Revisiting reliability of estimates at completion for department of defense contracts

IF 1.6 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Deborah B. Kim, E. White, J. Ritschel, Chad A. Millette
{"title":"Revisiting reliability of estimates at completion for department of defense contracts","authors":"Deborah B. Kim, E. White, J. Ritschel, Chad A. Millette","doi":"10.1108/JOPP-02-2018-0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nWithin earned value management, the cost performance index (CPI) and the critical ratio (CR) are used to generate the estimates at completion (EACs). According to the research in the 1990s, estimating the final contract’s cost at completion (CAC) using EACCR is a quicker predictor of the actual final cost versus using EACCPI. This paper aims to investigate whether this trend stills holds for modern department of defense contracts.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nAccessing the Cost Assessment Data Enterprise (CADE) database, 451 contracts consisting of 863 contract line item numbers (CLINs) were initially retrieved and analyzed in three stages. The first replicated the work conducted in 1990s. The second stage entailed calculating 95 per cent confidence intervals and hypothesis tests regarding percentage accuracy of EACs for a contract’s final CAC. Lastly, regression analysis was conducted to characterize major, moderate and minor influencers on EAC reliability.\n\n\nFindings\nFor modern contracts, EACCR aligns more with EACCPI and no longer demonstrates early accuracy of a contract’s final CAC. Contract percentage completion strongly reduced the per cent error of estimating CAC, while cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts and those with no work breakdown structure greater than Level 2 negatively affected accuracy.\n\n\nSocial implications\nTo militate against optimism of early assessment of a contract's true cost.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis paper provides empirical evidence that EACCR behaves more like EACCPI with respect to modern contracts, suggesting that today’s contracts have relatively high SPI. Therefore, caution is warranted for program managers when estimating the CAC from contract initiation up to and slightly beyond the mid-point of completion.\n","PeriodicalId":45136,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Procurement","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/JOPP-02-2018-0006","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Procurement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JOPP-02-2018-0006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Purpose Within earned value management, the cost performance index (CPI) and the critical ratio (CR) are used to generate the estimates at completion (EACs). According to the research in the 1990s, estimating the final contract’s cost at completion (CAC) using EACCR is a quicker predictor of the actual final cost versus using EACCPI. This paper aims to investigate whether this trend stills holds for modern department of defense contracts. Design/methodology/approach Accessing the Cost Assessment Data Enterprise (CADE) database, 451 contracts consisting of 863 contract line item numbers (CLINs) were initially retrieved and analyzed in three stages. The first replicated the work conducted in 1990s. The second stage entailed calculating 95 per cent confidence intervals and hypothesis tests regarding percentage accuracy of EACs for a contract’s final CAC. Lastly, regression analysis was conducted to characterize major, moderate and minor influencers on EAC reliability. Findings For modern contracts, EACCR aligns more with EACCPI and no longer demonstrates early accuracy of a contract’s final CAC. Contract percentage completion strongly reduced the per cent error of estimating CAC, while cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts and those with no work breakdown structure greater than Level 2 negatively affected accuracy. Social implications To militate against optimism of early assessment of a contract's true cost. Originality/value This paper provides empirical evidence that EACCR behaves more like EACCPI with respect to modern contracts, suggesting that today’s contracts have relatively high SPI. Therefore, caution is warranted for program managers when estimating the CAC from contract initiation up to and slightly beyond the mid-point of completion.
重新审视国防部合同完成时估计的可靠性
目的在挣值管理中,使用成本绩效指数(CPI)和临界比率(CR)来生成完工评估(EACs)。根据20世纪90年代的研究,与使用EACCPI相比,使用EACCR估算最终合同的完工成本(CAC)可以更快地预测实际的最终成本。本文旨在探讨这种趋势是否仍然适用于现代国防部门的合同。设计/方法/方法访问成本评估数据企业(CADE)数据库,最初分三个阶段检索和分析了451个合同,其中包括863个合同项目号(CLINs)。第一个实验复制了20世纪90年代进行的工作。第二阶段需要计算合同最终CAC的eac百分比准确性的95%置信区间和假设检验。最后,对影响EAC信度的主要、中等和次要因素进行回归分析。对于现代合同,EACCR与EACCPI更加一致,不再证明合同最终CAC的早期准确性。合同完成百分比大大减少了估计CAC的错误率,而成本加固定费用合同和没有超过2级的工作分解结构的合同对准确性产生了负面影响。社会影响:这不利于对合同真实成本的早期评估持乐观态度。本文提供的经验证据表明,就现代合同而言,EACCR的行为更像EACCPI,这表明今天的合同具有相对较高的SPI。因此,项目经理在评估从合同开始到完成的中点的CAC时需要谨慎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Public Procurement
Journal of Public Procurement PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: The Journal of Public Procurement (JOPP) seeks to further the understanding of public procurement. JOPP publishes original, high-quality research that explores the theories and practices of public procurement. The journal ensures that high-quality research is collected and disseminated widely to both academics and practitioners, and provides a forum for debate. It covers all subjects relating to the purchase of goods, services and works by public organizations at a local, regional, national and international level. JOPP is multi-disciplinary, with a broad approach towards methods and styles of research as well as the level of issues addressed. The Journal welcomes the submission of papers from researchers internationally. The journal welcomes research papers, narrative essays, exemplar cases, forums, and book reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信