Reference
[link to abstract] |
Title |
Date |
Discipline |
Link
to Document |
|
Financial Analysis - Tender Payment Scheduling (v2.3) |
2003 |
Tendering |
|
|
Tender Evaluation - Validity of Quantitative Techniques (v2.1) |
2003 |
Tender Evaluation |
|
|
Life Cycle Cost (LCC) - Risk Analysis (v3.2) |
2003 |
LCC |
|
|
Flyer- Automated Cost Risk Analysis Model (ACRAM) |
2005 |
Cost Risk |
|
|
Introducing Automated Cost Risk Analysis Model (ACRAM) |
2005 |
Cost Risk |
|
|
AS/NZS 4360:2004 Risk Management - Critique |
2005 |
Cost Risk |
|
|
Risk Analysis - Schedule Risk |
2005 |
Cost Risk |
|
|
Front End Life Cycle Costing (FELCC) Study - Defence Unsolicited Innovative Proposal |
2006 |
Cost Risk |
|
|
AS/ANZ 4536:1999 – life Cycle Costing – An Application Guide - Critique |
2005 |
Cost Risk |
|
|
@Risk 4.5 Correlation Functionality |
2008 |
Cost Risk |
|
| Reference |
|
|
In preparing bids, tenderers are faced with the problem of how to determine and offer a winning contract price in Base Date values and, at the same time a payment schedule that would not prejudice a reasonable profit margin nor the ability to pay for actual costs as they occur throughout the contract, given the many attendant uncertainties at time of bid. This paper addresses how tenderers and purchasers formulate, evaluate and negotiate tender prices and payment schedules throughout the various stages in getting to contract.
Key Words: tendering; tender price; payment schedule.
|
|
Computer-based tools are available as aids to the systematic evaluation,
documentation and comparison of competing tenders and often employ
quantitative techniques to determine ‘value’ indexes as
quantified measures of the worth to the buyer of an offer. Thus this
paper explores the validity of quantitative indexes and their limitations
in tender evaluation. It argues that value indexes and particularly
value for money indexes are more limited in their power than given
credit for by proponents.
Key words: tender evaluation; value indexes; quantified measures
of value. |
|
Life Cycle Cost (LCC) can be an important differentiator in the source selection decision for a system or equipment. In many instances, only a single estimate of LCC is determined. However, the decision maker needs to know more about the risk associated with the LCC estimate, as represented by the probable range of values that the LCC may take, ie between a lowest value and a highest value, and how LCC means may differ from their respective point estimates (modes). This paper illustrates the need for knowledge of the spread of LCC values about the point estimate, as an expression of estimating risk and the importance of correct statistical summation of cost component distributions to obtain a valid estimate of that LCC spread.
Key Words: Life Cycle Costing; LCC; cost risk.
|
|
The Automated Cost Risk Analysis Model (ACRAM)© is a proprietary, analytical, Excel-based tool that determines the risk associated with a total cost or budget estimate, given the component costs of that estimate and their individual risk profiles. All risk profiles - for the total and for each of its individual components - are expressed in terms of minimum, Mode, Mean and maximum values.
|
|
This article elaborates on the Flyer at Free-4.
|
|
This document is intended as a constructive critique of AS/NZS 4360:2004 Risk management and Risk Management Guidelines – Companion to AS/ANZ 4360:2004. It aims to identify what appear to be anomalies and errors in the standard and to propose changes. Key Words: Risk; Risk Management.
|
|
To correctly account for risk within a work schedule can be a time consuming and difficult task to do in a valid and defensible manner, given the complex, networked nature of most schedules. To provide also the functionality to cater for interdependence of component times poses a quantum leap in that difficulty. Yet, as this paper contends, interdependence of component times exists in most schedules and should not be ignored. The consequences could prove to be expensive.
|
|
The Acquisition and Logistics Study Centre proposes that Department of Defence (DOD) undertake a study to analyse major project cost and pricing data, to develop valid and usable Cost Estimating Relationships (CER), for application in the cost estimation of the acquisition and through life support (sustainment) of new major projects.
|
|
This document is intended as a constructive critique of AS/NZS 4536:1999, Life Cycle Costing – An Application Guide. It aims to identify what appear to be anomalies and errors in the standard and to propose change. Key Words: Life Cycle Costing; LCC standard; critique; cost estimation; cost risk; PV analysis.
|
|
This document is a constructive critique of the correlation functionality of Palisade Corporation's package @Risk V4.5. Key Words: cost risk; correlation; cost estimation.
|
| |
|