Abstracts – Browse Results

Search or browse again.

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 12 results ...

Anastasopoulos, P C, Labi, S, Bhargava, A, Bordat, C and Mannering, F L (2010) Frequency of Change Orders in Highway Construction Using Alternate Count-Data Modeling Methods. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 886–93.

El Asmar, M, Lotfallah, W, Whited, G and Hanna, A S (2010) Quantitative Methods for Design-Build Team Selection. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 904–12.

Ji, S, Park, M and Lee, H (2010) Data Preprocessing–Based Parametric Cost Model for Building Projects: Case Studies of Korean Construction Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 844–53.

Kent, D C and Becerik-Gerber, B (2010) Understanding Construction Industry Experience and Attitudes toward Integrated Project Delivery. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 815–25.

Kim, B and Reinschmidt, K F (2010) Probabilistic Forecasting of Project Duration Using Kalman Filter and the Earned Value Method. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 834–43.

Korkmaz, S, Riley, D and Horman, M (2010) Piloting Evaluation Metrics for Sustainable High-Performance Building Project Delivery. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 877–85.

Lai, A W Y and Pang, P S M (2010) Measuring Performance for Building Maintenance Providers. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 864–76.

Mostafavi, A and Karamouz, M (2010) Selecting Appropriate Project Delivery System: Fuzzy Approach with Risk Analysis. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 923–30.

Nguyen, L D and Ibbs, W (2010)  Case Law and Variations in Cumulative Impact Productivity Claims. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 826–33.

Xu, Y, Chan, A P C and Yeung, J F Y (2010) Developing a Fuzzy Risk Allocation Model for PPP Projects in China. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 894–903.

Zheng, S and Tiong, R L K (2010) First Public-Private-Partnership Application in Taiwan’s Wastewater Treatment Sector: Case Study of the Nanzih BOT Wastewater Treatment Project. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 913–22.

Zou, P X W, Chen, Y and Chan, T (2010) Understanding and Improving Your Risk Management Capability: Assessment Model for Construction Organizations. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 854–63.

  • Type: Journal Article
  • Keywords: Risk management; Construction management; Construction companies; Risk management; Maturity assessment models; Capability; Construction project; Construction organization; Maturity level;
  • ISBN/ISSN: 0733-9364
  • URL: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000175
  • Abstract:
    Implementing risk management in construction projects and organizations may bring a number of benefits and therefore it is necessary to have risk management as an integral part of a construction organization’s management practice. The aim of this paper is to develop a risk management maturity assessment model for construction organizations. The paper describes the development process of a Web-based RM3 (risk management maturity model), including its contents, its validation and testing, as well as its applications. The RM3 developed has five attributes namely, management, risk culture, ability to identify risk, ability to analyze risk, and application of standardized risk management process/system. These attributes are measured against four levels: initial, repeated, managed, and optimized. It is found that the proposed RM3 was suitable and useful. Using the RM3, it is found that the Australian construction industry’s overall risk management maturity level was relatively low (where 32% rated at Level 2 and 52% rated at Level 3). Furthermore, it is found that the weakest attribute was “analyzing risks” followed by “application of standardized risk management process.” It is therefore necessary to provide more training on qualitative and quantitative risk analysis to construction personnel and to develop and apply standardized enterprise risk management. It is concluded that the proposed RM3 is suitable for construction organizations to assess their risk management maturity levels and find ways for improvement.