Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management (한국건설관리학회논문집)

Korea Institute of Construction Engineering and Management (한국건설관리학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Improvement of the Evaluation Method for VE Alternatives using the Risk Assessment Process

리스크 평가절차 도입을 통한 VE 대안 평가방법 개선

  • Received : 2018.05.07
  • Accepted : 2018.08.13
  • Published : 2018.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Since the success or failure of VE projects depends on the capabilities of participants, including owners, construction managers, architects, general contractors and VE experts, it is important to follow systematic procedures. However, it is often the case that only a rough evaluation is performed, or the rough and detailed evaluations are integrated in actual VE tasks. In this case, it is difficult to analyze and evaluate the alternatives in terms of risk, even for the important alternatives. This in turn leads to the so-called returning alternatives where the alternatives proposed in the preceding stage are returned to the original plans in the following stage, and thus the repetitive work for the alternatives often decreases the efficiency of the VE task. In this regard, this study proposed a risk assessment process for VE alternatives in order to minimize the occurrence of returning alternatives based on the systematic analysis and evaluation of VE alternatives. It will increase the efficiency of VE tasks by reduces the number of regression alternatives.

발주자, 건설사업관리자, 설계자, 시공자, VE 전문가 등 참여자 역량에 의해 성패가 좌우되는 VE 프로젝트에서는 체계적인 절차를 따르는 것이 중요하다. 하지만, 실제 VE 업무에서는 개략평가만을 실시하거나, 개략평가와 상세평가를 통합하여 수행하는 경우가 있다. 이러한 경우, 중요한 대안일지라도 리스크에 대하여 평가하는 것이 어렵다. 이에 따라, 선행단계에서 제안된 대안이 후행단계에서 다시 기존안으로 돌아가는 회귀제안(returning alternatives)이 발생하여, 해당 대안에 대한 반복작업으로 인해 VE 업무효율이 저하되는 경우가 종종 발생한다.이에 본 연구에서는 VE 대안을 구체적으로 분석하고 체계적으로 평가하여 회귀제안 발생을 최소화하기 위해, VE 대안의 리스크 평가절차(risk assessment process for VE alternatives)를 제안하였다. 이는 VE 대안을 구체적이고 체계적으로 평가하여 회귀제안을 최소화하기 위한 평가절차로서 의의가 있으며, 회귀제안에 대한 반복업무를 줄임으로써 VE 업무의 효율을 높일 수 있을 것으로 예상된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Cho, J. K. (2012). "Risk Factor Classification and Weight Estimation for Urban Regeneration Project." MS thesis, University of Seoul, Seoul.
  2. Choi, I. S. (2008). "A Study on Procedures and Methods for Evaluating VE Alternatives at Design Phase." MS thesis, University of Seoul, Seoul.
  3. Choi, S. Y., and Kim, S. B. (2005). "Suggestions for Improvement of Construction VE Application Effect." Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, KICEM, 6(2), pp. 28-31.
  4. Harold, R. K. (2009). Project Management-Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling, 10th Edition, Wiley, New Jersey.
  5. Kang, S. B., and Kim, S. C. (2016). "A Study on Composition and Application of Risk Management Planning and Procedure for Successful Overseas Construction Projects - Based on the PRINCE2 Methodology in the UK -." Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, KICEM, 17(1), pp. 48-55. https://doi.org/10.6106/KJCEM.2016.17.1.048
  6. Kim, J. H. (2009). "Function Oriented VE Alternatives Evaluation Procedure using Function Classification." MS thesis, University of Seoul, Seoul.
  7. Kim, M. H. et al. (2005). Construction Engineering and Management, Kimoondang, Seoul.
  8. Kim, S. Y., Lee, Y. R., and Yang, J. K. (2015). "Alternative Evaluation Method of GFI-based Construction Value Engineering." Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, KICEM, 16(3), pp. 3-10. https://doi.org/10.6106/KJCEM.2015.16.3.003
  9. Kwon, T. S. (2004). "A Study on the Methodology to Select Optimum Choice for Construction Value Engineering." PhD Dissertation, YonSei University, Seoul.
  10. Park, B. S. (2013). "Structure Modeling for Risk Factors of Urban Regeneration." MS thesis, University of Seoul.
  11. Project Management Institute (2009). Practice Standard for Project Risk Management, Project Management Institute.
  12. Son, M. J. (2008). "The Development of a Practicability Evaluation Model on VE Proposals using the Scenarios Planning and the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process." MS thesis, University of Seoul, Seoul.
  13. The Chartered Institute of Building (2002). Code of Practice for Project Management for Construction and Development. 3rd ed.
  14. The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (2013). VE implementation manual.
  15. Washington State Department of Transportation (2014). Project Risk Management Guide.
  16. Wideman, R. M. (1986). "Risk Management." Project Management Journal, 17(4), pp. 20-26.
  17. Yu, K. H. (2014). "Enhancement Method of Acceptance Rate of Function Improvement Type Alternatives in Development Phase of Value Engineering." MS thesis, University of Seoul, Seoul.