DOI: 10.5593/sgem2017/53/S21.011


B. Fleaca, M. Corocaescu
Wednesday 13 September 2017 by Libadmin2017

References: 17th International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM 2017, www.sgem.org, SGEM2017 Conference Proceedings, ISBN 978-619-7408-10-2 / ISSN 1314-2704, 29 June - 5 July, 2017, Vol. 17, Issue 53, 85-92 pp, DOI: 10.5593/sgem2017/53/S21.011


Starting to elaborate complex activities as projects or recurrent work requires taking into consideration the relationship between effort and benefits which may gain different forms depending on the field of intervention. The most widely used and measurable context is referring to the effort, qualified as costs, and the benefits, viewed as added value gained by stakeholders regardless of the form: tangible and/or intangible elements. The analysis of efforts and benefits calls for a holistic approach for evaluating the main purpose of the project or the work undertaken and for identifying the desired results and related stakeholders. By this way, the researchers and professionals may evaluate work and results at different organizational levels as strategic and operational, macro and/or micro execution. Two of the most used methods for evaluating work results are referring to the cost-benefit analysis and to the value analysis or value engineering. The cost-benefit analysis tool could be also applied within social-based projects where evaluation process could be conducted considering different perspectives going beyond the engineering and economic domains. Although the study is limited to a conceptual analysis, the results of the comparative approach attempts to ascertain inner connections related to similarities and differences between two methods: cost-benefit analysis and value analysis or value engineering.

Keywords: value engineering, cost-benefit analysis, quality management, process improvement