Benefits of Small Projects Team Initiative
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 126, Issue 1
Abstract
Ordinarily, minimum design costs are associated with all construction projects regardless of their size or complexity. Consequently, the design costs are a higher percentage of the overall costs for small projects. This paper presents an analysis of the effectiveness of the Small Projects Team Initiative (SPTI) developed and implemented by the Seattle district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. SPTI is intended to lower the design costs on construction projects where the design scope is simple and/or the administrative and construction processes are somewhat routine. The Small Projects team consists of representatives from contracting, construction, engineering, and project management. This team produces specifications for selected projects with simplified design, design by shop drawing, and innovative contracting arrangements. Data from 77 projects completed within the Seattle district are compared with the data from 146 pre-SPTI jobs. Statistically confirmed benefits include reduced design costs and reduced schedule growth (when user requested changes are excluded). Lower median change-order rates are not confirmed, but further analysis of the nature of changes is recommended.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Ad-ready PS&E manual. (1998). Olympic Region Proj. Devel., Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, Wash.
2.
Anderson, C. (1997). “Job order contracting briefing to the state of Washington Alternative Public Works Oversight Committee.” Seattle district, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle.
3.
Berg, A. (1994). “Information paper: Seattle district small projects team initiative.” Ft. Lewis Area Office, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Ft. Lewis, Wash.
4.
Bubshait, A. A., Al-Said, F. A., and Abolnour, M. M. (1998). “Design fee versus design deficiency.”J. Arch. Engrg., ASCE, 4(2), 44–46.
5.
Clark, T. (1998). Installation support services manual. Savannah district, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Savannah, Ga.
6.
Dimichele, R. (1998). “Innovative acquisition process saves government time and money.” U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Huntsville, Ala.
7.
Eckstein, J. ( 1994). “The impact of partnering on construction contracts,” MS thesis, University of Washington, Seattle.
8.
Gardiner, P. D., and Simmons, J. E. L. (1998). “Conflict in small- and medium-sized projects: Case of partnering to the rescue.”J. Mgmt. in Engrg., ASCE, 14(1), 35–40.
9.
Hathaway, J. L., and Cassell, J. W. (1993). “Managing design performance.” Logistics Management Institute, Bethesda, Md.
10.
Heitzman, M., and Kennedy, G. (1998). “Abridged version of the FHWA-1273.” Federal Highway Administration, Iowa division, U.S. Department of Transportation, Iowa.
11.
“Installation support: Simplified design acquisition methodology (SDAM).” (1997). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Japan.
12.
“Interstate 5 South DePont: Interchange design process report.” (1997). Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, Wash.
13.
Katz, N. F. (1993). “Partnering: Trend or fad?” Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc.
14.
Kranzler, G., and Moursund, J. (1999). Statistics for the terrified. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
15.
McKenzie, J., Schaefer, R. L., and Farber, E. (1995). The student edition of mini-tab for Windows. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.
16.
Organizing for small project management. (1985). Marcel Dekker, New York.
17.
Reed, A. G. ( 1998). “The impact of the small projects team initiative on construction projects managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,” MS thesis, University of Washington, Seattle.
18.
Reilly, P. (1998). “Matrix of services and costs.” Norfolk district, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Norfolk, Va.
19.
“Standard operating procedures for administration of Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity construction contracts for installation support.” (1997). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Ft. Worth, Tex.
20.
Todd, K. T., and Waldo, J. (1998). “Reduced specifications and contract procedures: Alternate contracting procedures for small projects.” Federal Highway Administration, Maine division, U.S. Department of Transportation and the Maine Department of Transportation, Augusta, Maine.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 126 • Issue 1 • January 2000
Pages: 22 - 28
History
Received: Mar 2, 1999
Published online: Jan 1, 2000
Published in print: Jan 2000
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.