THE

QUANTITY
SURVEYOR

Volume 65 | No. 1 & 2 |2019|ISSN:116 -915X

Volume 65 | No. 1 & 2 Cost management
|2019|ISSN:116 -915X | Procurement Management | Project Management
 is published bi-annually (twice per year) including special issue(s) where necessary, through the
Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors.

publishes high quality - minimum of double - blind peer-reviewed research papers in the areas of
Cost management; Cost information management; Construction economics; Construction project management; Design
and construction management processes; Housing and infrastructure development; Stakeholders management; Project
planning and project impact assessments; Procurement management; Management of construction companies; Industry
development; Knowledge management in construction; Innovation in construction; Sustainable construction; Project
financing; Current and emerging infrastructure issues in developing countries. as well as other relevant issues.

The goal of the journal is to broaden the knowledge of construction professionals and academicians by promoting access
to quality information and providing valuable insight to construction-related information, research and ideas.

welcomes research or technical articles, which are published after proper peer-review process,
and provided the author(s) adhere strictly to the guideline for publication.

Copyright: © 2019, The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors

All rights Reserved. In accessing this journal, you agree that you will access the contents for your own personal use but
not for any commercial use. Any use and or copies of this Journal in whole or in part must include the customary
bibliographic citation, including author attribution, date and article title.

In no event shall the management of The Quantity Surveyor be liable for any special, incidental, indirect, or consequential
damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use of the articles or other material derived from The Quantity
Surveyor, whether or not advised of the possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability.

This publication is provided “as is” without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied, including, but not limited
to, the implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or non-infringement.

Descriptions of, or references to, products or publications does not imply endorsement of that product or publication.

While every effort is made by management of The Quantity Surveyor to see that no inaccurate or misleading data, opinion
or statements appear in this publication, they wish to make it clear that the data and opinions appearing in the articles and
advertisements herein are the responsibility of the contributor or advertiser concerned. Management of The Quantity
Surveyor makes no warranty of any kind, either express or implied, regarding the quality, accuracy, availability, or
validity of the data or information in this publication or of any other publication to which it may be linked.
Prof. Deji R. Ogunsemi
Department of Quantity Surveying,
Federal University of Technology Akure, Nigeria
Email: drogunsemi@futa.edu.ng

Dr. Ayodeji E. Oke

Department of Quantity Surveying,
Federal University of Technology Akure, Nigeria
Email: emayok@gmail.com, aeoke@futa.edu.ng

Prof. Henry A. Odeyinka Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile -Ife, Nigeria

Prof. Olukayode S. Oyediran University of Lagos, Akoka, Nigeria
Prof. Ahmed D. Ibrahim Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
Prof. Yahaya M. Ibrahim Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
Prof. Yakubu Ibrahim Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, Bauchi, Nigeria
Prof King N.O. Nyenke Rivers State University, Port-Harcourt, Nigeria
Dr. Samuel I. J. Onwusonye Imo State University, Owerri, Nigeria
Dr. Uchenna O. Ajator Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria
Dr. Richard Kolawole Federal Polytechnic, Bauchi, Nigeria
Dr. Simon Eigbe Auchi Polytechnic, Auchi, Nigeria

Prof. Abdul Rashidi Universiti Sains Malaysia

Prof. Charles Egbu University of East London, UK
Prof. George Ofori London South Bank University, UK
Prof. Godwin Jagboro Obafemi Awolowo University Ile -Ife, Nigeria
Prof. Hamman Tukur Sa’ad Ahmadu Bello University Zaria, Nigeria
Prof. Joseph Afolayan Anchor University Lagos, Nigeria
Prof. Kabir Bala Ahmadu Bello University Zaria, Nigeria
Prof. Martin Skitmore Queensland University of Technology Sydney, Australia
Prof. Paul Olomolaiye University of the West of England Bristol, UK
Prof. T. C. Mogbo Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu, Nigeria
Prof. Theo Haupt Mangosuthu University of Technology Durban, South Africa
Prof. Julius Fasakin Federal University of Technology Akure, Nigeria
Prof. Stephen Ogunlana Heriot-Watt University Edinburgh, UK

Ms. Lauretta Gerard

Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors
Plot 1743, Cadastral Zone, B6 Mabushi District
Abuja, Nigeria

