Model of Predicting Cost Overrun in Construction Projects

Round  1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors need to address the following comments and suggestions:

  Show how this method can be used to estimate cost overruns for whole projects.

Present a sizeable illustrative example

Validate the results using previously developed methods or historical data.

Author Response

Response to the comments of Reviewer 1

The author wish to thank the Reviewer for the positive feedback and for all comments that helped to enrich and improve the paper. The reviewer’s remarks and requests have been considered carefully by the author. All the requested revisions have been addressed. All the improvements and changes in the manuscript are marked with red colour. The author’ answers are presented in the questions that follow.

The authors need to address the following comments and suggestions:

-  Show how this method can be used to estimate cost overruns for whole projects.

The part 3 is added in article, dedicated to the cost increase prediction model for whole project. The model is schematically depicted in Figure 4 (line 302 – 328).

-          Present a sizeable illustrative example

An illustrative example is added (3.1. Case study: line 332 – 353).

-       Validate the results using previously developed methods or historical data.

The results are validated using the project actual costs increase. (line 355 – 362).

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is mostly well-written and presented, and deals with an interesting topic about predicting cost overruns in construction projects, which is relevant in developing and developed countries. It should be relevant and interesting to the readership of Sustainability. However the paper has some shortcomings in its current format. For example, the authors didn’t follow a journal paper structure. Without any case study support the paper makes little contribution to the research arena. Authors should expand Discussion section and also include Conclusion section.  Authors should submit a major revision.

Author Response

Response to the comments of Reviewer 2

The author wish to thank the Reviewer for the positive feedback and for all comments that helped to enrich and improve the paper. The reviewer’s remarks and requests have been considered carefully by the author. All the requested revisions have been addressed. All the improvements and changes in the manuscript are marked with red colour. The author’ answers are presented in the questions that follow.

… However the paper has some shortcomings in its current format. For example, the authors didn’t follow a journal paper structure. Without any case study support the paper makes little contribution to the research area.

The case study is added (line 331 – 353).

Authors should expand Discussion section and also include Conclusion section. 

The discussion section (including conclusion) is significantly expanded (line 369-383 and 388 – 394).

Reviewer 3 Report

Model of Predicting Cost Overrun in Construction Projects

This manuscript aims to develop a model to predict the increase in costs of construction works as compared to those planned, using a fuzzy Mamdani inference method. The author claims that the model can be helpful to contractors who wants to know the probability of total cost overrun, the possibility and amount of increase in costs of individual packages of works. This would help in planning the expenses related to implementation and schedule of works with consideration of the project cash flow. The author highlights that despite the preparation of various cost calculations before the implementation of a construction project, significant differences between planned and actual cost of works frequently occur. The author identified reasons for cost overruns categorized in 5 categories – (i) technical; (ii) economical; (iii) contractual; (iv) psychological and; (v) political. The author developed a prediction model with the assumption of determining the probability of the cost increase for the elements of the object for which it is the largest. A calculation example was given using the model.

The reviewer believes that the topic of the article is worthy of investigation and relevant to the theme of the journal.

·         The reviewer commends the detailed explanation of the model development such as Figure 1.

·         The reviewer recommends the author to carry out a thorough proof-reading of the manuscript. For example, in Table 1 “cost overrun categories”

·       The reviewer suggests the author to include additional columns in Table 1 to display the previous studies supporting the reasons for cost overruns.

·         The reviewer recommends that the author conduct a validation of the proposed model to demonstrate the validity and applicability of the model in predicting cost overrun in construction projects.

·        The reviewer suggests the author to include a section on limitations and conclusions in the study. The limitation on the scope of the study may be starting points for future research as already highlighted in the discussion.

Based on the comments above the reviewer encourages the authors to address the same and resubmit.

Author Response

Response to the comments of Reviewer 3

The author wish to thank the Reviewer for the positive feedback and for all comments that helped to enrich and improve the paper. The reviewer’s remarks and requests have been considered carefully by the author. All the requested revisions have been addressed. All the improvements and changes in the manuscript are marked with red colour. The author’ answers are presented in the questions that follow.

•         The reviewer recommends the author to carry out a thorough proof-reading of the manuscript. For example, in Table 1 “cost overrun categories”

The author has tried to improve their paper carry out a thorough proof-reading.

•         The reviewer suggests the author to include additional columns in Table 1 to display the previous studies supporting the reasons for cost overruns.

Additional column in Table 1  is added.

•         The reviewer recommends that the author conduct a validation of the proposed model to demonstrate the validity and applicability of the model in predicting cost overrun in construction projects.

Case study is added (line 331 – 353). The results are validated using the actual costs increase. (line 355 – 362).

•         The reviewer suggests the author to include a section on limitations and conclusions in the study. The limitation on the scope of the study may be starting points for future research as already highlighted in the discussion.

The limitation on the scope of the study and conclusion are added (line 369-383 and 388 – 394).

Round  2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have addressed my comments and suggestions.  However, I strongly recommend extensive English editing. 

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors tried to address the comments from the reviewer, the revision made would be considered to significantly improve the quality.