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.

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.

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.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to present a framework to devise a system for ranking of traditional project delivery methods, regarding their suitability, against the varying levels of mega project attributes.

The proposed system employs input and output interfaces and a granular (fuzzy rule base) component for estimating the subjective levels of risks, opportunities, and constraints and then mapping them to a decision matrix. A questionnaire has been designed (using the SurveyGizmo® platform) to collect the perceptions of the various project stakeholders and use them. A total of 127 stakeholders completed the survey form in full.

The survey data were used to calibrate the fuzzy logic model of the granular component. The envisioned system computes, for each possible delivery method, an index that reflects the suitability (of the corresponding delivery method) on an ordinal scale.

The devised decision support system is likely to lessen the dependency of “accurate decision” on “the experience of the decision-makers.” It will also enable ranking the various project delivery methods based on the various project and stakeholder attributes that are likely to affect the project risks, opportunities and constraints.

The construction project is implemented under uncertainty environment, and the product of construction is very complex. Selecting a project delivery system/approach is a critical task, which determines the project schedule, quality and investment objectives. The purpose of this paper is to propose a decision-making model for the selection of project delivery system which is based on information entropy and unascertained measure model.

A decision-making model based on information entropy and unascertained set is employed to select project delivery approach. In order to overcome the subjective evaluations from the experts, the theory of “entropy weight” is applied to modify the experts’ subjective weight. The multi-attribute unascertained measure decision making is fitted to deal with the uncertainty information for selection of project delivery system.

The proposed methodology is more comprehensive compared with the previous work, especially in the uncertainty environment.

There is some further work that should be considered, such as how to deal with the imprecise and subjective information given by the experts; how to determine the weight of the experts’; finding a set of importance factors influencing the selection of a delivery system is a complex task to further research.

The proposed method can help the construction owner to select a most fitted project delivery system of a construction project.

A new approach to select project delivery approach is proposed based on information entropy and unascertained set.

Due to the increasing size and complexity of construction projects, construction engineering and management involves the coordination of many complex and dynamic processes and relies on the analysis of uncertain, imprecise and incomplete information, including subjective and linguistically expressed information. Various modelling and computing techniques have been used by construction researchers and applied to practical construction problems in order to overcome these challenges, including fuzzy hybrid techniques. Fuzzy hybrid techniques combine the human-like reasoning capabilities of fuzzy logic with the capabilities of other techniques, such as optimization, machine learning, multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) and simulation, to capitalise on their strengths and overcome their limitations. Based on a review of construction literature, this chapter identifies the most common types of fuzzy hybrid techniques applied to construction problems and reviews selected papers in each category of fuzzy hybrid technique to illustrate their capabilities for addressing construction challenges. Finally, this chapter discusses areas for future development of fuzzy hybrid techniques that will increase their capabilities for solving construction-related problems. The contributions of this chapter are threefold: (1) the limitations of some standard techniques for solving construction problems are discussed, as are the ways that fuzzy methods have been hybridized with these techniques in order to address their limitations; (2) a review of existing applications of fuzzy hybrid techniques in construction is provided in order to illustrate the capabilities of these techniques for solving a variety of construction problems and (3) potential improvements in each category of fuzzy hybrid technique in construction are provided, as areas for future research.

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.

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.