Table 9 Average Recorded Optimism Bias for Equipment / Development and Outsourcing Projects

Recorded Optimism Bias (%)18

Equipment /Development

Outsourcing

54

214

-

-

-

-

41

-

Works Duration

Capital Expenditure

Operating Expenditure

Benefits Shortfall

Works Duration

Capital Expenditure

Operating Expenditure

Benefits Shortfall

Risk Area Contributions to Recorded Optimism Bias (%)19

Equipment /Development

Outsourcing

Procurement

Complexity of Contract Structure

13

11

-

-

-

-

-

Late Contractor Involvement in Design

12

-

-

-

-

-

Poor Contractor Capabilities

30

-

-

-

-

-

Government Guidelines

-

-

-

-

-

Dispute and Claims Occurred

-

-

-

-

-

Information management

-

-

-

-

-

Other (specify)

-

-

-

-

-

Project Specific

Design Complexity

-

-

-

-

-

Degree of Innovation

-

-

-

-

-

Environmental Impact

9

19

-

-

-

-

-

Other (specify)

-

-

-

-

-

Client Specific

Inadequacy of the Business Case

48

58

-

-

-

-

100

-

Large Number of Stakeholders

-

-

-

-

-

Funding Availability

-

-

-

-

-

Project Management Team

-

-

-

-

-

Poor Project Intelligence

-

-

-

-

-

Other (specify)

-

-

-

-

-

Environment

Public Relations

-

-

-

-

-

Site Characteristics

-

-

-

-

-

Permits / Consents / Approvals

-

-

-

-

-

Other (specify)

-

-

-

-

-

Political

-

-

-

-

-

Economic

-

-

-

-

-

External Influences

Legislation / Regulations

-

-

-

-

-

Technology

-

-

-

-

-

Other (specify)

-

-

-

-

-

- No information was available

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

18 This table should not be used for calculating optimism bias levels for current projects.

19 Contributions from each project risk area are expressed as a % of the recorded optimism bias. Note: The sum of individual percentages contributions in each column may not add up to 100% due to rounding errors.