China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Construction management fundamentals
Published in Len Holm, John E. Schaufelberger, Construction Superintendents, 2019
Len Holm, John E. Schaufelberger
In the design-build project delivery method, the owner has a single contract with the design-build contractor for both the design and construction of the project as illustrated in Figure 2.6. The design-build contractor may have a design capability within its own organization, may choose to enter into a joint venture with a design firm, or may contract with a design firm to develop the design. On some projects, a design firm may sign the prime contract and hire the construction firm. Construction may be initiated early in the design process using fast-track procedures or may wait until the design is completed. In this delivery method, the contractor’s PM is responsible for interfacing with the owner and managing both the design and the construction of the project. A variation to this method is the design-build-operate-maintain (DBOM) project delivery method in which the contractor operates and maintains the facility after construction for a specified period for an annual fee. This delivery method is often used for utilities or industrial projects such as water treatment or sewage treatment plants.
Contractual practices and collaborative relationships
Published in Johansen Agnar, Nils O. E. Olsson, Jergeas George, Rolstadås Asbjørn, Project Risk and Opportunity Management, 2019
Johansen Agnar, Nils O. E. Olsson, Jergeas George, Rolstadås Asbjørn
According to Hale et al. (2009), in the design–bid–build project delivery method an architectural/engineering firm is contracted to provide design services based on the requirements provided by the owner. The engineering firm supplies the engineering documents (including drawings and technical specifications) required for the project. The owner uses these engineering documents as the basis for a separate contract with a construction contractor (usually called a general or prime contractor). In this design–bid–build method, engineering and construction activities are performed by two different entities through two separate contracts. This means there is no contractual relationship between engineering and construction contractors. Figure 8.1 presents the contractual relationships in the design–bid–build delivery method.
Introduction
Published in John E. Schaufelberger, Len Holm, Management of Construction Projects, 2017
John E. Schaufelberger, Len Holm
In the design-build project delivery method, the owner has a single contract with the design-build contractor for both the design and construction of the project as illustrated in Figure 1.7. The design-build contractor may have a design capability within its own organization, may chose to enter into a joint venture with a design firm, or may contract with a design firm to develop the design. On some projects, a design firm may sign the contract and hire the construction firm. Construction may be initiated early in the design process using fast-track procedures or may wait until the design is completed. In this delivery method, the contractor’s project manager is responsible for interfacing with the owner and managing both the design and the construction of the project. A variation to this method is the design-build-operate-maintain (DBOM) project delivery method in which the contractor operates the facility after construction for a specified period for an annual fee. This delivery method often is used for utilities projects such as water treatment or sewage treatment plants.
A Comprehensive Appraisal of the Factors Impacting Construction Project Delivery Method Selection: A Systematic Analysis
Published in Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 2023
QingPing Zhong, Hui Tang, Chuan Chen, Martek Igor
The research of the factors in the list that influence the performance of the PDM can help understand and make the decision. The research on the influence mechanism of factors on performance will help decision-makers decide whether to adopt the factors and their weights. Some existing research focuses on some of the more critical factors in the list. For example, Liu et al. discussed the influence of owner characteristics (Liu et al. 2015; Xia et al. 2013). Others (Liu et al. 2016) and (Liu et al. 2019) discuss the characteristics of the project and the impact of the external environment separately. However, it seems that the influence and mechanism of some factors that have not received traditional attention should also be studied in depth. For example, the project execution organization often must consider the opinions of the community when working. In the highly integrated project delivery method, the professional departments of the project can quickly, accurately, and comprehensively share these opinions, reduce the deviation and delay caused by the transmission of information, and improve the project’s efficiency. However, how to effectively transmit this information to various professional departments and adjust project organization behaviors were not discussed in depth. An in-depth and detailed discussion of the factors affecting project delivery methods and mechanisms will help reflect the differences in PDM choices more fully.
Collaboration in Integrated Project Delivery: The Effects of Trust and Formal Contracts
Published in Engineering Management Journal, 2018
Lianying Zhang, Shanshan Huang, Ying Peng
In response, Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) was proposed as a project delivery method, which “integrates people, business structure, and practices into a process that collaboratively harness the talents and insights of all participants to optimize projects results, increase value to the owner, reduce waste and maximize efficiency through all phases of design, fabrication, and construction” (American Institute of Architects, 2011, p. 1). It has been stated that the IPD method could save two to ten percent of total costs for an individual project and may save up to thirty percent if the project team can integrate strategic partnering (UK Office of Government Commerce, 2007). Sutter Medical Center in Castro Valley demonstrated that the IPD method is thirty percent faster than the design-bid-build traditional project delivery method (Alarcon, Christian, & Tommelein, 2011). El Asmar, Hanna, and Loh (2013, 2016)) evaluated thirty five project cases and proved that IPD outperformed traditional delivery method on six performance areas including quality, schedule, project changes, stakeholders’ communications, environmental, and financial outcomes. Similarly, Hanna (2016) used quantitative methods to demonstrate that IPD/near-IPD outperformed non-IPD projects. Therefore, the superiority of IPD method has gained increasing attention in the construction industry (Ma, Zhang, & Li, 2018; Teng, Li, Wu, & Wang, 2017).
Predicting project cost overrun levels in bidding stage using ensemble learning
Published in Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 2020
Hyosoo Moon, Trefor P. Williams, Hyun-Soo Lee, Moonseo Park
Project delivery method is defined as the procurement method that includes the project scope, organizational structure, contract, and award (Gordon 1994). Previous studies indicate that the delivery method is a major contributor to project cost overrun (Ling, Chan, and Chong 2004; Sousa et al. 2014.). The current model employed DB and DBB delivery methods (Bennett, Pothecary, and Robinson 1996; Konchar and Sanvido 1998; Minchin et al. 2013). DB is a delivery method where the project owner contracts with a single entity to conduct both design and construction under a single contract. DBB is the traditional delivery method in many countries where the project owner contracts separately with a designer and a constructor (Konchar and Sanvido 1998).