it with the actual project results determined at interim stages (construction stage) of development.

Risk Management In line with the research, among the methodologies, the RMP (risk management process) methodology has been successfully applied to a specific live project which has demonstrated its capability in providing more information on risk factors that guides managers in their decision making process. However, this risk management concept is relatively new in the construction industry. It is significant that risk management has been extended well beyond the normal confines of insurance. Risk management has been developed mainly in the US to enable organizations to combat an ever-increasing exposure to risks. Risk management can be used to denote methods which aim to develop a comprehensive understanding and awareness of the risk associated with a particular variable of interest in strategic decision, or with the successful accomplishment of the project objectives or project success criteria. These variables of interest or project objectives may include tangible economic factors such as project cost, project schedule, project performance, net present value, or return on investment. Or they may include non-tangible factors such as corporate image, employee satisfaction, or increased customer service. As far as this article is concerned, the variable of interest is the cost of building in construction projects. Risk management applied to the construction industry refers to the assessment of and reaction to the risk and uncertainty that will inevitably be associated with a project. To manage a project, a quality and safety system is normally employed in order to meet the objectives and expectations of a company. The quality and safety system should be structured to optimize and control in relation to project risks, costs and benefits, to be achieved by the project to satisfy both internal and external customers. Construction, like many other industries in a free-enterprise system, has sizeable risk built into its profit structure. From inception to completion, the construction process is complex and characterized by many uncertainties. Risk Management Process (RMP) The RMP provides a logically consistent framework to develop a process of finding and understanding alternative risks, assessing their consequences and uncertainties, identifying the resources needed, and choosing appropriate courses of actions in coping with these risk factors and in achieving the desired results. It is a powerful tool of confronting unknown risks, responding quickly in finding

out what could go wrong and developing strategies to control risks for project success. The core aspects of the RMP approach are risk identification, risk measurement, risk assessment, risk evaluation and risk control and monitoring which are briefly elaborated as follows. The RMP begins with identifying the strategic importance of the project and the corresponding project mission, aims and objectives. The mission and aims must be driven by the overall business strategy of the corporation. They should be the driving force for RMP in developing an appropriate risk management model to identify and manage the risks associated with a given project. Risk identification, risk measurement and risk assessment form a system that includes several tools to identify all potential risk factors and to enumerate the consequences and their severity of the identified risk factors. It also includes several techniques of assessing the uncertainties associated with the consequences in the form of probability distributions and determining the probability distributions for project critical success factors. The risk evaluation phase of the RMP involves identifying several decision alternatives and evaluating them based on the risk profiles obtained in the risk assessment phase, and taking necessary corrective actions if the project outcomes are at variance with the planned outcomes. In the risk control and monitoring phase, the project manager can examine the progress, as well as any deviations that would occur and corrective actions required for achieving the desired objectives of the project. This phase also facilitates periodic communication of pertinent information on the status of project accomplishments to senior management and other personnel who are involved with project execution. Cases This article will carry two case studies. First, building project cost estimates will be prepared for the case project by using three different approaches, the traditional single point deterministic approach, the estimating using risk analysis (ERA) method, and the risk management process technique using Monte-Carlo simulation. The results obtained from the first two approaches will be compared with those obtained from RMP using Monte-Carlo simulation. Secondly, incorporating a cost model, this has been applied to the capital budget of a project to construct a new station (building) for an infrastructure project. The forecasted outcome (tender stage)

will be evaluated by comparing it with actual project results determined at interim stages (construction stage) of development. Detail of Case Project for Cost Estimation The title of the case project is known as ORL-Shopping center and Office Complex, Singapore." The information known about the project at the feasibility study-stage is as follows: Project Mission—To deliver the shopping complex to the client so as to meet the public demand in Singapore. Project Aim—To complete the project on time, within budget and at an acceptable standard to the client. Project Objective—So far as cost estimation is concerned, the objective is to predict the final total project cost as accurately as possible so that the client knows what to expect. ? The project is a shopping center and office complex in Singapore which is comprised of a market, cooked food center, offices, car-park, and an indoor recreation center. ? A six-story market complex with two basement levels for car-parks (10,500sq. m.), G/F to 2/F for market areas(15,750 sq. m.), 3/F for cooked food center (5,250 sq. m.), 4/F for office spaces (5,250 sq. m.) and 5/F indoor recreation center are shown on the sketch. ? The total air conditioning area is about 5, 250 sq. meters (for office space only), whereas the other areas will be provided with mechanical ventilation only. A bottom-up construction methodology is considered at this stage for the two basement works and also the superstructure. Table 1 indicates the cost data available from recent projects with comparable size and with similar design A risk model is developed following the risk management methodology described earlier, as shown in figure 1, and will be applied to the project to evaluate how risk management process can be applied in the preparation of the building project cost estimates. Cost Estimation Using Traditional Deterministic Approach The traditional deterministic approach is used to determine the most likely cost of the project. It does not handle risks in a logical and systematic way as RMP or ERA. Instead, a fixed percentage contingency sum is added on to the estimated cost of

the project as an allowance for risks. In this case project, the superficial method using unit area cost estimation is adopted to estimate the building costs for the market complex. The most likely cost figures in table 1 are used. A percentage allowance (usually say 10 percent) for contingencies is included in the estimated amount to represent the cost uncertainty. The cost estimation results are summarized in table 2. The target value of the building project (i.e., base estimate) is S $96.6 M and the contingencies allowances is S $9.7 M. Therefore, the total budget for building project is S $106.3 M. Estimating Using Risk Analysis (ERA) Method Estimating Using Risk Analysis (ERA) method is a risk management technique, specifically designed for cost estimation in construction projects. According to this method, the base estimate which represents the costs for the risk free (i.e., the certainty feature, the work that is unlikely to change) part of the work is prepared first by pricing the known features using current rates and prices. It is reasonable that the minimum cost figures in table 1 are used to calculate the base estimates for the building components. Risk identification is then carried out to identify significant risk factors that may affect project costs. In this case project, the checklist approach is used. Risk measurement and assessment are then carried out to determine the maximum risk allowance and average risk allowance for each risk factor. In his Certification submission, the author included 12 tables as appendix items. Space restrictions prevent those items from being included with this article. The maximum risk allowances and average risk allowances obtained are then used to calculate three types of estimates, a base estimate, average risk estimate, and maximum likely estimate by using the following equations: Average Risk Estimate = Base Estimate +∑ Average Risk Allowance (equation 1) Maximum Likely Estimate = Aver. Risk Estimate + Max. Likely addition (equation 2) Where Max. Likely Addition =√∑ (Max. Risk Allow. - Aver. Risk Allow.)? Summary of the calculation is shown in Table 3. The ERA calculation provides three point estimates on the cost of the building project. To set the target value and the contingency allowance depends on the risk attitude of the decision maker. For example, a decision maker can choose the base estimate as the target value (i.e., S $86.1 M) and the average risk estimate as the total budget (i.e., S $113.17 M). However, in this situation, one is unable to now the

probability that the actual cost would exceed the value that he or she has chosen. Cost Estimation Using RMP The base cost estimate is represented by a range estimate instead of a single-point estimate. Triangular distribution is used to describe the probability distribution. The three parameters of triangular distribution, namely: minimum, most likely and maximum values are estimated using the historical data available as shown in table 1. The base cost estimate is shown in table 4. The risk identification process is carried out. So far as the cost estimation exercise is concerned, the consequences that are of interest are costs. The magnitudes of these consequences (i.e., costs) are measured as percentage of base cost estimates, which are obtained from cost data of previous projects. As the project is under feasibility study stage, a superficial method using unit area cost estimation is used to formulate the building cost model for use in cost estimation. The cost model is represented by the following equation:


Where n = No. of building components; m = no of risk factors TC = Total Estimated Cost Ai = Gross floor Area of the Building components” I'; i = 1, 2,… …, n Ri = Cost per unit floor area "i"; i = 1,2,……,n Fj = Cost of Risk factor j = 1, 2… m

Risk assessment is then carried out to determine the uncertainties (i.e., the probability of occurrence) of these risk factors and the probability distribution of the relevant project success criteria (i.e., cost). Probability analysis using Monte Carlo simulation technique is then carried out to estimate probability distribution of the building components costs using the model formulated in equation 3. It is done by using the risk analysis and modeling software called "@RISK". Monte Carlo simulation is carried out to determine the probability distributions of the estimated costs the total building project costs for the feasibility stage by using

equation 3. A total of 750 iterations were conducted and the simulation results of the estimated costs total building project cost is presented by cumulative probability distributions in figure 2.

Based on the probability distributions obtained in step 5, different scenarios are developed for building components cost in order to manage risks. The risk evaluation process is consists of two parts, analysis and interpretation, and decision. Analysis and Interpretation of Results Cost estimation using RMP provides a range of values that the cost could take and the likelihood of occurrence of each value within the range. To set the target value and the contingency allowance again depends on the risk attitude of the decision-maker. A decision-maker can choose the most likely value, the expected value, or any value with a given probability of not exceeding it (such as 10 percent) as the target value. Similarly, the total budget can be chosen. From figure 2, the total building project cost scenario developed can be summarized as shown in table 5. For contingency in assigning the target value and the total budget, the decision maker can set a decision policy. For example, one can decide that the values with probabilities of 50 percent (P50) and 90 percent (P90) of not exceeding them as the target value and total budget, respectively. In this case, the target value and the total budget are S $120.62 M and S $126.7 M respectively (i.e., a contingency allowance of S $6 M). Risk monitoring and control will be carried out throughout the project life cycle to review and update risks. From the outcomes of risk monitoring and control process, the risk list prepared in step 2 is updated and reviewed at different stages of the projects. Steps 3 to 8 are repeated until the project is completed. When the project is

completed, the cost information is fed back to the historical cost data for future use.

COMPARISON OF RESULTS OBTAINED FROM DIFFERENT APPROACHES Comparison Between Traditional Approach and Risk Management Process Approach The traditional approach is a deterministic method of cost estimation which assumes that all variables are either known or can be predicted exactly. The final single-point cost prediction implies a degree of certainty that cannot reflect the actual situation where there are a lot of risks and uncertainties associated with the project. Using the cumulative probability distribution curves of estimated costs, for various installations obtained by using RMP, these are compared with the estimated costs obtained by using the traditional approach. The results are shown in table 6. It can be observed that in this project case, the traditional approach has seriously underestimated the costs. Comparison Between ERA Method and Risk Management Process Approach The final estimated costs by ERA are presented by three points, which are in deterministic terms. There is no indication of probability of how likely these three values will occur. Also, there is no indication of how likely the most likely estimate

will occur. The three-point estimated costs obtained from ERA method are compared with the cumulative probability distribution curves obtained by using RMP to check what the probabilities will be for achieving the cost estimates prepared by using ERA method. The results are summarized in table 7. It can be observed that the base estimates and maximum likely estimates are of no practical use for budgeting purposes because for the base estimates, the probability of the actual costs exceeding them is 100 percent. Whereas for maximum likely estimates, the probability of exceeding them is very low. Also, the probabilities that the actual costs will exceed the average risk estimate estimates are quite high. Detail of Case Project for Capital Budgeting This case study will examine the role and application of the risk management process in capital budgeting, using data from an existing station (building) for an infrastructure project. The study will consider how the critical success factors, project structure, work breakdown structure, range estimation, and management control system are used by the risk management process (RMP) to improve the evaluation and control of costs. The potential of the public sector communication infrastructure in Singapore for rail communication has been recognized for many years.


The government set up the Land Transport Authority (LTA) in September 1995, to spearhead improvements to its land transport system. On January 19, 1996, the government announced the decision to build the eagerly anticipated North-East Line. With the new financing framework for railway expansion set out in a white paper on land transport, the North-East Line was found to be financially viable and thus the go-ahead to build the line was granted earlier than originally anticipated. NEL is a mass rapid transit (MRT) line, approximately 20 km long, and it will be built primarily underground. LTA's mission is to provide a quality, integrated, and efficient world class land transport system which meets the needs and expectations of the Singapore people, supports economic environmental goals, and provides value for the money. Based on the risk management process (RMP) described earlier, the following

risk model for capital budgeting (See figure 3) has been deployed. It incorporates a cost model for the infrastructure project. The cost model has been selected as the risk driver for this case study. Alternative models could be developed and integrated in the same basic process for other critical success factors. The RMP process chart in figure 3 starts with a driver, the mission, aims and objectives of the project for the project company (XYZ). As noted earlier, these plans must be an integral part of the corporate business plan of LTA. Mission and Aims: The mission of this project is to "provide the Singapore people with a world class transport system. The specific aims of this project are the: “. . . planning, development, implementation and management of all transport infrastructure and policies.” Objectives: Classically, the objective for a successful project is to complete to budget and program, while providing an end product with satisfactory long-term performance. This is to be continued by developing organization, methods, and policies, to maximize the success of XYZ. Only the cost objective is considered in this article in formulating the RMP based risk management model. When the plans of a project are established, the cost review is initiated at the next stage of the process involving risk identification, risk measurement, and risk assessment. Risk identification starts with a base cost and schedule, prepared when the project was first selected, together with a risk list that is used in categorizing all possible risk factors for the project. A work breakdown schedule (WBS) is then used to determine appropriate cost centers, allocate the potential risk factors to these cost centers, and then prioritize risks by check lists (or alternatively influence diagrams or Ishikawa CE diagrams) for the next phase of risk measurement.


Risk measurement then models each of the risk elements identified on the check lists in terms of consequential cost, as a range estimate (magnitude of impact) and with the assistance of the WBS, at various levels, define cost relationships (as dependent or independent, to ensure no undesirable correlation impacts) which will produce the total project cost. The risk assessment phase determines the likelihood or frequency of each risk factor by input objective or subjective probability distributions, and then by Monte Carlo simulation (using @RISK) to determine the output probability distribution of the project costs as shown in figure 4, 5, 6, 7. The analyst would review the probability distribution and the associated profiles of project costs distributions, and cycle back to the risk measurement phase to modify the model uncertainties or preference for further assessment as necessary. The output cumulative distribution provides a range of probable costs (Construction stage) which reflects a summation of all variable costs. The parameter

estimates for which are a follows: ? ? ? ? ? ? Minimum: S$162.3 m; Maximum: S$165.02m; Mean: S$163.5m; Std.Dev: S$0.509m; P10 value: S$162.88m; and P90 value: S$164.24m Figure 4 can now be compared with figure 5, which shows the output distribution curve for the station (building) project, cost produced at the tender preparation stage. Where the range or variance and standard deviation was significantly different and wider, as shown by figure 7, although not skewed but approximately a normal probability distribution curve and was the result of a review of previous tender prices for similar work. The risk evaluation stage requires project managers to review and interpret the cost forecast produced by the risk assessment and either decide on an expected cost or instruct changes in the modeling of cost or project structure, causing cycling of the process, until the project cost is contained within the desired limits. The range estimates with expected values (EV) have been produced for the station (building) element of the WBS at the tender stage (See figures 5 and 7). When the quantity and rates for concrete, rebar, piling length, and the extent of hard ground was uncertain and the contracted cost was not sure and at the construction stage (See figures 4 and 6). The values produced at these stages are summarized in table 8. Where, contingency has been determined on a 90 percent probability (or confidence level). This value can be varied by the manager depending on his risk aversion. A further stage of estimation would show whether the forecast ranges are reducing towards an end where contingency can be reduced further and reflect that uncertainties have been controlled. If an adjustment cannot be made, then corrections will need to be made to the project in the risk control and monitoring stage. If however, the manager suspects the cost model is in error or model preferences need to be altered, then the process could be recycled at the appropriate phase in the model. The risk control and monitoring phase examines the targets set and contract strategies employed as a result of periodic risk evaluation and observations on if any deviations would occur. If they occur, necessary corrective actions will be devised

and evaluated using the risk evaluation phase of the model. At the end of the project, the outcome is evaluated to improve forecasting in the future. The Results The cost estimates for the case project is carried out in three different ways, traditional deterministic approach, ERA method, and RMP using Monte Carlo simulation. The results obtained from the first two methods are then compared with that obtained from using RMP. From the comparisons, there is no doubt that the present practice of using traditional deterministic approach is inadequate. Cost estimation by means of a risk management process, using Monte Carlo simulation, is superior, more advantageous, and beneficial than the traditional deterministic approach and ERA method. This is because of the following.


