1:5:200

Last updated

In the construction industry, the 1:5:200 rule (or 1:5:200 ratio) is a rule of thumb that states that:

Contents

If the initial construction costs of a building is 1, then its maintenance and operating costs over the years is 5, and the business operating costs (salary of people working in that building) is 200.

Rule

The rule originated in a Royal Academy of Engineering paper by Evans et al. [1] [2]

Sometimes the ratios are given as 1:10:200. The figures are averages and broad generalizations, since construction costs will vary with land costs, building type, and location, and staffing costs will vary with business sector and local economy. [3] [4] The RAE paper started a number of arguments about the basis for the figures: whether they were credible: whether they should be discounted; what is included in each category. These arguments overshadow the principal message of the paper that concentration on first capital cost is not optimising use value: support to the occupier and containment of operating-cost. Study by the Constructing Excellence Be Valuable Task Group, chaired by Richard Saxon, came to the view that there is merit in knowing more about key cost ratios as benchmarks and that we can expect wide variation between building types and even individual examples of the same type. [5]

Hughes et al, of the University of Reading School of Construction Management and Engineering, observed that the "Evans ratio" is merely a passing remark in the paper's introduction (talking of "commercial office buildings" and stating that "similar ratios might well apply in other types of building") forming part of a pitch that the proportion of a company's expenditure on a building that is spent directly on the building itself (rather than upon staffing it) is around 3%, and that no data are given to support the ratio and no defence of it is given in the remainder of the paper. In attempting to determine this ratio afresh, from published data on real buildings, they found it impossible to reproduce the 1:5:200 ratio, in part because the data and methodology employed by Evans et al. were not published and in part because the definitions employed in the original paper could not be applied. The ratios that they determined were different by an order of magnitude from the 1:5:200 ratio, being approximately 1:0.4:12. They observed that "everyone else who deals with real numbers" pitches the percentage somewhere between 10% and 30%, and that their data support 12%. [6]

They note (as does Clements-Croome) that the three costs for every individual building are affected by a plethora of factors, yielding a wide variation in ratios. They suggest that "[p]erhaps the original 1:5:200 ratio was simply meant to be a statement to focus clients' attention" on the importance of considering the higher staffing costs of a building relative to its operating and construction costs, and to encourage people to not be too concerned with higher initial build costs to improve build quality and reduce later lifetime costs. They state that if this is so "then subsequent users of the ratio have misused it", and that the frequency of use of the ratio is not problematic, but that the authority and gravitas that are assigned to it is. They conclude that "perhaps the most worrying feature of this whole discussion is how this passing introductory remark in the paper by Evans et al has gained the status of a finding from research carried out by the Royal Academy of Engineering, which it most certainly is not!". [6]

In a paper "Re-examining the costs and value ratios of owning and occupying buildings", Graham Ive [7] notes how widely the 1:5:200 ratio has been cited among policy makers and practitioners, and goes on to use published data about whole-life economic costs and the total costs of occupancy to re-assess the ratios. The paper finds that 1:5:200 is both an exaggeration and an over simplification. It reports that the assumed costs in the original paper are unrepresentative, identifies flaws in the original definition of terms and method, offers 'economic cost' estimates for Central London offices, extends the approach to include measurement of value added, and finally discusses the problems of measurement that need to be overcome to produce realistic ratios. It notes a key error in the original ratio is that all costs are summed regardless of when they arise, whereas from an economic perspective future costs and values need to be discounted to their equivalent present cost or value. It shows the implications of introducing discounting. The paper concludes that the best available data suggests a 1:3 undiscounted ratio for Central London offices (for construction:maintenance) and a 1:1.5 ratio when cash flows are discounted at 7%. As for the 200 operation figure, the paper concludes that a representative ratio would be of the order of 1:30 or 1:15 when cash flows are discounted at 7%.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cost accounting</span> Procedures to optimize practices in cost efficient ways

Cost accounting is defined by the Institute of Management Accountants as "a systematic set of procedures for recording and reporting measurements of the cost of manufacturing goods and performing services in the aggregate and in detail. It includes methods for recognizing, allocating, aggregating and reporting such costs and comparing them with standard costs". Often considered a subset of managerial accounting, its end goal is to advise the management on how to optimize business practices and processes based on cost efficiency and capability. Cost accounting provides the detailed cost information that management needs to control current operations and plan for the future.

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a form of economic analysis that compares the relative costs and outcomes (effects) of different courses of action. Cost-effectiveness analysis is distinct from cost–benefit analysis, which assigns a monetary value to the measure of effect. Cost-effectiveness analysis is often used in the field of health services, where it may be inappropriate to monetize health effect. Typically the CEA is expressed in terms of a ratio where the denominator is a gain in health from a measure and the numerator is the cost associated with the health gain. The most commonly used outcome measure is quality-adjusted life years (QALY).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cost of goods sold</span> Carrying value of goods sold during a particular period

Cost of goods sold (COGS) is the carrying value of goods sold during a particular period.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Value engineering</span> Engineering analysis that maximizes function-to-cost ratio

Value engineering (VE) is a systematic analysis of the functions of various components and materials to lower the cost of goods, products and services with a tolerable loss of performance or functionality. Value, as defined, is the ratio of function to cost. Value can therefore be manipulated by either improving the function or reducing the cost. It is a primary tenet of value engineering that basic functions be preserved and not be reduced as a consequence of pursuing value improvements. The term "value management" is sometimes used as a synonym of "value engineering", and both promote the planning and delivery of projects with improved performance.