ISSN: 116-915X © 2019 The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors

http://journal.niqs.org.ng
VOLUME 65 ISSUE 1-2 SEPTEMBER 2019 ISSN 116-915X

4 EDITORIAL 65(1) 113 EDITORIAL 65(2)

PAPERS

6-13 Kolawole Taoheed Bashir and Gbemisola 114-125 Rilwan Shuaibu Abdulrahman, Baba Adama Kolo,
Ajoke Akinola Ahmed Doko Ibrahim and Abdulrasheed Madugu
Assessment of factors influencing the Abdullahi
use of advance payment on building Correlates of risk factors in joint venture projects
projects in Lagos, Nigeria
126-138 Muhammad Laminu Ibrahim, Yahaya Makarfi
14-20 Ayodeji Oke and Olayinka Omole Ibrahim, Abdulazeez Abdulmumin and Aliyu
Drivers influencing the adoption of IBS in the Galadima Shehu
construction industry Assessment of stakeholder engagement in tertiary
education trust fund (TETFund) construction
21-29 Adesoye Morakinyo and Oluwaseyi A. projects
Awodele
Careers awareness among stakeholders for 139-158 Alexander Ejiro Omoraka, Ayodeji Emmanuel
sustainability of built environment in Nigeria Oke and Isaac Olaniyi Aje
Training of construction professionals in supply
30-42 Grace Kehinde Ojo and Esther Ilori chain management: a case of Nigerian Quantity
Ebunoluwa Surveyors
Risk matrix analysis approach of marketing of 159-166 Gbemisola Ajoke Akinola and Kolawole Taoheed
construction professional services
Bashir
Assessment of professionals’ level of awareness of
43-57 Najimu Saka project planning processes in the Nigerian
An assessment of the impact of foreign direct construction industry
investment (FDI) on the Nigerian construction
sector (NCS) 167-175 Olusola Olatunji
58-73 Ahmad Sani Ahmad, Abdu llahi Yahya Waziri Critical success factors for PPP projects in the
and Abdullahi Nafiu Zadawa Nigerian construction industry
A conceptual model for building information
modelling (BIM) adoption by Nigerian 176-184 Kenneth Otasowie and Ayodeji Oke
construction professionals Appraisal of required mentoring practices in
quantity surveying firms in Nigeria
74-81 Bamidele Temitope Arijeloye, Douglas
Omoregie Aghimien Olusola Festus 185-193
3 Samuel Opeyemi Williams; Razali Adul Hamid;
Akinradewo and Ruqayyah Titilayo Abdul- Funmilola Florence Williams; Hellen Omolade
Kareem Obagboye and Taki Eddine Seghier
Cost variability of educational building A critical review of the responsibilities of
projects in Ondo-State, Nigeria stakeholders in building construction safety

82-97 Ayokunle Olubunmi Olanipekun 194-208 Inuwa Nuruddeen Mohammed, Gambo Nuru &
Assessing the approaches for implementing Abdullahi Nafi’u Zadawa
project owners’ motivation and commitment in Effect of moral stakeholders’ participation on
the delivery of sustainable buildings satisfaction with delivery of projects in Federal
University Kashere
98-110 Usman Mohammed Datti, Ibrahim Ibrahim
Inuwa, Nuru Gambo, and Joshua Shedrack
Mangvwat
Preconditions for estimating building project
cost in design and management contract

ISSN: 116-915X © 2019 The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors

http://journal.niqs.org.ng
 (September, 2019) (1), 4

Editorial
Advance payment has been unarguably recognized as an alternative payment method in the Nigerian building industry.
The first paper by Bashir and Akinola assessed the factors influencing the use of advance payment on building projects
in Lagos, Nigeria. The paper revealed time-related factors and economic factors as the most significant factors influencing
the use of advance payment on building projects in Lagos, Nigeria. They suggested that moratorium be given prior to
amortization whenever advance payment is adopted on building projects to ensure that the contractors judiciously utilize
it.
The 21st century construction industry is focusing more on making buildings smarter and more intelligent. Although
to a very large extent, the construction industry in the developed countries have adopted the principles of Intelligent
Building System (IBS), many developing countries are still lagging for different reasons. Therefore, to improve the
adoption of Intelligent Building Systems in the developing countries, Oke and Omole conducted a study which identified
the greatest drivers that should be majored on to create a more conducive environment for IBS to thrive.
Morakinyo and Awodele investigated the level of awareness of surveying professions among career counsellors in
Senior Secondary School in Lagos State, Nigeria. They discovered that 77.4% were ignorant of the relevance of Quantity
Surveying towards the realisation of the built environment (BE), while 69.8% do not have Quantity Surveying listed on
their career advisory register. The study linked its results to the exclusion of relevant stakeholders from the creation of
awareness on BE careers and posited that these be corrected in future orientation programmes.
The impact of marketing is significant on the success of an organization. But, the impact of marketing is affected by
inherent risks which is a challenge for construction professionals to properly handle. Therefore, to enhance the service
delivery of these professionals, Ojo and Ebunoluwa assessed the degree of risks inherent in marketing their services.
Their results shed light on the risks that occur most frequently, risks with the greatest impact and high marketing risk
factors. These risk factors should be taken into proper consideration to successfully inhibit their effects on the services of
construction professionals.
Saka aligned with the assertion that the debt crises of the early 1980s led to the adoption of outward looking economic
model and Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), as an integral part of the new development policy by developing countries.
On this assertion, Saka employed the Vector Error Correction Model (VECM), Forecast Error Variance Decomposition
(FEVD) and the Impulse Response Functions (IRFs) to examine the impact of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) inflows
on the output of Nigerian Construction Sector (CNS). The results indicated that FDI inflow had a significant impact on
the growth of CNS and GDP (Gross Domestic Product).
Saka thus advocated for deeper economic and social reforms to enhance increased FDI inflows.
Globally, there is no controversy on the economic benefits and contributions of Building Information Modelling (BIM)
to the productivity of the building industry. Despite these, the pace at which BIM is being adopted is slower than
expectation, especially in the developing countries like Nigeria. In view of this, the factors affecting the adoption of BIM
by professionals in the Nigerian construction industry was appraised by Ahmad, Waziri and Zadawa. They extended the
popular Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) developed by Davis (1989) to produce a BIM acceptance mode l. They
uncovered the indicators of Perceived Usefulness and variables that positively affects Perceived Ease of Use.
Arijeloye, Aghimien, Akinradewo and Abdul-Kareem explored the cost variability between the preliminary cost
estimate and the final cost of educational building projects. They examined the factors causing the difference between
these two variables in tertiary institutional building projects in Ondo State, Nigeria. The cost deviation between final and
preliminary estimates averaged 9%. To bring down this percentage, there should be strict adherence t o the principle of
cost control and limit the extent of possible changes or variation to the original contract documents at the execution phase
of the educational construction projects. Furthermore, the design team should be given adequate time to prepare drawings
and specifications at the planning phase. In addition, there should be prior site investigation before the preparation of
contract documents.
The concepts of the project owners’ motivation and owner commitment have been adjudged as novel ways of
surmounting the complex process of delivering sustainable building projects. Olanipekun acknowledged that the practical
application of these concepts is not yet possible due to lack of specific approaches for their implementation. Therefore,
in a bid to illuminate these approaches, Olanipekun carried out a global overview of sustainable buildings in the
established member countries of the World Green Building Council (WGBC). Th is study expoused the approaches for
implementing the project owners’ motivation and commitment in practice and put forward certain suggestions that are
capable of promoting sustainable building practices.
Time and cost overruns have marred the performance of design and management (D&M) contract, which is one of the
variances of the management-oriented procurement system that is gaining prominence in Nigeria. To attain building
project cost effectiveness in D&M contract, Datti, Inuwa, Gambo, and Mangvwat researched and brought to limelight the
most important preconditions for estimating building project cost in D&M contracts in Bauchi town, Nigeria. In addition,
a strong positive relationship was observed between the preconditions and project cost effectiveness. The implication of
this is that, applying the wrong preconditions will reduce the likelihood of achieving value for money. This work
postulated what should be done in relation to preconditions to achieve better cost management and better project
execution.

ISSN: 116-915X © 2019 The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors

http://journal.niqs.org.ng
 (September, 2019) (1), 74-81

Bamidele Temitope Arijeloye1*, Douglas Omoregie Aghimien2 Olusola Festus Akinradewo 3

and Ruqayyah Titilayo Abdul-Kareem4

Literature has shown a wide gap between the final cost of construction and preliminary cost estimate for construction projects
and this causes fear to public clients in commissioning new projects. Therefore, this research examined the cost variability
between the preliminary cost estimate and the final cost of educational building projects as well as factors causing the
difference between these two variables of tertiary institutional building projects in Ondo State, Nigeria. Censored method
was adopted to elicit information from in-house Architects and Quantity surveyors from the Physical and planning Units of
the Federal University of Technology, Akure (FUTA) and Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba -Akoko (AAUA) and the
Architects and Quantity Surveyors in contracting and consulting firms that registered and partook in the completion 33
building projects of various categories from which historical cost data were also garnered. The data were analysed using
Percentile and Mean item Score. The findings revealed that cost deviation in final and preliminary estimates averaged 9%.
The implication of this is that clients can no longer rely absolutely on the initial cost estimates prepared by the design team.
The study thus recommends strict adherence to the principle of cost control by limiting the extent of changes or variation in
the original contract documents at the execution phase of the educational construction projects. The study also recommended
that adequate time should be given to the design team for the preparation of drawings and specifications at the planning phase
of educational construction projects. Finally, prior site investigation should be carried out before the preparation of contract
documents.
: Educational Construction Project, Preliminary Estimates, Final Cost, Variability Factors, Nigeria.