Unlike the traditional deterministic approach and ERA method, the final estimated costs are presented in probabilistic terms. The decision maker can therefore have a full picture about the likelihood of the costs of the project. He/she can have a more concrete base to make a logical, rational, and consistent decision about the target values, contingencies to be allowed, and the total budget for the project. In the transportation infrastructure project, RMP has been applied to formulate

a risk management model at the tender stage, which has assisted in refining the capital budget needs, and identified the risks which need continuous review during the construction stage of the project life cycle. By assessing all the risks of each work package together, the total outcome has been evaluated to provide a risk pool or contingency sum that will cover all likely risks. The RMP will continue to be recycled throughout the project life and be used to review capital budgets at half yearly intervals. However the range estimate shown by figure 4 is considered achievable and all expectations are that the final cost will be within the stated range. The need for the application of risk management in construction projects, especially in large projects like oil and gas, and infrastructure projects, is evident. Here are some findings against the traditional deterministic approach which naturally

direct toward the application of risk management as a must. The percentage figure is arbitrarily arrived at, and not appropriate for the specific project. ? ? ? ? There is a tendency to double count risks, because some estimators are inclined to include contingencies in their best estimate. A percentage addition still results in a single figure prediction of estimated final cost, implying a degree of certainty, which is simply not justified. It only reflects the potential for downside risk and does not highlight any potential for cost reduction. Finally, it needs to direct attention away from time and performance or quality and safety risks. Also, as a project is progressing from feasibility stage to construction stage, many of the risks become known or eliminated. The allowances made for these known or eliminated risks should therefore be suitably adjusted, so that more concentration can be put on the unresolved risks. The traditional single-figure deterministic approach is illogical, cost ineffective, and reactionary in nature. This approach is inadequate, since a risk management process (RMP) provides a logical and consistent framework. The need for use of RMP in capital budgeting / cost estimation in any size of project in the construction industry is apparent.


[1] @RISK: Risk Analysis and Simulation Add-In for Microsoft Excel, Release 3.5 User's Guide, Palisade Corporation, New York, (1997) [2] Al-Bahar, Jamal F. and Keith C. Crandle(1990). Systematic Risk Management Approach for Construction Project. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE. Vol.116, No.3, (Sept,1990): 533-546. [3] Cooper, D. F. and C.B. Chapman Risk Analysis for Large Projects-Models, Methods and Cases, John Wiley & Son, Chichester, (1987): pp 150-171 [4] Flanagan, R. and S. Stevens. Risk Analysis, Quantity Surveying Techniques: New

Directions, BSP Professional Books, Oxford, (1990): 121-138. [5] Hertz, D.B. and H. Thomas. Risk Analysis and Its Applications, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, (1984): 1- 3. [6] Khoon, Quak Ser. Marketing Abroad: Competitive strategies and Market Niches for the Singapore Construction Industry. Singapore: Pacific Trade Press (1991): 22-24. [7] Mustafa, Mohammad A., and Jamal F.Al Bahar. Project Risk Assessment Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 38,No.1, (1991): 46-52. [8] Tummala, V.M. Rao, and John F.Burchet Applying a Risk Management Process (RMP) to Manage Cost Risk for an EHV Transmission Line Project. International Journal of Project Management, 17, No.4, (Aug. 1999). [9] Tummala V.M. Rao, M.N. Nkasu and K.B. Chuah. A Systematic Approach to Project Risk Management, Mathematical Modeling and Scientific Computing. 4, (1994)



Rashed Ali, CCE

摘要:社会的需求随着人类知识和技术进步日益增加。因此 ,项目也越来越大, 而他们往往是复杂和多学科。 一个很好的例子是基础设施,石油和天然气工业项 目,其中包括大型建筑公司的活动。 从开始到完成,施工过程是复杂而具有许多不 确定性。 然而,大多数承包商已经开发出一系列的经验法则,他们应用在处理风险, 它本质上是一个动态的问题。 一些作者已经制定不同的风险管理方法。在所有方 法中,风险管理流程(RMP)方法为风险管理提供了一个逻辑一致的框架。 如果应用 RMP,不仅将更明确地知道项目成本,也将利润最大化。本文使用的方法是制定一 个风险管理模型,将基础设施建设项目成本预算的目的 ,并将它应用到项目中以 提高评价和控制成本。 关键词:建设,成本估算,风险管理流程和模型,基础设施项目 发达国家的经验表明, 建设投资和活动增加与该国的经济发展状况。特别是 威尔斯研究表明,资本形成建筑占GDP的比例,增加8.9%的国家的人均GDP低于350 美元的人均国内生产总值13.6%的国家人均GDP 700美元以上。 在九十年代初的新加坡, 一个持续的建设热潮前景重申在国家的经济行业中 的作用作为一个重要的经济部门。 在六十年代, 这是负责安全的住房和卫生设施。 在七十年代和八十年代初,是高效率的交通和工业基础设施支持产业扩张。 在九十年代,它被要求提供一个商业环境基金,这将使新加坡跨国公司全球 商业中心和一个有吸引力的位置设置他们的运营基础。 每一个建设项目的主要目标是满足用户的功能需求。根据项目的性质,美学 也可以起到一定的作用。通常,建设项目未能实现他们的时间,质量和预算的目 标。这经常是因为承包商的失败分析和评估非预期风险的频繁。 目前的趋势是走向开放的竞争性招标。未来将需要新的创新的融资解决方 案,通过严格而复杂的风险管理分析和技术支持,以及紧密的合同结构。 然而,大多数承包商已经开发出一系列的经验法则,他们应用在处理风险,它 本质上是一个动态的问题。 这些规则通常依靠承包商的经验和判断。承包商很少 量化不确定性和系统地评估项目的风险。


此外,即使他们评估这些风险,他们更经常评估这些风险相关的后果(潜在影 响)。原因之一可能是缺乏理性的,直截了当的方式,结合风险系统的所有方面优 先和管理方案。因此,需要更好的工具来处理这个问题。 很明显,目前在准备建设项目成本估算方法是不够的,应该被审查。 它是可取 的和必要的研究当前风险管理理论 ,并详细检查可用的风险管理技术,对风险管 理过程的实现(RMP)准备制定成本估计。 本文的范围是风险管理过程的研究应用程序的制定风险管理模型 ? 建设项目的成本估算和比较 RMP 的获得的结果。使用传统的确定性方法和估 计使用风险分析(ERA)方法。 ? 将成本模型已应用于资本预算项目的构建一个新的车站 ( 建筑 )的基础设施 项目。预测结果(投标阶段)将通过比较它与实际项目评估结果确定临时 (施 工阶段)的发展阶段。 风险管理 在使用的研究方法中,RMP(风险管理过程)方法已经成功地应用到一个特定 的项目, 并已经证明其能力生活在提供更多信息风险因素指导管理者在他们的决 策过程。 然而, 这种风险管理的概念是相对较新的建筑行业。这是显著的风险管理已 经远远超出保险的正常界限。 风险管理开发主要在美国,使组织应对日益增加的风险敞口。风险管理可以 用来表示方法,旨在开发一个全面的了解和感知风险与一个特定的战略决策变量 的兴趣,或与项目的成功成就目标或项目的成功标准。 关注这些变量或项目目标可能包括有形的经济因素如项目成本、项目进度、 项目性能、净现值、投资回报。或者他们可能包括企业形象等无形因素、员工满 意度、提高客户服务。就本文而言,感兴趣的变量是建筑建设项目的成本。 风险管理应用于建筑行业是指评估和反应风险和不确定性,必然会被关联到 一个项目。管理一个项目,质量和安全系统通常采用以满足公司的目标和期望。 质量和安全体系结构优化和控制项目风险、成本和收益,通过这个项目来满 足内部和外部客户。 建筑,像许多其他行业在自由企业制度中,有相当大的风险构 建到其利润结构。从开始到完成,施工过程是复杂而具有许多不确定性。 风险管理程序(RMP) RMP 提供了一个逻辑一致的框架开发一个发现的过程和理解替代风险,评估


