1998Journal of Management in EngineeringRequires access

FEATURE: Weighing the Options

James P. Groton, George Anthony Smith

Open publisher page 3 citations

Abstract

The risks involved in any construction project can vary greatly and can include economic and market conditions, governmental regulations and zoning, and environmental requirements. The decision that will most affect the relationships and risk allocation on a construction project is the choice of project delivery method. Choosing the right project delivery method is the first protection against surprises. The traditional project delivery sequence is a triangular system of design/award/build in three separate phases. Under this relationship, the owner must determine whether the contract should be negotiated or bid and, if it is to be bid, what type of qualification or screening of bidders should be used. If the contract is to be negotiated, the owner should consider engaging the contractor in two separate roles: to serve as a consultant to the owner and architect early in the design phase, and to provide a guaranteed maximum price and guaranteed schedule and accomplish construction. To save time, some degree of fast-tracking may also be included in the project, allowing the owner to enter into separate, prime contracts for discrete jobs early in the project. For owners who want to transfer responsibility for both design and construction to one organization, the design/build project delivery approach may work. This delivery method can also save time on a project. In the typical design/build method, where a single contractor provides both the design and the construction of the project, the owner obtains a single source of responsibility. Whatever project-delivery method the owner chooses, the traditional roles and attitudes of owners, architects, contractors, and subcontractors should not be ignored. While innovation can bring improvements, change for the sake of change can create needless complications.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The risks involved in any construction project can vary greatly and can include economic and market conditions, governmental regulations and zoning, and environmental requirements. The decision that will most affect the relationships and risk allocation on a construction project is the choice of project delivery method. Choosing the right project delivery method is the first protection against surprises. The traditional project delivery sequence is a triangular system of design/award/build in three separate phases. Under this relationship, the owner must determine whether the contract should be negotiated or bid and, if it is to be bid, what type of qualification or screening of bidders should be used. If the contract is to be negotiated, the owner should consider engaging the contractor in two separate roles: to serve as a consultant to the owner and architect early in the design phase, and to provide a guaranteed maximum price and guaranteed schedule and accomplish construction. To save time, some degree of fast-tracking may also be included in the project, allowing the owner to enter into separate, prime contracts for discrete jobs early in the project. For owners who want to transfer responsibility for both design and construction to one organization, the design/build project delivery approach may work. This delivery method can also save time on a project. In the typical design/build method, where a single contractor provides both the design and the construction of the project, the owner obtains a single source of responsibility. Whatever project-delivery method the owner chooses, the traditional roles and attitudes of owners, architects, contractors, and subcontractors should not be ignored. While innovation can bring improvements, change for the sake of change can create needless complications.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The risks involved in any construction project can vary greatly and can include economic and market conditions, governmental regulations and zoning, and environmental requirements. The decision that will most affect the relationships and risk allocation on a construction project is the choice of project delivery method. Choosing the right project delivery method is the first protection against surprises. The traditional project delivery sequence is a triangular system of design/award/build in three separate phases. Under this relationship, the owner must determine whether the contract should be negotiated or bid and, if it is to be bid, what type of qualification or screening of bidders should be used. If the contract is to be negotiated, the owner should consider engaging the contractor in two separate roles: to serve as a consultant to the owner and architect early in the design phase, and to provide a guaranteed maximum price and guaranteed schedule and accomplish construction. To save time, some degree of fast-tracking may also be included in the project, allowing the owner to enter into separate, prime contracts for discrete jobs early in the project. For owners who want to transfer responsibility for both design and construction to one organization, the design/build project delivery approach may work. This delivery method can also save time on a project. In the typical design/build method, where a single contractor provides both the design and the construction of the project, the owner obtains a single source of responsibility. Whatever project-delivery method the owner chooses, the traditional roles and attitudes of owners, architects, contractors, and subcontractors should not be ignored. While innovation can bring improvements, change for the sake of change can create needless complications.

Key concepts: Integrated project delivery, Schedule, Design–build, Basis of estimate, Project stakeholder, Pre-construction services, Project planning, Project management triangle

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
FEATURE: Weighing the Options — Research Paper | ScholarLens