IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

An effective outline business case to facilitate successful decision-making

Listed author(s):
  • Mark John Gannon
  • Nigel John Smith
Registered author(s):

    Historically the public sector's outline business case for Light Rapid Transit/Metro public-private partnership projects delivered in the United Kingdom has frequently failed to address the project affordability decision. As a consequence the business cases have had to be reworked, redeveloped or have required the project to be revoked, in each case wasting significant amounts of public and private sector time and money. The development and testing of an effective outline business case to facilitate successful project affordability decision-making for PPP projects is described. A mixed methods research approach was adopted utilizing a case study research methodology, interviews with PPP experts to identify business case critical success factors and application of the analytical hierarchical process to assess their effectiveness. The Delphi technique was used to verify and validate the effectiveness of the outline business case. The findings demonstrated that the success of the outline business case in practice relies on three critical success factors: the degree of political support, achieving a balance between political PPP ideology and the market's acceptance of the contractual model and the level of transparency and commitment from suppliers. These factors are major uncertainties, are difficult to represent accurately within the business case and signify a major constraint to the sponsor forecasting the project's affordability.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Construction Management and Economics.

    Volume (Year): 29 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 2 ()
    Pages: 185-197

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:29:y:2011:i:2:p:185-197
    DOI: 10.1080/01446193.2010.538707
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Web:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:29:y:2011:i:2:p:185-197. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.