Result: Modification of Advanced Programmatic Risk Analysis and Management Model for the Whole Project Life Cycle's Risks
Faculty of Engineering, The Univ. of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran, Islamic Republic of
School of Urban Development, Queensland Univ. of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
CC BY 4.0
Sauf mention contraire ci-dessus, le contenu de cette notice bibliographique peut être utilisé dans le cadre d’une licence CC BY 4.0 Inist-CNRS / Unless otherwise stated above, the content of this bibliographic record may be used under a CC BY 4.0 licence by Inist-CNRS / A menos que se haya señalado antes, el contenido de este registro bibliográfico puede ser utilizado al amparo de una licencia CC BY 4.0 Inist-CNRS
Further Information
The advanced programmatic risk analysis and management model (APRAM) is one of the recently developed methods that can be used for risk analysis and management purposes considering schedule, cost, and quality risks simultaneously. However, this model considers those failure risks that occur only over the design and construction phases of a project's life cycle. While it can be sufficient for some projects for which the required cost during the operating life is much less than the budget required over the construction period, it should be modified in relation to infrastructure projects because the associated costs during the operating life cycle are significant. In this paper, a modified APRAM is proposed, which can consider potential risks that might occur over the entire life cycle of the project, including technical and managerial failure risks. Therefore, the modified model can be used as an efficient decision-support tool for construction managers in the housing industry in which various alternatives might be technically available. The modified method is demonstrated by using a real building project, and this demonstration shows that it can be employed efficiently by construction managers. The Delphi method was applied in order to figure out the failure events and their associated probabilities. The results show that although the initial cost of a cold-formed steel structural system is higher than a conventional construction system, the former's failure cost is much lower than the latter's. I.