Search results

The purpose of this paper is to identify key project delivery method selection factors to assist water industry decision-makers in selecting the most appropriate delivery method for their water treatment plant projects.

The selection factors were identified by compiling and validating key project delivery selection factors across various industries through an extensive literature review and two industry expert workshops. This resulted in the development of a web-based decision-support tool to facilitate project delivery method selection within the water industry.

The research effort led to the identification of 13 key project delivery method selection factors (seven primary factors and six secondary factors) for water treatment plant projects. These factors were utilized to develop EXPRSS-TP, a pioneering web-based project delivery method decision-support tool for the water industry.

A project delivery method selection process is typically an informal process that may range from days to weeks at a time. Based on this work, the assessment can now be completed in about one hour and provides decision-makers with the most favorable delivery method for their project. And with the new tool that encompasses the new knowledge, not only is the decision reached at an accelerated pace, EXPRSS-TP also documents the entire selection process, allowing for a written and retained record of this key decision and its procedure.

This paper contributes to the exisiting body of knowledge by identifying key project delivery selection factors across numerous industries, assessing and combining them, and finally incorporating them into one comprehensive process. EXPRSS-TP improves the traditional project delivery method selection process and provides evidence-based project delivery method selection recommendations.

Over the last three decades, construction projects have increasingly been delivered through alternative delivery methods. As a result, many owners have a range of delivery methods to choose from and aim to use the right one for each of their projects. Researchers have developed several tools and decision-support processes to facilitate this selection procedure. The purpose of this study is to review and discuss differences and common themes across selection tools developed by academic researchers and project owners.

The study reviews prominent selection processes and tools used for infrastructure projects by conducting an in-depth literature review and using the content analysis method to elicit findings on the methodologies and criteria presented in the literature.

This study presents three principal findings. First, findings show three common themes emerge within the selection criteria—characteristics, goals and risks. Second, while academic studies most commonly suggest employing multi-attribute analysis, this study reveals that, in practice, selection tools most frequently employ a staged or gated evaluation based on the type of criteria and their importance to the decision. Finally, this review further highlights the importance of institutional context in decision-making.

This work contributes to the body of knowledge by providing guidance to practitioners and opening new directions for researchers around the way selection criteria are categorized in the relevant literature and the institutional context considerations when structuring or evaluating a selection process or tool.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of risk on the project delivery selection process of three primary methods in use in the USA, including design-bid-build (DBB); design-build (DB); and construction manager/general contractor (CMGC).

The review of empirical studies, national survey questionnaire, multivariate analysis, and cross-validating discussion are adopted for this research. The risk factors were identified through an exhaustive literature review and empirical studies that included more than $10 billion of transportation projects. Experts with an average of 25 years of professional experience related to risk and project delivery methods in the transportation industry were invited to participate in the survey.

There were six critical risk factors for DBB, seven for DB, and six for CMGC. These critical risk factors are ranked differently from each delivery method. The most critical risk factor for DBB is construction risk, for DB is scope risk, and for CMGC is constructability and documentation risk.

Knowledge of the risk factors will allow researchers to better understand the impact of risk on DBB, DB, and CMGC projects. The chief limitation of this research is that the primary data were mostly opinions from experts although several empirical data were collected for cross-validation. The future research may take into account the role of participant's risk aversion in project delivery decision frameworks.

Transportation agencies and other practitioners can use these risk factors to make more effective and defensible decisions on which delivery method is the most suitable for their projects. The result from this study provides a foundation for decision makers to use a risk-based approach in the project delivery decision.

This research is the first attempt to examine the impact of risk on the project delivery selection process.

Selecting a proper project delivery system is one of the critical issues for the success of a project. This paper discusses the application of project delivery systems in China and the existing project delivery system selection methods, analyzes project objectives and indicators influencing the selection of project delivery systems, and aims at finding an appropriate method to select project delivery systems.

A survey was conducted by postal questionnaire and Multivariate Statistical Analysis was applied to analyze the project data. A robust model was developed to analyze the selection of project delivery systems.

