W16_LUCKY_Decision to put
up contractor claim or not to put up contractor claim using Decision Tree
1.
Problem
Recognition
A friend of mine who is
a contractor has approached me for advice. He has essentially completed the
construction of the block of flats under a fixed price contract. There have
been budget costs overrun, unfortunately. Although, not losing money overall,
the overrun has substantially reduced his profit.
2.
Problem Definition
My friend believes that the
cost overrun was caused by delays attributable to the owner in the form of late
deliveries of owner-furnished materials, slow reviews of submittals, etc.
Will submitting a claim be
the best?
I would like to solve it
using the Decision Tree Tool and Technique.
a.
Assumptions
Key assumptions include:
·
The
preliminary estimate of delay costs, both direct and indirect, is USD1 million
·
The owner
is generally unreceptive to claims for indirect costs on change orders
·
There is
no provision for the use of arbitration for dispute resolution
·
The
contract does not have damages for delay clause, as none of the delays were for
force majeure
·
It will
cost $20,000 to prepare the claim
3.
Feasible
Alternatives
Feasible alternatives
include:
1.
Do not
submit the claim
2.
Submit
the claim and owner request a negotiation
o This option has 50 per cent probability
o If it goes well, chances of recovering the amount are
as follows
§ $750,000 – 10%
§ $500,000 – 50%
§ $250,000 – 40%
3.
Submit
the claim and owner rejects it. Two choices available
o Leave off
o Request arbitration (Estimated cost $20,000)
§ 30 per cent probability
o If it goes to arbitration, chances of recovering the
amount are as follows
§ $750,000 – 10%
§ $500,000 – 50%
§ $250,000 – 40%
4.
Owner rejects arbitration. Two choices available
o Leave off
o Pursue legal action (Estimated cost to file suit:
$50,000)
§ 70 per cent probability
o It could result in out-of-court settlement, chances of
recovering lower amount are as follows
§ $500,000 – 20%
§ $250,000 – 50%
§ $100,000 – 30%
o Time to file suit and claim estimated to be 1 year
§ Time-value –of-money at 12 percent per year
5.
Owner not
receptive to out-of-court settlement
o Legal cost increase by $100,000 to bring case to trial
o It could result in chances of recovering amount are as
follows
§ $500,000 – 40%
§ $250,000 – 40%
§ $0 –
20%
o Time to pursue trail to final judgment estimated to be
5 years
§ Time-value-of-money at 12 percent per year
4.
Development of outcomes for each alternative
There are three decision
points:
1.
The
decision to submit or not to submit
2.
If claim
is rejected, whether to pursue arbitration or not to pursue arbitration
3.
If
arbitration is rejected, whether to pursue legal action or not to pursue legal
action
There are three intermediate
event nodes towards the ultimate outcomes as follows:
X – From
which my friend can choose to negotiate or reject claim
Y – From
which my friend can either agree to arbitrate or reject arbitration
Z – From
which my friend can either go for trial or settle out-of-court
The following calculations
results:
Step One –
Determining the expected
value, Ev
·
Outcome
A: Don’t submit option - Ev
= $0
·
Outcome
B: Claim submitted, negotiation results
Ev = $1,000,000
(0%) +$750,000 (0.1) + $500,000(0.5) + $250,000(0.4) = $425, 000
·
Outcome
C: Leave off option - Ev
= $0
·
Outcome
D: Seek arbitration , Ev =
$425, 000
·
Outcome
E: Arbitration rejected, Ev
= $0
·
Outcome
F: Possible legal action, at time of award, with 90 per cent probability
Ev
= $500,000
(0.2)
+ $250,000(0.5)
+ $100,000(0.3) = $255, 000
Calculating
the present value of the outcome at Node Z –
PV =
$255,000 – (P/F, 12%, 1 yr.) = $228,000
·
Outcome
G: Going to court, with 10 per cent
probability
Ev
= $500,000
(0.4)
+ $250,000(0.4) + $0(0.2) = $300, 000
Calculating
the present value of the outcome at Node Z –
PV =
$300,000 – (P/F, 12%, 5 yr.) = $170,000
4.
Selection Criteria
The selection criterion is to
use the most favorable net expected value at the original decision node and
tracking it back through the tree to determine the most favorable decision.
5.
Analysis and Comparison of the alternatives
Step Two –
Working
backwards through the paths:
Node
Z: Assuming the legal fee is paid in year
3 although spread across the 5-year period, the present value, PV = $100,000 – (P/F, 12%, 3 yr.) = $71,000
Thus, net
expected value at node Z = $170,000 - $71,000 = $99,000
Combining
expected value of out-of-court settlement with going to court expected value
gives a net expected value (present value) as follows
Ev
= $99,000
(0.1)
+ $228,000(0.9) = $215, 000
At
decision Node 3, since filing suit for legal action cost $50,000, the net value
of that option at Node 3 is $165,100
(i.e. $215,000 - $50,000)
Node Y: Option of acceptance or rejection of arbitration, the expected value
is
Ev
= ($425,000-$40,000) (0.3) + $165,100(0.7) = $231, 070
At
decision Node 2, the expected value will also be $231, 070 since it only
compared to the leave off option.
Node X: Option to negotiate or not, the expected value is
Ev
= $425,000
(0.5)
+ $231,070(0.5) = $328, 035
Subtracting
the cost of preparing the claim, the net expected value is $308,035 (i.e. $328,035 - $20,000) comparing to the option of not
submitting a claim (expected value of $0).
6.
Selection of preferred alternative
It appears that submitting a
claim would provide a positive return of $308,035
compared to not doing so. This is the advice I would give my friend, although,
I would stress to him that the expected value is not assured but just a better
chance of getting an award than losing money. Besides, he needs to note that
the expected value is far less than the $1m estimate at the onset.
Additionally, I would remind him of the consequences of taking this decision
which includes alienation of the client, loss of future opportunities, bad
publicity in the market place, and valuable staff time taken away from other
more important tasks for his company.
7.
Performance monitoring and post evaluation of results
Time value of money could be
applied to the outcomes and costs just like with those associated with legal actions.
For a better decision, it may be useful to calculate the net outcome for each
potential final event and the probability of occurrence. This will be examined
in a subsequent blog.
Reference
1.
Sullivan,
W., Wicks, E., Koelling, P., Kumar, p., & Kumar, N. (2012).Chapter 12
Probabilistic Risk Analysis (pp. 528 - 533). Engineering economy (15th edition). England: Pearson Education Limited.
2.
Brassard, M. & Ritter D.
(2010). Chapter 24 Tree Diagram (pp.200 – 209). The Memory Jogger 2 (2nd edition). USA:GOAL/QPC
3. Giammalvo,
P. (2012, October 22). Integrated
portfolio (asset), program (operations) and project management methodology
course (cost engineering) slides (An AACE methodology course). Lagos,
Nigeria: Lonadek
Excellent!!! Another great case study and you set it up nicely!!!
ReplyDeleteNot much more I can add to this!!! Just keep up the good work.
BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta