YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    How Reliable Is the Total Cost or Modified Total Cost Method?

    Source: Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice:;2007:;Volume ( 133 ):;issue: 001
    Author:
    H. Randolph Thomas
    ,
    Robert C. Volkman
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2007)133:1(74)
    Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
    Abstract: The total cost or modified total cost method is the most common contractor used method of quantifying contract damages, probably because of its simplicity. But the judiciary has placed limits on its use. In theory, before it can be used by a contractor in a court of law, the contractor must show that (1) all the damages were the result of actions by the owner; (2) the project was sufficiently complex that there is no other way to satisfactorily quantify the damages; (3) the contractor’s bid is correct; and (4) the costs are reasonable. This note focuses only on the correctness of the contractor’s bid. The writers recently completed a benchmarking study of union interior system (framing and drywall) specialty contractors. The study relied on the use of a reference project and an accompanying shopping list of 10 commonly constructed items. In theory, all contractors were developing a bid on the same thing. The study was distributed nationally. Based on an analysis of 57 responses (and subsequently cleansed to 42 responses) the range of workhours to construct the shopping list was 1,247–2,500 with an average of 1,805. There is a twofold increase from the low bid to the high bid. There are also significant differences between regions that are in close proximity to one another, for example, northern and southern California and San Diego, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, Chicago and St. Louis. The range in the total database is 1,253, which is a surprisingly large amount. The standard deviation in some regions of the United States was as large as the standard deviation of the total database. Based on these results, it is concluded that a contractor could make a sizable mistake in his/her bid and still be within the range of “correct” estimates. Almost any bid could be argued as correct. This hardly seems to be a reasonable standard of proof.
    • Download: (64.79Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Statistics

      How Reliable Is the Total Cost or Modified Total Cost Method?

    URI
    https://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/47843
    Collections
    • Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice

    Show full item record

    contributor authorH. Randolph Thomas
    contributor authorRobert C. Volkman
    date accessioned2017-05-08T21:20:46Z
    date available2017-05-08T21:20:46Z
    date copyrightJanuary 2007
    date issued2007
    identifier other%28asce%291052-3928%282007%29133%3A1%2874%29.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/47843
    description abstractThe total cost or modified total cost method is the most common contractor used method of quantifying contract damages, probably because of its simplicity. But the judiciary has placed limits on its use. In theory, before it can be used by a contractor in a court of law, the contractor must show that (1) all the damages were the result of actions by the owner; (2) the project was sufficiently complex that there is no other way to satisfactorily quantify the damages; (3) the contractor’s bid is correct; and (4) the costs are reasonable. This note focuses only on the correctness of the contractor’s bid. The writers recently completed a benchmarking study of union interior system (framing and drywall) specialty contractors. The study relied on the use of a reference project and an accompanying shopping list of 10 commonly constructed items. In theory, all contractors were developing a bid on the same thing. The study was distributed nationally. Based on an analysis of 57 responses (and subsequently cleansed to 42 responses) the range of workhours to construct the shopping list was 1,247–2,500 with an average of 1,805. There is a twofold increase from the low bid to the high bid. There are also significant differences between regions that are in close proximity to one another, for example, northern and southern California and San Diego, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, Chicago and St. Louis. The range in the total database is 1,253, which is a surprisingly large amount. The standard deviation in some regions of the United States was as large as the standard deviation of the total database. Based on these results, it is concluded that a contractor could make a sizable mistake in his/her bid and still be within the range of “correct” estimates. Almost any bid could be argued as correct. This hardly seems to be a reasonable standard of proof.
    publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
    titleHow Reliable Is the Total Cost or Modified Total Cost Method?
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume133
    journal issue1
    journal titleJournal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2007)133:1(74)
    treeJournal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice:;2007:;Volume ( 133 ):;issue: 001
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian