Search results

The purpose of this study was to identify specific enablers intrinsic to integrated project delivery (IPD) that can be adapted into the conventional project delivery (CPD) approach to enhance the quality of design documentation produced under the CPD within the Ghanaian construction industry.

The study employed questionnaires and semi-structured interviews for data collection. The sample size was 235 responses for questionnaires while 15 participants were interviewed. The survey instrument was piloted with industry professionals to ensure validity. IBM SPSS was used to analyze quantitative data by determining frequencies, percentages, correlation and regression, while content analysis was used on qualitative data with the aid of QSR Nvivo software.

Key findings include the need to adapt the early involvement of key participants for collaborative design input, tie individual success to overall project success with incentives and establish shared accountability for design errors and encourage open communication.

Adapting IPD enablers into the CPD approach would ensure higher-quality design documentation and more efficient project delivery. This has the potential to improve project outcomes, reduce errors, and foster better collaboration among stakeholders.

This study is the first of its kind to identify specific enablers inherent in IPD that can be adapted into the CPD approach to improve the quality of design documentation within the Ghanaian construction industry.

The conventional project delivery (CPD) approach has been reported in the literature as the most widely used project delivery method in the construction industry globally compared to other delivery methods. However, researchers and practitioners have argued that the approach, specifically during the production of design documentation under the CPD, lacks certain capabilities that ensure quality and enhance project delivery. Therefore, this study aims to use the Ghanaian construction industry to identify the capabilities required of the CPD in practice, particularly during the production of design documentation.

The study design follows a pragmatist philosophy and uses mixed methods based on a deductive approach. Data collection involved a questionnaire survey, followed by semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data analysis used descriptive and inferential statistics, whereas qualitative data analysis used content analysis with the assistance of IBM SPSS and QSR Nvivo 12 Pro.

Findings indicate that there should be incentives for producing good design documentation quality; mandatory coordination of design documentation; improving collaboration among designers; and allowing contractors to make input during the design stage.

The results indicate the need for the identified capabilities to be introduced in the CPD approach to improve design documentation quality.

This study offers a significant insight into the specific capabilities that are required of the CPD approach in practice particularly, in the production of design documentation