Client’s decision to acquire or commission a building project will depend mostly on the cost of completing the project.
The client seeks professional advice in this regard and when an estimate is given, the accuracy of such estimate becomes
the client’s next concern (Ashworth, 1994). Ameyaw, chan, owusu-manu, and coleman (2015) opined that the budgetary
reliability of BOQ in procuring public infrastructure projects has been questioned owing to the fact that contracts are
awarded to the lowest bidder in traditional procurement method. However, Owoeye, Ibironke, and Adeniyi (2014) stated
that estimates provide the basis for the client’s funding arrangements, budgeting and cost control of construction projects.
An accurate estimate will improve good contracting; improve the process of calculating and analysing all the costs that
will enter into a particular job to arrive at a set total.
Oseghale and Wahab (2014) observed that the major worries of professionals in the construction industry are the wide
gap between the final cost of construction, the tender and preliminary estimates earlier arrived at the pre-contract stage.
Most of the significant factors affecting project costs are qualitative, such as client priority on construction time,
contractor’s planning capability, procurement methods, inaccurate preliminary estimates and market (Aziz, 2013). A

ISSN: 116-915X © 2019 The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors

http://journal.niqs.org.ng
75

project otherwise completed may not be regarded as successful unless it satisfies the cost limitations applied to it. It is
believed that construction projects experience an increase in the cost of about 33% on average (Hartley, 2017). According
to one very comprehensive research made on cost overrun in the global construction, it was found that 9 out of 10 projects
had overrun, overruns of 50–100% were common, therefore the problem of cost overrun is critical and needs to be studied
more to alleviate this.
Edukugho, (2013) observed that most educational building projects suffer this same fate in Nigeria as most of these
projects experience time and cost overruns, while some are even left abandoned. Several studies have been carried out to
study factors responsible for construction cost variation; for example, Baek and Ashuri (2019) examined the variability
of submitted unit price bids for asphalt line items in highway projects by developing a random parameters model to
measure the cost variability of high way projects in Georgia. Ameyaw et al. (2015) developed a fuzzy model for
evaluating risk impacts on variability between contract sum and the final account in government-funded construction
projects in Ghana while Adafin, Rotimi, and Wilkinson (2015) examine the reasons that cause a disparity between the
design stage elemental cost plan prepared by the consultant Quantity Surveyor and final tender sum submitted by the
successful contractor in New Zealand with a view to providing information on the risk factors responsible for the variation
and conclude that factors such as market conditions, client’s change, design enhancements/variations, site investigation
information, co-ordination errors, documentation errors/omissions, incomplete design information, incomplete
documentation for cost plan and inadequate tender documentation are some of the variables that causes cost variability
between the preliminary estimates and final cost of construction projects. To the best knowledge of the researchers, there
is no recent documentary evidence of an investigation into the factors causing cost variability of educational building
projects in Nigeria, therefore, this research work examined the cost variability between the preliminary cost estimate and
the final cost of educational building projects as well as factors causing the difference between these two variables with
a view to providing more accurate preliminary cost estimates. This is to give clients a full view of the expected financial
commitment, thus improving the delivery of educational building projects in Nigeria.

In Nigeria, the Federal Government is a major contributor to the educational sector with huge amounts being expended
on infrastructures, especially in the tertiary institution's projects (Ewa, 2013; Oyedele 2013). Unfortunately, most of the
projects being carried out are either left uncompleted or completed not to standard (Edukugho, 2013) due to lack of
adequate funds among other reasons. This unhealthy situation can be associated with poor initial estimate carried out from
the onset, as a low initial estimate will result to a low initial budget, thereby leading to lack of fund to complete such
projects or cost variability between the initial and final cost of the completed projects.