他们的后果和不确定性,确定所需的资源,选择合适的课程的行动在应对这些危 险因素和实现所需的结果。 这是一个强大的工具面对未知的风险,应对迅速找出可能出错 ,为项目的成 功开发策略来控制风险。RMP 的核心方面的方法是风险识别、风险度量、风险评 估、风险评价和风险控制和监测,简要阐述如下。 RMP 始于识别项目的战略重要性和相应的项目任务,目标和目标。 任务和目标必须由由该公司的整体业务策略驱动。 。他们应该 RMP 的驱动力 在发展中一个适当的风险管理模型来识别和管理风险与一个给定的项目。 风险识别、风险度量和风险评估形成一个系统,包括几个工具来识别所有潜 在的危险因素和枚举的后果及其严重程度确定风险因素。 它还包括许多技术评估 与结果相关的不确定性概率分布的形式和确定项目关键成功因素的概率分布。 RMP 涉及的风险评估阶段识别几个决定选择和评估他们基于获得的风险概 况在风险评估阶段,并采取必要的纠正措施,如果项目结果与计划的结果差异。 在风险控制和监控阶段,项目经理可以检查进展,以及发生的任何偏差和所 需的纠正措施项目的实现预期的目标。 这一阶段也促进了相关信息的定期沟通项 目状态的成就高级管理人员和其他人员参与项目执行。 例 本文将携带两个案例研究。首先,建立项目成本估计将准备项目通过使用三 种不同的方法,传统的单点确定方法,使用风险分析评估(ERA)方法,使用蒙特卡 罗模拟和风险管理过程的技术。 前两种方法的结果将与来自 RMP 使用蒙特卡罗模拟。其次,合并成本模型, 这是应用于资本预算项目的构建一个新的车站(建筑)的基础设施项目。 预测结果 (投标阶段)将通过比较它与实际项目评估结果确定临时(施工阶段)的发展阶段。 项目成本估算的细节情况 情况项目名称被称为新加坡的 ORL-购物中心和办公综合大楼。 该项目处于可行性研究阶段的资料如下: 项目任务——在新加坡以低价提供客户的购物中心,以满足公众的需求。 项目宗旨——在预算范围之内,并在一个可接受的标准客户端,按时完成项目。 项目目标——到目前为止,成本估算而言,目标是尽可能准确地预测最终的项目 总成本,以便客户端知道会发生什么。 该项目是一个购物中心和办公综合大楼位于新加坡是由一个市场,熟食中

心,办公室,停车场和室内康乐中心。 六层高的市场的复杂与两层地库的停车场(10,500平方米) ,G/ F 至 2/ F 代表的市场领域(15,750平方米) ,3/ F 代表熟食中心(5,250平方米) ,4/ F 代表的办公空间(5,250平方米)和5/F 女性室内康乐中心显示在草图。 总空调面积为约5,250平方米(用于办公空间) ,而其它区域将仅机械通风 来提供。自下而上施工方法被认为在这个阶段两个地下室工程,也是上层建筑。 表1显示了成本数据可以从最近的项目与类似规模和类似的设计 风险模型开发后前面所描述的风险管理方法,如图1所示,将被应用到项目评估风 险管理过程可以应用于制备建筑项目的成本估计。 使用传统的确定性方法的成本估算 传统的确定性方法用于确定最可能的项目的成本。 它不处理风险在一个合乎 逻辑的和系统的方式 RMP 或 ERA。相反,一个固定的百分比应急费用添加到项目 的估计成本作为备抵的风险。 在这种情况下的项目,使用单位面积成本估算来估计市场复杂的建筑成本。 最可能的成本数据在表 1。备抵(通常是 10%)比例为突发事件包括在估计的数量 代表成本的不确定性。 成本估算结果总结在表 2 中。 建筑工程的目标值(即基本预算)是 96.6 美元每平方公尺和突发事件准备 是 9.7 美元每平方公尺。因此,总预算为建设项目为 106.3 美元每平方公尺。 估价采用风险评估(ERA)的方法 使用风险分析评估(时代)方法是一种风险管理技术,专为成本估算在设计建 设项目。根据这一方法,基本估计代表无风险的成本(即,确定性的特征,不太 可能改变)的一部分工作是准备首先使用当前的利率和价格定价的已知特性。这 是合理的最低成本数据表 1 中用于计算的基本估计构建组件。 然后进行风险识别识别重大风险可能会影响项目成本的因素。在这种情况 下, 是使用项目的清单法。 然后进行风险度量和评估来确定最大风险备抵和平均 风险限额为每一个风险因素。 作者在认证提交中,包括12个表作为附件项目。空间限制本文附带防止这些 物品。 获得的最大风险备抵和平均风险备抵,然后用来计算三种类型的估计,一个 基本估计,平均风险估计,估计和最大可能通过以下方程:(略) 在 ERA 计算提供了对建筑项目的成本三点估算。 设置目标价值和应急备抵取


决于决策者的风险态度。例如,决策者可以选择基本估计作为目标(即价值 86.1 美元每平方公尺)和平均总预算(即风险估计 113.17 美元每平方公尺)。然而,在 这种情况下,一个是现在无法实际成本的概率将超过他或她选择的价值。 成本估算使用 RMP 基本成本估计为代表的一系列估计,而不是单点估计。三角分布是用来描述 概率分布。三角分布的三个参数,即:最低,最有可能和最大值估计使用历史数据 如表 1 所示。基本成本估算表 4 所示。 风险识别过程。 所以成本估算运动而言,感兴趣的后果是成本。这些后果(即 震级,测量成本)的比例基本费用估计,从以前的项目成本数据。 项目处于可行性研究阶段,表面使用单位面积成本估算方法是用来制定建筑 成本模型用于成本估算。成本模型是由以下方程:(略) 然后进行风险评估,以决定的不确定性(即这些风险因素的发生概率)和相关 的项目成功的概率分布标准(即成本)。 概率分析然后进行使用蒙特卡洛模拟技术来估计概率分布建立组件的成本 使用模型方程3制定。这是通过使用风险分析和建模软件名为“@ risk” 。 蒙特卡罗模拟进行确定的概率分布的总建筑项目成本估算成本可行性阶段 通过使用方程3。 总共750次迭代进行的仿真结果估算成本项目总建筑成本提出了 累积概率分布如图2所示。 第5步中所获得的概率分布基础上,开发不同的场景构建组件成本为了管理 风险。 风险评估过程包括两个部分,分析和解释,并决定。 结果的分析和解释 成本估算使用 RMP 提供了一个范围的值,可能需要和成本发生的可能性范围 内的每个值。 设置目标价值和应急准备金又取决于决策者的风险态度。 决策者可以选择最 可能的值,预期值,或任何值与给定的概率不超过它(比如 10%)作为目标的价值。 类似地,可以选择总预算。 从图 2 中,开发建设项目总成本场景可以总结如表 5 所示。 应急的分配目标价值和总预算,决策者可以设置一个政策决定。 例如,一个人 可以决定的值概率为 50%(P50)和 90%(P90)不超过他们的目标价值和总预算,分 别。 在这种情况下,目标价值和总额预算分别是 120.62 美元每平方公尺和 120.62 美元每平方公尺(即的应急准备金 6 美元每平方公尺)。

风险监测和控制将在整个项目生命周期进行评审和更新风险。 从风险监测和 控制过程的结果,更新风险列表准备在步骤 2 中,回顾了在不同阶段的项目。 重复 步骤 3 到 8,直到项目完成。当项目完成后,成本信息反馈给历史成本数据,以供 将来使用。

对比传统方法和风险管理过程的方法 传统方法是一个确定性的成本估算方法,假设所有变量要么是已知或可预测 准确。 最后的单点预测成本意味着一定程度的确定性,不能反映实际的情况有很多 与该项目相关的风险和不确定性。 使用估算成本的累积概率分布曲线,使用 RMP 获得的各种设施,这些都是与 使用传统方法获得的估算成本。结果如表6所示。 它可以观察到,在这个项目的情况下,传统方法已经严重地低估了成本。 ERA 对比方法和风险管理过程的方法 最后估算成本时代提出了三分,在确定的条件。没有迹象表明这三个值的概 率有可能发生。同样,没有表明最有可能发生的可能性估计会发生。 从时代方法获得的三点估算成本与使用 RMP 检查获得的累计概率分布曲线 的概率将实现的成本估算方法使用时代。结果总结在表7。 可以观察到的基本估计和最大可能的估计是没有预算的实际应用目的,因为 基本估计,实际成本超过他们的概率是100%。 而对于最大可能的估计,超过他们的 概率非常低。同时,实际成本将超过平均的概率风险评估估计相当高。 资本预算项目的细节情况 这个案例研究将检查风险管理过程的作用和应用在资本预算,使用数据从现 有的车站(建立)一个基础设施项目。 这项研究将考虑的关键成功因素,项目结构、 工作分解结构、范围的评估和管理控制系统使用的风险管理过程(RMP)改进的评 估和控制成本。