Facility management or facilities management (FM) is a professional management discipline focused on the efficient and effective delivery of logistics and other support services related to real property and buildings. It encompasses multiple disciplines to ensure functionality, comfort, safety and efficiency of the built environment by integrating people, place, process and technology, as defined by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). The profession is certified through Global Facility Management Association member organizations.

Total cost of ownership (TCO) is a financial estimate intended to help buyers and owners determine the direct and indirect costs of a product or service. It is a management accounting concept that can be used in full cost accounting or even ecological economics where it includes social costs.

In financial accounting, free cash flow (FCF) or free cash flow to firm (FCFF) is the amount by which a business's operating cash flow exceeds its working capital needs and expenditures on fixed assets. It is that portion of cash flow that can be extracted from a company and distributed to creditors and securities holders without causing issues in its operations. As such, it is an indicator of a company's financial flexibility and is of interest to holders of the company's equity, debt, preferred stock and convertible securities, as well as potential lenders and investors.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Net income</span> Measure of the profitability of a business venture

In business and accounting, net income is an entity's income minus cost of goods sold, expenses, depreciation and amortization, interest, and taxes for an accounting period.

A housing bubble is one of several types of asset price bubbles which periodically occur in the market. The basic concept of a housing bubble is the same as for other asset bubbles, consisting of two main phases. First there is a period where house prices increase dramatically, driven more and more by speculation. In the second phase, house prices fall dramatically. Housing bubbles tend to be among the asset bubbles with the largest effect on the real economy because they are credit-fueled,,and a large number of households participate and not just investors, and because the wealth effect from housing tends to be larger than for other types of financial assets.

A cost estimate is the approximation of the cost of a program, project, or operation. The cost estimate is the product of the cost estimating process. The cost estimate has a single total value and may have identifiable component values.

Asset management is a systematic approach to the governance and realization of all value for which a group or entity is responsible. It may apply both to tangible assets and to intangible assets. Asset management is a systematic process of developing, operating, maintaining, upgrading, and disposing of assets in the most cost-effective manner.

A cost overrun, also known as a cost increase or budget overrun, involves unexpected incurred costs. When these costs are in excess of budgeted amounts due to a value engineering underestimation of the actual cost during budgeting, they are known by these terms.

Indirect costs are costs that are not directly accountable to a cost object. Like direct costs, indirect costs may be either fixed or variable. Indirect costs include administration, personnel and security costs. These are those costs which are not directly related to production. Some indirect costs may be overhead, but other overhead costs can be directly attributed to a project and are direct costs.

The German income approach is the standard income approach used in Germany for the valuing of property that produces a stream of future cash flows.

Whole-life cost is the total cost of ownership over the life of an asset. The concept is also known as life-cycle cost (LCC) or lifetime cost, and is commonly referred to as "cradle to grave" or "womb to tomb" costs. Costs considered include the financial cost which is relatively simple to calculate and also the environmental and social costs which are more difficult to quantify and assign numerical values. Typical areas of expenditure which are included in calculating the whole-life cost include planning, design, construction and acquisition, operations, maintenance, renewal and rehabilitation, depreciation and cost of finance and replacement or disposal.

Return on investment (ROI) or return on costs (ROC) is the ratio between net income and investment. A high ROI means the investment's gains compare favourably to its cost. As a performance measure, ROI is used to evaluate the efficiency of an investment or to compare the efficiencies of several different investments. In economic terms, it is one way of relating profits to capital invested.

Value-driven maintenance (VDM) is a maintenance management methodology.

Cost reduction is the process used by organisations aiming to reduce their costs and increase their profits, or to accommodate reduced income. Depending on a company’s services or products, the strategies can vary. Every decision in the product development process affects cost: design is typically considered to account for 70–80% of the final cost of a project such as an engineering project or the construction of a building. In the public sector, cost reduction programs can be used where income is reduced or to reduce debt levels.

Chemical plant cost indexes are dimensionless numbers employed to updating capital cost required to erect a chemical plant from a past date to a later time, following changes in the value of money due to inflation and deflation. Since, at any given time, the number of chemical plants is insufficient to use in a preliminary or predesign estimate, cost indexes are handy for a series of management purposes, like long-range planning, budgeting and escalating or de-escalating contract costs.

The following is a glossary of terms relating to construction cost estimating.

References

  1. ↑ Evans, R., Haryott, R., Haste, N. and Jones, A. (1998) The Long Term Costs of Owning and Using Buildings, London, Royal Academy of Engineering.
  2. ↑ Evans, Raymond; Haryott, Richard; Haste, Norman; Jones, Alan (2004). "The long-term costs of owning and using buildings". In Sebastian Macmillan (ed.). Designing Better Buildings: Quality and Value in the Built Environment. Taylor & Francis. pp. 42–50. ISBN   0-415-31525-5.
  3. ↑ Tunstall, Gavin (2006). Managing the Building Design Process. Elsevier. p. 113. ISBN   0-7506-6791-5.
  4. ↑ Clements-Croome, Derek (2004). Intelligent Buildings: Design, Management And Operation. Thomas Telford. p. 342. ISBN   0-7277-3266-8.
  5. ↑ Saxon, Richard (2005) Be Valuable: A guide to creating value in the built environment, London, Constructing Excellence
  6. 1 2 Hughes, W.P.; Ancell, D; Gruneberg, S; Hirst, L (2004). "Exposing the myth of the 1:5:200 ratio relating initial cost, maintenance and staffing costs of office buildings". Proceedings of the 20th Annual ARCOM Conference. Heriot-Watt University: 373–381. Retrieved 7 November 2013.
  7. ↑ Ive, G. (2006) Re-examining the costs and value ratios of owning and occupying buildings, Building Research & Information, 34(3) 230-245 https://doi.org/10.1080/09613210600635192
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.