Setting Maximum Incentive for Incentive/Disincentive Contracts for Highway Projects
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 130, Issue 1
Abstract
An increasing number of State Highway Agencies (SHAs) are utilizing Incentive/Disincentive (I/D) bidding for highway construction. The I/D bidding concept is designed to shorten the total contract time by giving the contractor an incentive for early completion and a disincentive for late completion of a project. SHAs are then presented with the problem of determining the maximum incentive that may be awarded to the contractor. This maximum incentive amount is affected by construction cost, time, and the incentive/disincentive formula. Many SHAs use a fixed amount or fixed percent of construction cost as a maximum incentive amount. However, overestimation of the maximum incentive amount may waste public money and underestimation will reduce the effectiveness of the incentive. This research offers a quantifying model to determine a reasonable maximum incentive amount and uses projects from the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to illustrate this model that is only suitable for linear I/D. A functional relationship between the construction cost and time duration is developed from the FDOT’s data. The curve with the functional relationship between the construction cost and time duration is then combined with the incentive/disincentive line to determine the optimum maximum days for incentive and incentive amount. Finally, several projects completed by the FDOT will be used to illustrate the validity of this model.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Callahan, M. T., Quackenbush, D. G., and Rowings, J. E. (1992). Construction project scheduling, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Cusack, M. M. (1991). Construction management—The way forward, investment, procurement and performance in construction, E & FN Spon, London.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). (1989). “Incentive/disincentive (I/D) for early completion.” Tech. Advisory T 5090.10, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Washington, D.C.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). (1996–1997). “Alternative contracting program preliminary evaluation.” Internal Rep., Florida Dept. of Transportation, Tallahassee, Fla.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). (1997–1998). Internal Rep., Florida Dept. of Transportation, Tallahassee, Fla.
Jaraiedi, M., Plummer, R. W., and Aber, M. S.(1995). “Incentive/disincentive guidelines for highway construction contracts.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 121(1), 112–120.
Herbsman, Z., Chen, W. T., and Epstien, W. B.(1995). “Time is money: Innovative contracting methods in highway construction.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 121(3), 273–281.
Munzer, H. (1998). “Traffic control plan development methodology for the reconstruction of urban freeways.” MS thesis, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis.
Shen, L., Drew, D., and Zhang, Z.(1999). “Optimal bid model for price-time biparameter construction contracts.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 125(3), 204–209.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 130 • Issue 1 • February 2004
Pages: 84 - 93
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jul 18, 2001
Accepted: Sep 23, 2002
Published online: Jan 16, 2004
Published in print: Feb 2004
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.