在新加坡公共部门通信基础设施的潜力为铁路通信已经认识很多年了。 政府建立了陆路交通管理局 (LTA)1995 年 9 月 , 带头改进其土地运输系统。 1996年1月19日,政府宣布的决定建立备受期待的东北线。 铁路扩张的新的融资框 架在一份白皮书在陆地运输 ,东北线被发现在经济上可行的 ,因此批准建造比最 初预想的早些时候批准。 天蝎队是一个大众捷运(捷运)线,大约20公里,它主要将建在地下。 英国网球 协会的使命是提供高质量的、集成,和高效的世界级的陆地交通系统符合新加坡 人的需求和期望,支持经济环境目标,提供了钱的价值。 根据前面描述的风险管理过程(RMP),以下风险资本预算模型(参见图3)已经 部署。它集成了一个基础设施项目成本模型。 成本模型已经被选为这个案例研究的危险驾驶。 替代模型可以开发和集成在 其他关键成功因素相同的基本过程。RMP 过程图在图3中始于一个司机,任务,目 标和目标项目的项目公司(XYZ)。 如前所述,这些计划必须是 LTA 公司商业计划的 一部分。 任务和目标:这个项目的使命是 “为新加坡人民提供一个世界级的交通系统。 这个项目的具体目标是:“规划、开发、实施和管理的交通基础设施和政策。 ” 目的:经典,一个成功的项目的目标是完成预算和计划,而最终产品提供一个 令人满意的长期性能。这是继续开发组织、方法、和政策,最大化 XYZ 的成功。 只有成本目标被认为是在本文中在制定基于 RMP 的风险管理模型。 项目的计划建立后,下一阶段的启动成本评估过程包括风险识别、风险度量 和风险评估。 成本和进度风险识别开始于一个基地,准备当项目是第一选择 ,加上风险列 表,用于分类项目的所有可能的风险因素。 工作分解计划(WBS)然后用于确定适当的成本中心,分配这些成本中心的潜 在风险因素,然后优先风险检查表(或者影响图或石川 CE 图)为下一阶段的风险 测量。 然后风险度量模型检查表上的每个风险因素的间接成本 , 随着一系列估计 (的影响)和 WBS 的协助下,各级,定义成本关系(或独立的依赖,确保没有不良的 相关影响)生产项目总成本。 风险评估阶段确定每个风险因素的可能性或频率输入客观或主观概率分布, 然后通过蒙特卡罗模拟 ( 使用 @ risk) 确定项目成本的输出概率分布如图 4 所 示,5、6、7。

分析师将审查概率分布和项目成本分布的相关资料,并循环回风险度量阶段 修改模型的不确定性或倾向于根据需要进一步评估。 输出累积分布提供了一系列可能的成本(施工阶段),反映了所有可变成本的 总和。的参数估计是如下:(略) 现在可以与图5相比,图4显示了输出分布曲线车站 (建设)项目,在招标准备 阶段产生的成本。范围、方差和标准偏差明显不同的和更广泛,如图7所示,虽然 不是扭曲但大约正态概率分布曲线,是回顾的结果之前的招标价格类似的工作。 风险评估阶段需要项目经理评估和解释成本预测产生的风险评估和决定一 个预期成本或指示建模成本或工程结构的变化 ,导致循环的过程,直到项目成本 中包含所需的限制。 预期值的区间估计(EV)已经产生了 WBS 的车站(建筑)元素在投标阶段(见图 5和图7)。具体的数量和费率时,钢筋、桩的长度,和硬底的程度不确定和合同成 本不确定和施工阶段(见图4和图6)。总结了在这些阶段产生的值在表8。 其中,应急已经确定在90 %的概率(或置信水平) 。这个值可以通过经理根 据不同的风险厌恶情绪。 进一步评估阶段将显示天气预报范围是否进一步降低对 结束,可以减少应急和反映出不确定性的控制。 如果不能做出调整,然后修正需要对项目风险控制和监控阶段。 但是,如果经 理嫌疑人成本模型是在错误或需要改变模型参数,然后这个过程可以回收在适当 的阶段模型。 风险控制和监控阶段检查设定的目标和合同策略采用定期风险评估和观察 的结果是否会发生偏差。如果他们发生,必要的纠正措施将设计和评估模型的使 用风险评估阶段。在项目的最后,结果是评估在未来改善预测。 结果 案例项目的成本估计是在三种不同的方式进行,传统的确定性方法,方法时 代,和 RMP 使用蒙特卡洛模拟。然后从第一个两种方法获得的结果与使用 RMP 获 得。 从比较,毫无疑问,目前使用传统确定性方法的实践是不够的。成本估算的风 险管理过程,使用蒙特卡罗模拟,优越,更有利,有利的方法比传统的确定性方法 和时代。原因如下: ? 与传统的确定性方法和时代的方法,最后提出了估算成本的概率。决策者可 以因此有一个全面的成本项目的可能性。他/她可以有一个更具体的基本逻 辑,理性的,并一致决定目标价值观,突发事件是允许的,和项目的总预算。 在交通基础设施项目,RMP 已经应用于制定风险管理模型在招标阶段,协助

完善了资本预算需求,并确定了风险过程中需要不断地审查建设项目生命周期的 阶段。 通过评估所有风险的每个工作包在一起,总的结果是评估提供一个风险池或 应急费用,涵盖了所有可能的风险。RMP 将继续回收整个项目生命和被用来评估 资本预算年度间隔的一半。 不过估计范围如图4所示是可实现的,所有的期望都最 终成本将在规定范围内。 需要在建设项目风险管理中的应用,尤其是在石油和天然气等大型项目 ,和 基础设施项目,是显而易见的。这里有一些发现与传统的确定性方法自然地直接 向风险管理的应用是必须的。 数字任意比例到达,不适合特定的项目。 ? ? 有一种倾向,将双计算风险,因为有些估计倾向于包括突发事件的最佳估计。 添加比例仍然结果在一个图的预测估计最终成本,意味着一定程度的确定性, 这是不合理的。 ? ? 它只反映了潜在的下行风险,不强调任何潜在的降低成本。 最后,它需要直接的注意力从时间和性能或质量和安全风险。 同时,作为一个项目从可行性阶段进展到施工阶段 ,许多的风险成为已知或 消除。津贴为这些已知或消除风险应该适当调整,以便更多的浓度可以穿上未解 决的风险。 撇开传统确定性方法是不合逻辑的,无效的,成本和反动。 这种方法是不够的, 因为风险管理流程(RMP)提供了一个逻辑一致的框架。需要使用 RMP 资本预算/ 成本估算在任何规模的项目在建筑业是明显的。


[1] @RISK: Risk Analysis and Simulation Add-In for Microsoft Excel, Release 3.5 User's Guide, Palisade Corporation, New York, (1997) [2] Al-Bahar, Jamal F. and Keith C. Crandle(1990). Systematic Risk Management Approach for Construction Project. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE. Vol.116, No.3, (Sept,1990): 533-546. [3] Cooper, D. F. and C.B. Chapman Risk Analysis for Large Projects-Models, Methods and Cases, John Wiley & Son, Chichester, (1987): pp 150-171 [4] Flanagan, R. and S. Stevens. Risk Analysis, Quantity Surveying Techniques: New

Directions, BSP Professional Books, Oxford, (1990): 121-138. [5] Hertz, D.B. and H. Thomas. Risk Analysis and Its Applications, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, (1984): 1- 3. [6] Khoon, Quak Ser. Marketing Abroad: Competitive strategies and Market Niches for the Singapore Construction Industry. Singapore: Pacific Trade Press (1991): 22-24. [7] Mustafa, Mohammad A., and Jamal F.Al Bahar. Project Risk Assessment Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 38,No.1, (1991): 46-52. [8] Tummala, V.M. Rao, and John F.Burchet Applying a Risk Management Process (RMP) to Manage Cost Risk for an EHV Transmission Line Project. International Journal of Project Management, 17, No.4, (Aug. 1999). [9] Tummala V.M. Rao, M.N. Nkasu and K.B. Chuah. A Systematic Approach to Project Risk Management, Mathematical Modeling and Scientific Computing. 4, (1994)


Managing Risks of Large Scale Construction Projects

Dr. Prasanta Dey ABSTRACT: The main purpose of this article is to develop an integrated framework for managing risks of large-scale construction projects. Conventional project risk management frameworks emphasize managing business risks and often ignore operational risks. There are instances of project failure because of operational risks (e.g. , failure of project leadership , contractors' and suppliers' incapability , technical complexities etc), A hierarchical approach deals with such shortcomings by analyzing risks in different levels (e.g., project, work package and activity). It helps identify the least risky project alternative through project level risk analysis and subsequent work package and activity level risk analysis to help identify both business and operational risks. The proposed framework has been applied to a 17000 km long oil pipeline construction project in India in order to demonstrate one effective example of its use. KEY WORDS: Analytic hierarchy process, construction, pipeline projects, and risk management


Although today's organizations appreciate the benefits of managing risks in construction projects, formal risk analysis and management techniques are rarely used because of a lack of knowledge and doubts on the suitability of these techniques for construction industry activities [1]. Managing risks is one of the most important tasks for the construction industry as it affects project outcomes. Today's project managers believe that a conventional approach to project management is not sufficient, as it does not enable the project management team to establish an adequate relationship among all phases of the project, to forecast project achievement for building confidence of the project team, to make decisions objectively with the help of an available database, to provide adequate information for effective project management and to establish close cooperation among project team members. The current literature on construction risk management consists of empirical researches on risk management practices of the construction industry and conceptual frameworks of risk management using various tools and techniques. The Project Management Body of Knowledge, (PMBoK) introduces a six step method of risk management [5], although, these steps are very generic and act as a guideline for managing the risk of projects, they fail to provide a risk management framework for a specific project. The conventional project risk management approaches in the project feasibility stage emphasize on managing business risks and often ignore operational risks. However, there are instances of project failures because of operational risks such as technical complexities, contractors' and suppliers' incapability, government red tape etc, which remain unidentified until they occur. Prasanta Dey reported time overrun because of implementation issues of a river crossing section for cross-country oil pipelines in the eastern part of India [2], S.O. Ogunlana and others reported cost overrun in high rise building projects in Thailand because of contractor's failure [4], Social and environmental issues caused prolonged postponement of the Chand-Cameroon oil pipelines [3], Several projects in the Vietnam oil industry were delayed because of government approval [7]. Risk management approaches in the feasibility stage , although helping to mitigate business risks (external in nature), however fail to identify operational risks. Although they are valuable to identify' the least risky project, but fail to provide a framework for managing every risk across various levels of the project.

The integrated hierarchical approach to risk management not only combines the risk management processes (identification, analysis and development of responses) in an analytical framework, but also integrates the risk management processes in every level of the projects that helps identifying all the possible risks in the early planning phase of the project enabling the project team to make decisions on their responses. The objective of this study is to develop a framework for managing the risk of large construction projects using an integrated hierarchical framework with the active involvement of the concerned stakeholders. There are two approaches to construction risk management—project level risk analysis and work package level risk analysis, which are carried out during the feasibility analysis and implementation phases respectively. Both the approaches have limitations. The project level risk analysis reveals mostly the business risks, which are external in nature covering market, economical and political factors. Although it helps identify the least risky project, it fails to identify' operational risk factors. On the other hand work package level risk analysis reveals operational issues, which in many cases are too late to address and the responses are constrained by the business risks. Moreover, the current literatures demonstrate applications of various tools and techniques in managing project risk, but none of the research reports risk analysis across various levels, which help identify the least risky project alternative, critical work packages and activities along with the associated risks during the early project phase. Therefore, the contemporary approaches to risk analysis lack establishing an integrated risk management framework covering every level of the project, which helps to manage the project effectively. This study is for bridging this gap. Proposed Risk Management Framework The proposed risk management framework has the following steps: ? ? ? ? ? ? Identifying the alternative projects, Analyzing project level risks and selecting the least risky project, Developing the work breakdown structure of the selected project, Analyzing work package level risks, Developing risk responses, Analyzing activity level risks. And,


Developing risk responses. This study uses the analytic hierarchy process for analyzing risks in the project,

work package and activity levels [6].

Application The proposed framework has heen applied to a newly conceived cross-country oil pipeline transportation project in the Western part of India. A typical oil pipeline project consists of laying oil pipelines, constructing pumping and delivery stations, constructing tank farms , constructing communication and a catholic protection infrastructure. A risk management group consisting of nine executives with more than 15 years of project experience was formed. They performed the following steps to analyze risk of the project under study.


Step 1: Identifying the alternative projects

In the oil pipeline industry , alternative projects are identified through feasible routes. The geological information system helped identify a few alternative feasible routes. Step 2: Analyzing project level risks and selecting the least risky project The risk management group in a brainstorming session first identified project level risks. They were market , financial , economical , environmental , technological and political risks. A few sub factors were also identified against each factor. The likelihood of the risks were then derived using the analytic hierarchy process (first, the likelihood of risk factors and sub factors were determined through pair wise comparison at each level using the verbal sealer [6]. Second, the likelihood of failure of each alternative with respect to each risk sub factor was determined by pair wise comparison and subsequently, the results were synthesized across the hierarchy to determine the overall risk of each work package). Step 3: Developing the work breakdown structure of selected project The entire project had been hierarchically classified to form a work breakdown structure (WBS). Figure 2 shows the WBS of the project under study. Step 4: Analyzing work package level risks The risk management group decided to analyze only pipeline laying, station construction and the tank farm work package risk after a short brainstorming session. They identified various technical, organization and environmental risks. Risks related to selection of appropriate technology, site selection, implementation methodology selection, information and communication technology selection, and operational risk were identified under technical risk, Similarly, risk created by project team, operating team, consultant, contractors, suppliers and communication framework were considered as organizational risk and environmental damages during implementation and operations, negative impact on society during implementation and operations and statutory clearance for implementation and operations were identified as environmental risk. Figure 3 shows the work package level risk analysis in an AHP framework. First, the likelihood of the risks was derived by pair wise comparison in factor and sub factor levels using the verbal scale, Second, the likelihood of failure of each package with respect to each sub factor was derived through pair wise using same verbal scale. Finally, the results were synthesized to determine the overall risk of the work package.

The analysis revealed that the pipeline stretches had the highest risk followed by tank farm and stations. Technical and environmental risks were more likely to happen compared to organizational risk, hi the sub factor level, risk related to implementation method selection, environmental damages and negative impact on society were most likely. Step 5: Developing risk responses in work package level The group decided to take the following responses to mitigate work package level risks. They were selection of quality contractors for each work package, selection of appropriate implementation methodology for every pipeline section, appropriate environmental impact assessment and social impact assessment of pipelines package and dynamic operational risk analysis of stations package. Step 6: Analyzing activity level risk The risk management group decided to further analyze risk of pipeline work package by classifying it to four stretches. They identified four major risks in this level. They include the following. ? design risk —(design quality and communication framework); ? procurement risk (procurement method , quality consultants , contractors and suppliers, and communication framework); ? Implementation risk (specification, organization, natural hazards, environmental and social impact, and communication framework); and. ? Operations risk (throughput, inspection, maintenance, environmental and social impact and communication framework). Subsequently, they derived the riskiness of each factor and sub factor and calculated the likelihood of failure of each pipeline stretch using the AHP framework (as demonstrated in step 2 and 4). Figure 4 shows the risk structure for activity level risk analysis. The analysis revealed that implementation risk was most likely followed by procurement risk and pipeline stretch 3 is the most vulnerable. As pipeline stretch 3 was routed through the most difficult terrain, it was likely to experience risks in relation to procurement method selection and possible poor performance of consultants, contractors and suppliers. Additionally, this stretch was vulnerable from poor implementation method specification and organizational issues for implementation. Pipeline stretch 1 was vulnerable from environmental and social impact as it mostly traversed through normal terrain. The pipeline stretch 4 was exposed to mainly

operational risk as it was connected to an offshore terminal.

