Cost Predictive Model Adoption in Construction Organisations: A Pilot study

Accurate construction cost estimation is essential for effective project planning, budgeting, and decision-making. The increasing complexity of construction projects has accelerated the adoption of advanced cost predictive models that complement traditional estimation techniques. However, limited empirical evidence exists regarding the acceptance and application of these predictive approaches within construction organisations. Therefore, this study aimed to examine the cost predictive model approaches adopted by construction organisations from the perspective of Quantity Surveyors. A quantitative research design was employed using a structured questionnaire survey distributed to Quantity Surveyors working in client, consultant, contractor, and subcontractor organisations. A total of 58 valid responses were analysed using descriptive statistics and the Kruskal–Wallis H test. The findings revealed that all seven cost predictive model approaches achieved a high level of agreement, indicating strong industry recognition of both conventional and advanced prediction techniques. Traditional Statistical Models recorded the highest mean score (M = 4.21), followed by Fuzzy Logic and AI-Based Models and Hybrid Models (M = 4.07), while Probabilistic and Bayesian Models obtained the lowest mean score (M = 3.76). Furthermore, the Kruskal–Wallis analysis indicated no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) among respondents from different organisational categories, suggesting a common perception regarding the importance of cost predictive models across the construction industry. The study contributes to the growing body of knowledge on construction cost estimation by providing empirical evidence of practitioners' perceptions towards contemporary predictive approaches. The findings offer practical insights for construction organisations seeking to improve estimation accuracy and support the adoption of intelligent, data-driven cost prediction techniques as part of the industry's digital transformation.

Construction cost estimation, Cost predictive models, Quantity Surveyors, Construction organisations, Artificial intelligence, Machine learning

1. Abdel-Monem, M., Alshaer, K., & El-Dash, K. (2022). Assessing risk factors affecting the accuracy of conceptual cost estimation in the Middle East. Buildings, 12(7), 950. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12070950 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Abdi, S. J. (2023). A comprehensive guide for selecting appropriate statistical tests: Understanding when to use parametric and nonparametric tests. Open Journal of Statistics, 13(4), 464–474. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojs.2023.134023 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Abed, Y. G., Hasan, T. M., & Zehawi, R. N. (2022). Cost prediction for roads construction using machine learning models. International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering Systems, 13(10), 927–936. https://doi.org/10.32985/ijeces.13.10.8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Ahmed, B., Das, P., Banerjee, R., Singh, S., & Bharti. (2024). Data analytics methods. Auerbach Publications eBooks, 259–269. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003504900-13 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Alrasheed, K., Ballat, M. A., Soliman, E., & Albader, H. (2025). Artificial neural network-based cost estimation for public construction projects in Kuwait. Journal of Engineering Research, 14(1), 150–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jer.2025.09.001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Arce, G. C. (2023). Sample size. Translational Sports Medicine, 167–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-91259-4.00085-0 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Bulanov, N. M., Suvorov, A. Y., Blyuss, O. B., Munblit, D. B., Butnaru, D. V., Nadinskaia, M. Y., & Zaikin, A. A. (2021). Basic principles of descriptive statistics in medical research. Sechenov Medical Journal, 12(3), 4–16. https://doi.org/10.47093/2218-7332.2021.12.3.4-16 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Çebi, S., Kahraman, C., Onar, S. Ç., & Öztayşi, B. (2024). Ranking of factors affecting pricing in construction projects by intuitionistic fuzzy analytic hierarchy process with ordered pairs. Notes on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets, 30(2), 131–141. https://doi.org/10.7546/NIFS.2024.30.2.131-141 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Chaitongrat, T., Janthachai, K., Kusonkhum, W., Boonchai, P., Ikhwali, M. F., & Khotdee, M. (2024). Comparing data mining methods for predicting construction project costs: A case study of cost management datasets from Thailand. Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development, 8(5), 2801. https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i5.2801 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Chen, L., Tiang, S. S., Chong, K. S., Sharma, A., Berghout, T., & Lim, W. H. (2025). Predicting construction costs with machine learning: A comparative study on ensemble and linear models. Journal of Electronics, Electromedical Engineering and Medical Informatics, 7(3), 624–645. https://doi.org/10.35882/JEEEMI.V7I3.799 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Das, P., Kashem, A., Hasan, I., & Islam, M. (2024). A comparative study of machine learning models for construction cost prediction with natural gradient boosting algorithm and SHAP analysis. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering, 25(4), 3301–3316. https://doi.org/10.1007/S42107-023-00980-Z [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Fazil, M. W., Lee, C. K., & Tamyez, P. F. M. (2021). Cost estimation performance in construction projects: A systematic review and future directions. International Journal of Industrial Management, 11, 217–234. https://doi.org/10.15282/IJIM.11.1.2021.6131 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Habe, B. T., Nigussie, L. F., & Belay, M. D. (2024). Modeling cost estimation factors for public building projects with a hybrid approach in Addis Ababa. Advances in Civil Engineering, 2024, Article 1737352. https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/1737352 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Habibzadeh, F. (2024). Data distribution: Normal or abnormal? Journal of Korean Medical Science, 39(3), e35. https://doi.org/10.3346/JKMS.2024.39.E35 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Hurst, P., & Bird, S. R. (2018). Questionnaires. Research Methods in Physical Activity and Health, 93–101. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315158501-10 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Jezzini, Y., Assaad, R. H., & El-Adaway, I. H. (2025). Risk allocation model for price escalations in construction projects: Integrating bargaining game theory and probabilistic Bayesian modeling. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 151(9). https://doi.org/10.1061/JCEMD4.COENG-15142 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Padala, S. S., & Goyal, A. (2025). Early-stage cost prediction model for Indian building construction projects using artificial neural networks. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 30(3), 377–397. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMPC-12-2023-0085 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Park, D., & Yun, S. (2023). Construction cost prediction using deep learning with BIM properties in the schematic design phase. Applied Sciences, 13(12), 7207. https://doi.org/10.3390/APP13127207 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Plebankiewicz, E., Meszek, W., Zima, K., & Wieczorek, D. (2019). Probabilistic and fuzzy approaches for estimating the life cycle costs of buildings under conditions of exposure to risk. Sustainability, 12(1), 226. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12010226 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Rizk, T. H. (2023). Analysis of variance. Elsevier eBooks, 149–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-823026-8.00024-9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Sciberras, M., & Dingli, A. (2023). Quantitative research. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, 43–115. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19900-4_11 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Singh, J., Rani, S., & Srilakshmi, G. (2024). Towards explainable AI: Interpretable models for complex decision-making. Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Communication Systems, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICKECS61492.2024.10616500 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Yadgarov, M., Kuzovlev, A., Berikashvili, L., Baeva, A., & Likhvantsev, V. (2021). Importance of data distribution normality test: Theory and practical guide. Russian Journal of Anesthesiology and Reanimatology, 2, 136. https://doi.org/10.17116/ANAESTHESIOLOGY202102113 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Impact Of UI/UX Design on User Trust and Task Completion in Civic Tech Platforms
• Solar Cell Photovoltaic Model Shell Sp 75
• Development of an Intelligent Traffic Management System to Address Visibility Obstruction at Urban Intersections: A Case Study of Ibadan Metropolis
• Optimum Placement of Facts Devices on an Interconnected Power Systems Using Particle Swarm Optimisation Technique
• Assessing Construction Transformation and Implication on Future Production Flow System