The results of survey and analysis show that design‐bid‐build (DBB)/project management (DBB+PM), design‐build (DB)/engineering, procurement and construction (EPC)/Turnkey, multi‐stage DB/EPC and EP+C are commonly used in China. The differences between DBB and DBB+PM, and differences between DB/EPC and Turnkey in China are not significant. Weights of project objectives in each project delivery system and the ranking of indicators influencing the selection of project delivery systems are acquired.

Analysis was conducted with a robust model instead of traditional model in consideration of efficiency. This research may assist owners in Mainland China in selecting project delivery systems, improve project performance, and encourage efficiency in project delivery process.

Delivering a building project on time and under budget is still an increasingly complex and risky business. A host of new project delivery methods and management techniques have been promoted to help achieve this. Developing a project delivery strategy and contractual relationships is a particularly complex and large problem domain that requires diverse, highly sophisticated skills, expertise and knowledge. Expert knowledge and lessons learned in the construction phase of a building project hold a wealth of knowledge and expertise that can be often taken for granted. However, this body of knowledge is not systematically incorporated into the procurement phase of subsequent projects. Case‐based reasoning is a technology for problem solving based on recall and reuse of specific experiences; it offers techniques for acquiring, representing and managing the knowledge gained from previous experiences and augmenting a set of specific experiences with generalised knowledge. Outlines how current case‐based reasoning techniques support project delivery method decisions. Presents a case‐based framework for project delivery method selection. Finally, reports the findings of the first phase of the system development cycle.

The purpose of this paper is to use Delphi technique to assess the applicability of coupling various project delivery methods (PDMs) and contract strategies (CSs) for delivery of public building projects (PBP) in Ethiopia.

To achieve the objective of this research, an online Delphi study was designed, conducted and analyzed using various statistical procedures. Results were compared to CII’s project delivery and CS (PDCS) tool, a US-based PDM selection tool.

This study converged in the third round signifying a consensus on the importance of design–build and construction manager at risk as alternatives to design–bid–build. In addition, “controlling schedule growth” was deemed to be a major performance measure that needs to be considered for PBP in Ethiopia, a result consistent with the outcomes from CII’s PDCS tool.

Among existing studies, none to the best of the authors’ knowledge has focused on a holistic approach to identify the most appropriate pairings of PDMs and CSs for PBP which was critically needed due to the magnitude and high stakes of these projects. This research is a steppingstone toward gaining knowledge on how to approach these types of projects in fast-growing environments thirsty for new building projects such as in Ethiopia.

Innovative design and execution approaches are employed in infrastructure sectors and planning to enhance the integrated project delivery system, assure the sustainability of infrastructure projects, and meet the demands of the dynamic, changing environment. Delivery methods must incorporate new technologies. By combining digital technology, teamwork, and mass manufacturing, a greater degree of exceptional quality, sustainability, and resilience in the environment will be generated. As a result, a new approach does not rely on the reaction policy, but instead considers alternative scenarios and employs a simulation model to determine the best course of action.

In the paper, the system dynamics approach to construction management is validated in light of pertinent research. Additionally, it describes the difficulties facing the infrastructure projects' delivery system. Additionally, the strategy for system dynamics creation is described. This strategy includes a causal loop diagram, generates a stock-flow diagram, and simulates forecasts of model behavior over time. Next, the optimization model's validation process is used to create a system dynamics model for choosing the best infrastructure project delivery system project and controlling it to maximize sustainability, mass production, digital integration, and team integration. The dynamic complexity of project management is growing.

The primary goal is to present a system dynamics (SD) simulation to look at how well infrastructure projects perform in terms of choosing the best method for delivering infrastructure projects. One of the most ideal methods for delivering projects is integrated project delivery. An effective methodology for making strategic decisions on the choice of the best project delivery method. In order to enhance certain infrastructure project delivery system metrics for sustainability, mass production, digital integration, and team integration, the model included building strategy and sophisticated system dynamics simulation. According to the construction strategy, the outcomes have been satisfactory.