Step 7: Developing risk responses in activity level The risk management group through brainstorming developed the following responses (see table 1) for each stretch. Construction projects often fail because of wrong technology selection, poor environmental management plan, political red tape, poor design specification, wrong implementation methods, poor performance of contractors, and lack of maintaining materials delivery schedule by the suppliers along with many other reasons. The causes of failure could be classified into business risks (external) and operational risks (internal). Unless they are addressed in the early project-planning phase and adequate responses are planned and implemented, projects inevitably fail to achieve their objectives. In the conventional approaches to project appraisal and planning, quite often only business risks are addressed in order to justify the investment. Therefore, as the projects progress with added learning, there is need for additional resources and knowledge in order to accomplish project outcomes as planned, which

become impossible in many cases. Analyzing project risks hierarchically helps prioritize activities, which are vulnerable for not achieving time, cost and quality. Thereby it helps achieving successful completion of the work packages and in turn projects. Additionally, it helps identifying risk in each level (project, work package and activity). Analysis of project level risk helps identify the least risky project alternative and calls for additional planning for mitigating the risks that are present in the selected project option. Work package level risk analysis firstly, identifies the risky work packages and prioritizes work packages on the basis of risk vulnerability for additional planning. Second, it analyzes risk factors associated with each work package and derives the mitigating measures for each risky work package. Activity level risk analysis on one hand identifies the risky activities within the risky work packages and on the other hand, identifies risk factors, analyzes them and derives responses. Risk analysis using a hierarchical approach not only justifies additional planning and resource requirement at the early project phase, but also helps achieving project schedule, budget and specification. This study reveals that the project level is affected by external risks, work package level is affected by both external and internal risks and activity level is affected by internal risks. The proposed risk management framework using the analytic hierarchy process helps project executives to make decisions dynamically during the project planning phase with the involvement of the project stakeholders. This provides an effective monitoring and control mechanism of projects across various levels of| management of the organization. The proposed framework uses Expert Choice to analyze the decision situation. Additionally , the sensitivity utility of AHP provides an opportunity to the risk management group to observe the nature of the model outcome in different alternative decision situations.


[1]. Akintoye, A.S. and M.J. Macleod, Risk Analysis and Management in Construction, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 15, No.1, (1997): 31-38. [2]. Dey, P.K., Decision Support System for Risk Management: a Case Study, Management Decision, Vol. 39 No. 8.(2001): 634-648. [3]. Ndumbe , J.A. , the Chad-Cameroon Oil Pipeline —Hope for Poverty Reduction. Mediterranean Quarterly, 13 (4), (2002): pp. 74-87 [4]. Ogunlana, SO, H. Promkuntong, V.Jearkjirn, Construction Delays in a Fast Crowing Economy: Comparing Thailand with Other Economies, International Journal of Project Management, 1996. [5]. PMBOK, A Guide to Project Management Body of Knowledge, Project Management Institute, US, 2004. [6]. Saaty, T. L, The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, US, 1980. [7]. Thuyet, N.V , S.O. Ogunlana, and P.K. Dey, Risk Management in Oil and Cas Construction Projects in Vietnam, International Journal of Energy Sector Management, Vol. 1,3, 2007.


Dr. Prasanta Dey 摘要:本文的主要目的是开发用于管理大型建设项目风险的综合框架。传统的项 目风险管理框架强调了管理业务风险,往往忽略了经营风险。有因为经营风险的 项目失败的实例(例如,项目领导的失败,承包商和供应商的无能,技术复杂性 等) ,分层的方法处理这些缺点,通过分析在不同的风险水平(例如,项目,工 作包和活动) 。它有助于通过项目层面的风险分析和随后的工作方案和活动水平 的风险分析, 以帮助替代确定业务和经营风险识别风险最小的项目。建议的架构 已应用于印度的一个 17000 公里长的石油管道建设项目, 以证明其使用的一个有 效的例子。 关键词:层次分析法,建筑,管道工程和风险管理 虽然今天的企业在管理建设项目, 正式的风险分析和管理技术风险的好处很 少使用,由于缺乏知识和怀疑这些技术是否适合建筑业活动[1]。 管理风险,是为建造业最重要的任务之一,因为它影响到项目成果。今天的 项目经理认为, 传统的项目管理方法是不够的,因为它不会使项目管理团队建立 项目各个阶段之间的适当关系, 来预测项目成果建设项目团队的信心,在客观地 决定用一个可用数据库的帮助下,以提供足够的信息进行有效的项目管理,建立 项目中的团队成员紧密合作关系。 现有文献上建设风险管理包括对建造业的使用各种工具和技术风险管理方 法和风险管理的理论框架实证研究的。项目管理知识体系(PMBOK)引入风险管 理的六步方法[5],虽然这些步骤是非常通用的,并作为一个准则来管理项目的 风险,但是他们无法提供一个风险管理框架去管理一个具体的项目。 传统的项目风险管理方法在项目可行性研究阶段着重于管理业务风险, 往往 忽略了经营风险。不过,也有项目失败是因为经营风险,如技术复杂,承包商和 供应商的无能,政府的各类审批等等,直到他们发生的仍然不明的情况。 Prasanta Dey 报告称,由于对跨国输油管道在印度东部的一条河流穿越段 的执行问题时超支,S.O. Ogunlana 等人报道,由于承包商的失败,社会和环境 问题成本超支在泰国的高层建筑项目引起了昌德 - 喀麦隆输油管道长时间推 迟,有几个项目在越南的石油工业被推迟是因为政府审批复杂。 风险管理方法在可行性研究阶段,虽然有助于降低业务风险(外部性的) , 但不能识别经营风险。虽然他们是有价值的,以确定风险最小的项目,但无法提

供跨不同级别项目的每一个管理风险的框架。 集成的分层风险管理方法不仅结合了一个分析框架的风险管理流程(识别, 分析和响应的发展) ,而且可以帮助识别在所有可能的风险项目的每一个层面整 合的风险管理流程该项目使项目团队对他们的反应做出决定的早期规划阶段。 本研究的目的是开发用于管理使用集成的分层架构与利益相关者的积极参 与大型建设项目的风险的框架。 有两种方法来建造风险管理,项目层面的风险分析和工作包层次的风险分 析,这是在可行性分析和实施阶段中分别进行。这两种方法都有局限性。 该项目层面的风险分析显示大部分的经营风险,这是外部性质,涵盖市场, 经济和政治因素。 虽然它可帮助识别风险最小的项目,它无法识别的运作风险因 素。 在另一方面工作包层次的风险分析发现业务问题, 在许多情况下都来不及处 理和响应由业务风险的制约问题。此外,目前的文献资料证明的各种工具和管理 项目风险技术的应用, 但没有在各个层次的研究报告风险分析,从而帮助识别风 险最小的项目替代,关键的工作包和活动,以及相关的风险中项目的早期阶段。 因此,现在的方法,以风险分析乏建立综合风险管理框架,涵盖的项目,这 有助于有效地管理项目的每一个层面。这项研究是为弥合这一差距。 提出了风险管理框架 建议的风险管理框架有以下几个步骤: ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 确定备选项目, 分析项目层面的风险,选择风险最小的项目, 发展中所选项目的工作分解结构, 分析工作包层面的风险, 制定风险应对措施, 分析活动水平的风险, 制定风险应对。 他的研究采用层次分析法,分析了该项目,工作包和活动水平的风险。

建议的架构已应用于在印度的西部一家新建的跨国石油管道运输项目。 一个 典型的石油管道项目包括铺设石油管道,建设泵站和输送站,建造油库,建设通 信和阴极保护基础设施。成立由 9 名高管拥有超过 15 年的项目经验了风险管理 小组。它们执行的以下步骤在研究以分析项目的风险。 步骤 1:确定备选项目 在石油管道行业,备选项目通过可行的途径确定。地质信息系统,帮助确定


了几个可行备选路线。 步骤 2:分析项目层面的风险,选择风险最小的项目 风险管理小组在一个头脑风暴会议首次发现项目风险水平。他们是市场、金 融、经济、环境、技术和政治风险。这样几个子过程也对每个因素确定。风险的 可能性使用层次分析法(第一,这样的可能性风险因素和子过程是通过一对使用 口头希尔来比较每一层风险。 其次,失败的可能性替代对每个风险的次级因素是 个明智的比较。随后,结果合成整个层次结构来确定每个工作包的整体风险)。 步骤 3:选定开发项目的工作分解结构 整个项目已经分级分类,形成一个工作分解结构(WBS) 。图 2 示出了所研 究的项目的 WBS。 步骤 4:分析工作包层面的风险 风险管理组决定只分析管道铺设, 车站建设和罐区工作包的风险很短的头脑 风暴会议之后。他们确定了不同的技术,组织和环境风险。 涉及到选择合适的技术,选址,实施方法选取,信息和通信技术的选择和操 作风险的风险已根据技术风险识别,同样,由项目团队,运营团队,顾问,承包 商, 供应商和通信框架创建风险实施和运营,并为实施和被认定为环境风险业务 的法定间隙期间对社会的负面影响时被视为组织风险和环境损害。 图 3 显示了工作包级别风险分析层次分析法的框架。 首先, 推导的风险的可 能性对智慧比较使用口头规模因素和次级因素水平。其次,每个工作包的失败的 可能性对每个次级因素得出通过使用明显的相同词汇。最后,结果综合确定工作 包的整体风险。 通过分析发现,该管道的延伸为最高风险,其次为罐区和车站。技术和环境 风险是可能发生的相比, 组织风险, 高科技的子因素水平, 风险与实施方法选取, 环境破坏和对社会的负面影响是最有可能。 步骤 5:在工作包一级建立风险应对 该集团决定采取以下对策, 以减轻工作包层面的风险。他们是选用优质承建 商承接每个工作包, 选择合适的实施方法为每个管道部分,适当的环境影响评估 和管道包和工作站包的动态操作风险分析的社会影响评估。 步骤 6:分析活动水平的风险 风险管理组决定进一步分析管道工作包的风险分类四个延伸。 他们确定了四 个主要的风险水平。他们包括以下。 ? ? ? 设计风险——(设计质量和通信框架); 采购风险(采购方法,质量顾问、承包商和供应商,和通信框架); 实现风险(规范、组织、自然灾害、环境和社会的影响,以及通信框架);


操作风险(吞吐量、检验、维修、环境和社会影响和通信框架)。 随后,他们得出各因素和子因素的风险度和计算使用 AHP 框架(这表现在

步骤 2 和 4) ,每个管道伸展失效的可能性。图 4 显示了风险结构活性水平的风 险分析。 通过分析发现, 最有可能是其次的采购风险实施风险和管道拉伸 3 是最 脆弱的。 管道拉伸 3 到最困难的地形, 它可能经验风险与采购方法选择和可能表现不 佳的顾问、承包商和供应商。此外,这段是脆弱的贫乏实现方法规范和组织实施 问题。 管道拉伸 1 是脆弱的环境和社会影响,因为它主要是通过正常的地形遍历。 管道延伸 4 主要是操作风险暴露的是连接到一个离岸终端。 步骤 7:在活动水平中发展风险反应 风险管理小组通过头脑风暴开发以下每个伸展反应 因为错误的技术选择,恶劣的环境管理计划,政治上的制约因素,设计规范 差,错的实施方法,承建商表现欠佳,以及缺乏维护材料的交付时间表的供应商 以及许多其他原因,导致建设项目经常失败。 失败的原因可分为商业风险(外部)和操作风险(内部) 。除非他们解决在 项目初期规划阶段, 并进行策划和实施适当的对策,项目必然无法实现自己的目 标。 在传统的项目评估和规划方法,经常只为了证明解决商业风险投资。因此, 作为项目进度添加学习, 是需要额外的资源和知识为了按计划完成项目成果,在 许多情况下,这成为不可能。 分析项目风险分层优先考虑的活动,这弱势是难以同时实现时间,成本和质 量的成果。从而帮助完成的工作包,又成功完成项目。此外,它有助于识别各层 次风险(项目,工作包和活动) 。 项目级风险分析有助于确定减轻所选定的项目中选择目前的风险增加规划 风险最小的项目选择和调用。 工作包级别的风险分析,确定高风险的工作包和优 先考虑的工作包的风险漏洞的基础上额外的计划。 第二,它与每个工作包关联分析风险因素,每个风险的缓解措施工作包。活 动水平风险分析一方面识别高风险的工作包内的高风险活动, 另一方面,识别风 险因素,分析并获取响应。 风险分析使用分层方法不仅证明额外的规划和资源需 求在项目早期阶段,但也有助于实现项目进度、预算和规范。这项研究揭示了项 目层面受到外部风险, 工作包级别是受到外部和内部风险和内部风险活动水平的 影响。 使用层次分析法提出了风险管理框架可以帮助项目经理在项目计划阶段动

态决策与项目涉众的参与效果。 这提供了一个有效的监测和控制机制的项目在各 级管理组织实现。拟议的框架使用专家选择分析决定的情况。此外,层次分析法 的灵敏度效用风险管理集团提供了一个机会, 观察在不同的替代模型结果的性质 决定的情况。


[1]. Akintoye, A.S. and M.J. Macleod, Risk Analysis and Management in Construction, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 15, No.1,(1997): 31-38. [2]. Dey, P.K., Decision Support System for Risk Management: a Case Study, Management Decision, Vol. 39 No. 8.(2001): 634-648. [3]. Ndumbe , J.A. , the Chad-Cameroon Oil Pipeline —Hope for Poverty Reduction. Mediterranean Quarterly, 13 (4), (2002): pp. 74-87 [4]. Ogunlana, SO, H. Promkuntong, V.Jearkjirn, Construction Delays in a Fast Crowing Economy: Comparing Thailand With Other Economies, International Journal of Project Management, 1996. [5]. PMBOK, A Guide to Project Management Body of Knowledge, Project Management Institute, US, 2004. [6]. Saaty, T. L, the Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, US, 1980. [7]. Thuyet, N.V , S.O. Ogunlana, and P.K. Dey, Risk Management in Oil and Cas Construction Projects in Vietnam, International Journal of Energy Sector Management, Vol. 1,3, 2007.




外文翻译要求 - 外文翻译要求 毕业设计(论文)外文文献翻译要求 根据《普通高等


外文翻译 - 毕业论文外文资料翻译 学院: 文学院 专业班级: 汉语言文学涉外文


外文翻译规范要求及模版格式 - (二)外文翻译 每位学生必须阅读 2 篇以上(10000 字符左右)的外文材料, 应完成 5000 汉字以上 的英译汉翻译。加“外文翻译”封面...


共享经济外文翻译文献编辑 - 文献信息: 文献标题:Putting the sh


外文翻译要求and格式 - 外文文献翻译要求 根据《普通高等学校本科毕业设计(论


外文翻译 - 外文资料翻译 题目:弹性联轴器在燃气轮机中的应用 院(系) 专班姓


外文翻译 - 西南交通大学本科毕业论文(外文翻译) 利用混合整数线性规划求解固定


快速外文文献翻译方法 - 1. 宗旨:简单.实用.快速 在科研过程中阅读翻译外文文献是一个非常重要的环节, 许多领域高水平的 文献都是外文文献,借鉴一些外文文献翻译...


机械专业外文翻译(中英文翻译) - 第1页 外文翻译 英文原文 Belt Con


外文翻译格式要求2016 - 南京理工大学 毕业设计(论文)外文资料翻译 教学点


本科毕业论文外文翻译外文译文题目 (中文) : 营运能力比率分析 学专学 院:


计算机外文翻译 - 中原工学院信息商务学院毕业设计(论文)译文专用纸 第1 页

毕业设计 外文翻译模板.doc

毕业设计 外文翻译模板_英语学习_外语学习_教育专区。毕业设计 外文翻译模板 大连理工大学 大连理工大学本科外文翻译 外文的中文题目 外文的中文题目 The title of ...


高速铁路外文翻译 - Overvoltage research status M


外文翻译范例 - 毕业设计/论文 外文文献翻译 院专姓 系业班级名 经济管理学院


外文翻译模板_IT/计算机_专业资料。杭州电子科技大学 毕业论文外文文献翻译要求


外文文献翻译,好的外文文献这里找_专业资料。好的网址 要写毕业论文了,要外文文献翻译,好的外文...


超详细外文翻译模板及写法 - XX学院毕业论文(设计)外文翻译撰写格式规范 学院毕业论文(设计) 学院毕业论文 一、外文翻译形式要求 外文翻译形式要求 1、要求本科生...


外文文献查找方法及翻译要求 - 文献查找: 根据自己课题到知网或类似的数据库网站查找, 有相关英文文章可以进行下载之后翻译。 如 果不能下载, 网站的中英文摘要...


(范例)外文翻译格式 - 本科毕业设计(论文) 本科毕业设计(论文)外文翻译译文

网站首页 | 网站地图
All rights reserved Powered by 学霸学习网
copyright ©right 2010-2021。