The estimated cost of a work is a close prediction of what the actual cost should be. The process of achieving the estimated
cost has been described in different ways by various studies. Akintoye (2000) describes estimating as a way of trying to
predict the cost required for the completion of a particular project. Enshassi, Mohamed and Madi (2007) stated that
estimating is an important step in the construction process as the reliability of its estimate depends on accuracy from
conceptual to detailed stages which determines the success or failure of a project. Similarly, Odusami and Onukwube
(2008) stated that estimating cannot be a precise technical and analytical process, but to an extent, it is a subjective process
where estimators consider factors relevant to the successful completion of a project. Skitmore (1990) identified three
basic types of estimates. These include approximate estimate which is generally applied to assess the magnitude of a
project before its design, preliminary or definitive estimate, which is used to access the relative costs of alternative designs
and detailed estimate, which provides the final assessment of the cost of a project which is compiled from drawings,
specifications and bill of quantities. Ashworth (2004) reduced this classification to just two i.e. preliminary estimate
 76
which is an initial estimate to establish a benchmark for the project and also ascertain the feasibility and viability of the
project and authorization estimate which is a final cost plan which includes construction detailing, final budget and
control. In a similar vein, Project management for construction (2013) categorized construction estimates into Design
Estimates, Bid Estimates, and Control Estimates.
Akinsiku, Solomon and Akintayo (2011) informed that the accuracy of a preliminary cost estimate can be seen in the
level of its deviation from the final cost expended on the project. Barzandeh (2011) also stated that accuracy is the degree
to which a measurement or calculation deviates from its actual figure or price. Therefore, estimating accuracy is an
indication of the degree to which the final price outcome of a project may vary from the single point value used as the
estimated cost of the project (Dysert, 2006). This means that the difference between the estimated cost and the final cost
will to a large extent depends on the accurate use of estimating methods. Some studies have also looked into percentage
deviation in the accuracy of preliminary estimates to final cost such as Titov, Nikulchev, and Bubnov (2015) that opined
that cost of rework accounts for about 9-13% deviation from the preliminary estimates and Love, Irani, Smith, Regan,
and Liu (2017) that opined that change order constitutes about 23% increase to project cost in the UK.

Brook (1998) stated that during the first half of the twentieth century, six methods of initial price estimating were
developed, which are still much the same today. Maalinyuur (2010), further categorize these methods into three which
are; Conference Estimate; Single-Rate Method (superficial floor area, superficial perimeter method, cube method, unit
method, story-enclosure method); and Multiple-Rate Method (elemental cost method, analytical cost method). Seeley
(1996) also classified estimating methods into single-purpose estimates, dual-purpose estimates, single-purpose
preliminary estimates, single-purpose later-stage estimates, primary conservative cost estimates and secondary
conservative cost estimates. Factors that determine the most appropriate methods includes but not limited to (a) the nature
of the activity to be cost or assessed, (b) the degree of familiarity of the organization with the item or activity to be cost,
(c) the extent to which reference can be made to previous exercises, (f) the availability of reliable design information and
(g) the time available to prepare the estimate (Owoeye , 2014).

Robust research on the factors causing the variability between the preliminary estimate and the final cost of construction
works abound. These factors do not only cause a difference between both variables, but also affects the outcome of the
project as a wrong initial estimate can lead to clients’ dissatisfaction, frustration, and poor project performance in terms
of cost and even project abandonment. Trost and Oberlender (2003) identified and grouped a total of 45 factors affecting
the accuracy of initial estimates into 11 factors. 5 most important factors were further identified and these include (a)
process design, (b) team experience (c) cost information and time allowed to prepare estimates, (d) site requirements, and
(e) bidding and labour climate. Gunner and Skitmore (1999) also identified twelve factors affecting accuracy of cost
estimate, which include building function, type of contract, conditions of contract, contract sum, price intensity, contract
period, number of bidders, good or bad years, procurement basis, project sector, number of priced items and number of
drawings.
Akinsiku (2011) further categorized the factors affecting the accuracy of estimates as procedural errors, human
errors and the uncertain nature of the project. Procedural errors relate to accuracy in pricing, the cost involved in pricing,
availability of methods of pricing and availability of price data while human errors relate to changes in design and
incomplete information, accidental errors caused by procedural mistakes, judgmental errors and deliberate errors caused
by the estimator. Uncertain nature of the project relates to weather conditions, construction delays, supervision policies,
construction methods, political and economic variations, changing nature of construction technology and costs, the
difference in maintenance technology, differences in labour p roductivity and materials and equipment availability. This

ISSN: 116-915X © 2019 The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors

http://journal.niqs.org.ng
77

is similar to Liu and Zhu (2007) classification which are; control factors and idiosyncratic factors. Control factors are
those that can be determined by the estimators to increase the performance of the estimation. Idiosyncratic factors are
factors that affect estimation but are outside the control of the estimator i.e. the uncontrollable factors. This includes
market conditions, project complexity, weather, size of the contract, type of client, si te constraints, resource availability,
etc. Maalinyuur (2010) opined that factors such as nature and condition of the site, change in design, inflationary trend,
Change in specification and time overrun are factors responsible for cost variation between the preliminary and final
estimates of construction works in Ghana.
Oyedele (2015) stated that in Nigeria, political factor, economic factors, government policy, time ( season when the
construction is to be carried out), location of the project, legal factors, security, good and bad year of project (for example,
any year preceding election year in Nigeria is usually a good year as politicians tend to spend money on capital projects
in election years than in non-election years), nature of job, complexity of job, experience of the contractor, detail of project
brief given to the consultants, and corruption, are all factors that can affect accuracy of estimates.