System dynamics research has been done to replicate the idea of contemporary construction in order to determine the best approach for delivering infrastructure. The government and decision-makers would benefit from understanding this research as they decide on the best delivery method for boosting the sustainability and productivity of infrastructure projects in Egypt.

The purpose of this study is to determine the barriers and constraints executive decision-makers have to face during the delivery method selection stage of water and wastewater projects using alternative project delivery (APD) methods, e.g. design-build (DB), design-build-operate (DBO) and construction management-at-risk (CMAR).

Structured interviews were conducted with 18 executive decision-makers from public agencies to identify the reasons for transitioning to APD from the design-bid-build (DBB) method. Respondents were also asked about the major obstacles they faced during the decision-making process, as well as key positive and negative factors in using APD methods. The executive decision-makers were also asked about their lessons learned during this process. In addition, this study collected key steps in making APD water and wastewater projects successful. All of the findings from the interview phase were validated by seven public agency executive decision-makers of water and wastewater industries.

One major study finding was that executive decision-makers chose the APD method because it provided cost and schedule benefits and the owner could also choose the designer or builder based on qualifications. The study also found that the main obstacles executive decision-makers faced were: (1) difficulty in implementing APD methods because they do not follow the low-bid process, (2) reluctance to use DB/CMAR because of the status quo and (3) unfamiliarity of city councils/elected commissions with the DB/CMAR process. The validation survey found that most findings from the initial phase of interviews were confirmed by the executives who took part in validation phase.

The major limitation of this research is the small sample size. As the executive decision-makers are very hard to reach for interviews, the authors failed to get interviews from a large number of them, despite repeated efforts made by the authors. Another limitation of this study is that the authors contacted most of the executive decision-makers listed in the WDBC list. These executive decision-makers worked for public agencies and, therefore, the views from private agencies could not be included in this research. The authors understand that the validation of the study findings is very important. However, due to the scope and limited time available for the research, the authors could not validate the findings of this study with other public agencies.

Selecting APD methods instead of DBB methods in water and wastewater projects for public agencies is a crucial issue during the project planning phase. Agencies' executive decision-makers need to understand the advantages and disadvantages of APD methods, along with the transition process in order to smoothly deliver projects. The findings of this study will assist public agency executive decision-makers to mitigate risks, overcome obstacles and become more educated about the APD method process, so that these projects can be successfully delivered within budget and on time.

This paper contributes to the existing body of knowledge by identifying lessons learned related to various APD method issues, which can be utilized by municipal executive decision-makers to successfully complete future APD projects.

Early contractor involvement (ECI) faces many barriers because it differs from traditional business practices. Public owners, especially, face a major challenge because they must comply with international and national legislation. The purpose of this paper is to develop a framework that illustrates the various approaches that public project owners can take to implement ECI.

In addition to a literature review, three groups of case studies were carried out. The case studies were based on 54 semi-structured in-depth interviews with key personnel from 21 Norwegian public projects and document study.

In all, 25 approaches to ECI were identified during the research. Twelve of these were used in the cases studied.

There are several approaches to ECI that are suitable for public owners. However, the contractor’s contribution depends on which approach is implemented and how it is implemented.

As original contribution, this study presents a novel framework that defines options for implementing ECI in public projects. Furthermore, this paper provides insights on how ECI can be implemented in public projects based on Norwegian experiences. Although the empirical data of the study is limited to Norwegian public projects, this study contributes to knowledge about how to implement ECI internationally.

The purpose of this quantitative study was to investigate Penn State Extension 4-H volunteer leaders’ leadership development needs and preferred delivery methods for leadership development. The participants were 147 volunteer leaders who attended Penn State Extension Annual 4-H Leader Forum and filled out the survey. We found that the overall mean score for leadership skills needs among volunteer leaders was 4.33 (SD =.45). Volunteers’ overall leadership skills needs do not differ based on volunteer gender, level of education, age, and previous volunteer experience. The preferred delivery methods of leadership development for Penn State Extension 4-H volunteer leaders were workshop and in-service training. Leadership education is critical in advancing volunteers’ skills and preparing them to delivery well-developed, state of the art contemporary leadership education programs.