Data for the study were collected through primary and secondary sources. The primary source involved the use of
questionnaires while the secondary source involved the collection of cost data from two tertiary institutions in Ondo State,
Nigeria and through the extensive review of Literatures. Ondo State has 3 public universities but the study was restricted
to Federal University of Technology Akure (FUTA) and Adekunle Ajasin University Akungba -Akoko (AAUA) because
they had been established more than 20 years ago and has recognized physical planning units. Data were obtained from
Quantity Surveyors (QS) and Architects in the physical planning units of this two (2) universities as well as contracting
and consulting firms that have participated in construction activities in the identified institutions. The choice of QS and
Architects was based on the premise that the two professionals are involved in the certification of payment to the
contractor. There are 6 QS and 3 Architects for the study which makes a total of 9 respondents in th e physical planning
units of both institutions and they were all sampled as in-house consultants. Also, Contracting and Consulting QS and
Architectural firms working with these institutions as at the time of the research were sampled on 33 projects making a
total of 75 respondents and were all censured. A total of 31 questionnaires were retrieved out of th e 75 questionnaires
distributed and 33 cost data was obtained from the institutions. The questionnaires survey was used to evaluate the factors
responsible for this deviation of preliminary cost estimate from the final cost of educational building projects in order to
ascertain statistically the level of deviation from of preliminary cost estimate from the final cost. Percentile and Mean
Score were employed in analyzing the data collected.

The result shows that 45% of the respondents were working in consulting firms while 25% were working in contracting
firms, 29% in the physical planning units of both institutions. 12% of the respondents have between 1 to 5 years working
experience, while 35%, 23%, 10, and 19% have between 6 to 10 years, 11 to 15 years, 16 to 20 years and above 20 years
working experience respectively. Since a total of 87% of the respondents have between 6 to 20 years working experience,
it, therefore, implies that the result gotten from the respondents can be relied upon as answers were given based on
experience. The result shows that 94% of respondents have been involved in the preparation of the preliminary cost
estimate which implies that the respondents’ opinion is reliable for this study.

Table 1 shows the percentage deviation of the final cost from the preliminary cost estimate in educational building projects
in Ondo State. The result further shows that out of the 33 projects sampled, only 5 did not deviate from its initial cost
 78
estimate. 27 projects deviated from their initial cost estimate ranging from 1% to 24% while only one project had its final
cost less than its preliminary cost estimate. On average, a total of 9% deviation was recorded on all the 33 projects. The
9% deviation implies that there is a 91% level of accuracy in the preliminary cost estimates for the projects used in the
study. The deviation is within the acceptable range of (20% - 25%) stated by the (National Institute of Building Science
2013). This is similar to the work of Titov et al. (2015) that observed an average 9.13% change in the rework costs in
Russia with a standard deviation of 10.42.

Result in Table 2 indicates that the most significant factor is variation with a mean score of 4.48, while incomplete
drawings and specifications, site topography and market condition followed with a mean score of 4.39, 4.35 and 4.20
respectively. Lack of historical data for a similar job is ranked the least with a mean score of 3.35. This result is in
agreement with Maalinyuur (2010) research where nature/condition of the site (site topography) and change in design
(variation) were the two major factors responsible for the change in the preliminary cost estimate and the final cost of
construction projects in Ghana. This is contrast with Akinsiku et al,. (2011) which concluded that the major factors
affecting the accuracy of preliminary cost estimate are the skill and expertise of the estimator, availability of information
and time allotted for the preparation using the final account of 10 bank construction projects. This is understandable as
most bank construction jobs are constructed within a shorter time frame base on demand or need for expansion thereby
leading to scanty information for the estimator to work with. Educational building projects, on the other hand, are planned
over a considerable period of time with adequate information shared among project participants.

S/n Project Type The final cost of Prelim. Estimate Deviation (N Percentage
construction (N millions) (N million millions) deviation (%)
1 A 147.90 133.12 14.79 11
2 A 111.84 95.06 16.78 18
3 A 93.09 80.99 12.10 15
4 A 500.00 500.00 - 0
5 A 98.11 92.58 5.53 6
6 A 43.55 43.55 - 0
7 A 154.04 155.27 -1.23 -1
8 A 55.27 46.98 8.29 18
9 A 95.3 80.41 15.32 19
10 A 304.55 268.00 36.55 14
11 A 69.16 62.24 6.92 11
12 A 50.00 42.00 8.00 19
13 A 72.00 58.00 14.00 24
14 A 7.70 7.70 - 0
15 A 55.43 52.66 2.77 5
16 A 64.28 55.93 8.36 15
17 A 45.77 39.82 5.95 15
18 A 698.62 687.75 10.88 2
19 A 132.81 128.84 3.97 3
20 A 85.26 75.89 9.38 12
21 A 162.79 160.72 2.07 1
22 A 448.21 445.62 2.59 1
23 A 112.34 100.16 12.18 12
24 B 9.22 8.00 1.22 15
25 C 172.66 160.22 12.45 8
26 C 64.48 63.83 0.64 1
27 A 55.36 50.66 4.70 9
28 C 22.84 19.12 3.72 19
29 C 45.88 40.30 5.58 14
30 C 4.20 4.20 - 0

ISSN: 116-915X © 2019 The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors

http://journal.niqs.org.ng
79

31 B 17.21 16.35 0.86 5

32 B 29.63 28.63 1.00 3
33 C 1.50 1.50 - 0
295

Average percentage deviation= Total deviation/number of projects 8.91%

Table 2: Factors Causing Difference between Preliminary Estimate and Final Cost of Construction of Educational Projects

Variation 4.48 1
Incomplete drawings and specifications 4.39 2
The topography of the site 4.35 3
Market condition 4.20 4
Corrupt practices 4.19 5
Inaccurate data used in estimating 4.16 6
Fluctuations 4.06 7
Incomplete project scope definition 4.06 7
Contractors poor management ability 3.94 9
Changes in owners requirement 3.94 9
Government policy 3.90 11
Poor analysis of cost data for cost analysis 3.87 12
Unforeseen changes in materials 3.87 12
Insufficient tender document analysis 3.87 12
Political factor 3.83 15
Lack of understanding of project requirement 3.81 16
Lack of historical data on past projects 3.73 17
Lack of review of cost estimate by management 3.71 18
Low participation in estimation by the site team 3.68 19
Poor communication between the project team 3.65 20
Insufficient time for estimating 3.58 21
Poor feedback accuracy of previous estimates 3.58 21
Estimators lack of knowledge on estimating techniques 3.53 23
The omission of some items of work during estimating 3.47 24
Lack of performance review of estimators 3.45 25
Cost of mobilization to site 3.45 25
Lack of historical data for similar job 3.35 27

Due to the need for cost-effective construction and the need for reduction in the number of abandoned educational
construction projects in Nigeria, this research variability between the preliminary cost estimates and the final cost of
educational building projects in Ondo State, Nigeria. The research examined the use of preliminary cost estimate and its
level of accuracy and the factors causing the deviation between initial and final costs.
Findings revealed that the final cost deviated from the preliminary cost estimate by 9%. This is reasonable because it
falls within the acceptable error margin of between 20% and 25%. This shows that the preliminary estimating method
cannot be totally ignored. The study recommends that the extent of using change order at the execution phase of the
educational construction projects should be reduced and the culture of alteration to the original contract documents should
be ignored. Site investigation should be made a priority by the design team before the preparation of contract documents;
this will give the design team first-class information on the topography of the site. The study also recommended that
adequate time should be given to the design team for the preparation of drawings and specifications at the planning phase
of educational construction projects.

Akinsinku, Solomon & Akintayo (2011). Comparative accuracy of floor area, storey enclosure and cubic m ethods in the
 80
preliminary estimate, 6 (3 /4): 315–322
Akintoye, A. (2000).Analysis of factors influencing project cost estimating practice,
, 18 (1): 77–89
Ashworth, A. (1994). Cost Studies of Building. Second edition, Longman Scientific and Technical
Ashworth, A. (2004).Cost Studies of Buildings (4 Ed.), Harlow, England, New York, Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Barzandeh M. (2011) Accuracy of estimating techniques for predicting residential construction costs – a case study of an
Auckland residential construction company. Report for Industry Project Unitec New Zealand.
Brook, M. (1998). .Estimating and Tendering for Construction Work, Second edition, Butterworth -Heinemann.
Dysert, L. R. (2003). Sharpen Your Cost Estimating Skills. 45 (6): 9.
Edukugho, E (2013).Education sector stinks! Infrastructure bad, now worse. Retrieved from
http://www.vanguardngr.com/2013/12/education -sector-stinks-infrastructure-bad-now-worse/
Enshassi, A., Mohamed, S. and Madi. I. (2007). Cost estimation practice in the Gaza Strip: A case st udy.
, 15 (2): 153-176.
Ewa U.E (2013), Root Causes of Project Abandonment in Tertiary Institutions in Nigeria ;
6(11): 149 – 159.
Gunner, J. & Skitmore, M. (1999). Comparative analysis of pre-bid forecasting of building prices based on Singapore
data. , 17(5): 635 -646.
Liu, L., & Zhu, K. (2007).Improving Cost Estimates of Construction Projects Using Phased Cost Factors.
, 133(1): 91–95
Maalinyuur, A. (2010). M.Sc Thesis submitted
to the Department of Building Technology, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology.
National Institute of Building Sciences (2013). Estimating Methods. Available at
www.nibs.org/%3Fpage%3Dconference. Accessed on May 17, 2013.
Oberlender, G. D. & Trost, S. M. (2001) Predicting the accuracy of early cost estimates based on estimate quality.
127 (3): 173 – 182.
Oborien, M.O. (2006).Tendering and Estimating for Building Students, (1st ed.), Best way Printers, Auchi.
Odusami, K. T. & Onukwube, H. N. (2008).Factors affecting the accuracy of pre -tender cost estimate in Nigeria,
, COBRA.
Omole, A.O. (1999).Cost Estimating and Management, , 3-8.
Oseghale G. E & Wahab A. B (2014). Analysis Of Relationship Between Preliminary Estimate, Tender Sum And Final
Accounts (A Case Study Of Selected Building Projects In Edo State, Nigeria). 6,
No.6, 2014.
Owoeye, Ibironke.o. & Adeniyi (2014). Exploring cost estimating practises of quantity surveyors firms in Abuja and
Ondo State.
Oyedele, D. (2013).UI receives the biggest allocation of the intervention fund. Retrieved from
http://www.thisdaylive.com/articles/ui -receives-biggest-allocation-of-intervention-funds/158465/
Oyedele, O. A (2015). Evaluation of Factors Affecting Construction Cost Estimation Methods in Nigeria. FIG Working
Week, Wisdom of the Ages to the Challenges of the Modern World Sofia, Bulgaria, 17 -21 May 2015.
Project Management for Construction (2013). Cost Estimation. Available at
http://pmbook.ce.cmu.edu/05_Cost_Estimation.html.
Richard, J. A & Shaaba, A. M (2014). Assessment of Contingency Sum in Relation to the Total Cost of Renovation Work
in Public Schools in Abuja, Nigeria. 2(10): 55-63.
Seeley, I .H. (1996). . Macmillan, London.
Skitmore, R. M (1990). The Accuracy of Construction Price Forecasts: A Study of Quantity Surveyors P erformance in

ISSN: 116-915X © 2019 The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors

http://journal.niqs.org.ng
81

Early Stage Estimating Technical Report, Department of Surveying, University of Salford.

Trost, S. M., & Oberlender, G. D. (2003): Predicting Accuracy of Early Cost Estimates Using Factor A nalysis and
Multivariate Regression, 129(2):198-213.
True, N.F. (1988): Determining the accuracy of a cost estimate.
1-10.
Adafin, J., Rotimi, J. O., & Wilkinson, S. (2015). Why do the design stage elemental cost plan and final tender sum differ
in New Zealand? (2), 116-131.
Ameyaw, E. E., Chan, A. P., Owusu -Manu, D.-G., & Coleman, E. (2015). A fuzzy model for evaluating risk impacts on
variability between contract sum and the final account in government-funded construction projects.
(1), 45-69.
Aziz, R. F. (2013). Factors causing cost variation for constructing wastewater projects in Egypt.
(1), 51-66.
Baek, M., & Ashuri, B. (2019). Analysis of the Variability of Submitted Unit Price Bids for Asphalt Line Items in
Highway Projects. (4), 04019020.
Hartley, J. R. (2017). : Routledge.
Love, P. E., Irani, Z., Smith, J., Regan, M., & Liu, J. (2017). Cost performance of public infrastru cture projects: the
nemesis and nirvana of change-orders. (13), 1081-1092.
Titov, S., Nikulchev, E., & Bubnov, G. (2015). Learning practices as a tool for quality costs reduction in construction
projects. (149), 68.