TECHNICAL PAPERS
Jan 1, 2006

Relative Effectiveness of Project Delivery and Contract Strategies

Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 132, Issue 1

Abstract

Project delivery systems define the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved in a project. They also establish an execution framework in terms of sequencing of design, procurement, and construction. The decision made in the selection of a project delivery system for a project impacts all phases of execution of the project and greatly impacts the efficiency of project execution. Such decisions should be facilitated by thorough analysis. Structured, quantitative decision analysis processes have been shown to have several benefits over the simplistic, holistic, and informal processes that typically characterize subjective evaluations. However, a dearth of quantitative values of project delivery systems established and validated through research has invariably left project managers with no alternative than to make project delivery selection decisions on the basis of subjective evaluations. Development of the needed quantitative values for application in a decision analysis process would greatly enhance the quality of the decision-making process and provide a defensible rationale for selection of project delivery systems for capital projects. This paper presents research findings that provide the needed quantitative values in this area. Based on the quantitative values defined here, interested parties can develop and implement quantitative evaluation of project delivery alternatives to identify the optimal solution for a given project. Multicriteria decision analysis was found to be the suitable approach for a quantitative, analytical evaluation of project delivery systems. Consequently, the quantitative values presented in this paper were developed in accordance with the requirements of the multicriteria decision analysis technique known as simple multiattribute rating technique with swing weights (SMARTS). Utilizing the quantitative values presented here and applying the analysis technique of SMARTS, a decision support tool has been developed and validated for the Construction Industry Institute. The decision support tool is presently being utilized by member companies of the Construction Industry Institute that were privy to its development. With the presentation of the quantitative values in this paper, other parties interested in developing similar tools would benefit from the research results presented here.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a grant from the Construction Industry Institute (CII) at the University of Texas at Austin. The writers would like to thank the membership of the CII Project Delivery and Contract Strategy Research Team for their guidance, wisdom, patience, and encouragement throughout the research process.

References

Borcherding, K., Eppel, T., and Von Winterfeldt, D. (1991). “Comparison of weighting judgments in multiattribute utility measurement.” Manage. Sci., 37(12), 1603–1619.
Construction Industry Institute. (2001). “Owner’s tool for project delivery and contract strategy selection.” Research Summary Rep. No. 165-1, The Univ. of Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex.
Construction Industry Institute. (2003). “Project delivery and contract strategy selection: A tool for owners,” Implementation resource 165-2, 2nd Ed., The Univ. of Texas at Austin Press, Austin, Tex.
Dyer, J. S., Fishburn, P. C., Steuer, R. E., Wallenius, J., and Zionts, S. (1992). “Multiple criteria decision making, multiattribute utility theory: The next ten years.” Manage. Sci., 38(5), 645–652.
Dyer, J. S., Edmunds, T., Butler, J. C., and Jia, J. (1998). “A multiattribute utility analysis of alternatives for the disposition of surplus weapons-grade plutonium.” Oper. Res., 46(6), 749–761.
Edwards, W. (1977). “How to use multiattribute utility measurement for social decision-making.” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern., SMC-7(5), 326–337.
Edwards, W., and Barron, F. H. (1994). “SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved simple methods for multiattribute utility measurement.” Org. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process., 60(3), 306–325.
French, S. (1983). “A survey and interpretation of multi-attribute utility theory.” Multiobjective decision making, S. French, R. Hartley,L. C. Thomas, and D. J. White, eds., Academic, London.
Goodwin, P., and Wright, G. (1991). Decision analysis for management judgment, Wiley, New York.
LaValle, I. H. (1990). Fundamentals of decision analysis, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York.
Olson, D. L. (1996). Decision aids for selection problems, Springer, New York.
Oyetunji, A. A. (2001). “Methodology for selecting project delivery system and contract strategies for capital projects.” PhD dissertation, Texas A&M Univ., College Station, Tex.
Oyetunji, A. A., and Anderson, S. D. (2001). “Project delivery and contract strategy selection,” Research Rep. 165-12, Construction Industry Institute, The Univ. of Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 132Issue 1January 2006
Pages: 3 - 13

History

Received: Oct 7, 2003
Accepted: Nov 15, 2004
Published online: Jan 1, 2006
Published in print: Jan 2006

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Adetokunbo A. Oyetunji, A.M.ASCE [email protected]
Senior Engineer, Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc., 11757 Katy Freeway, Suite 500, Houston, TX 77079. E-mail: [email protected]
Stuart D. Anderson, M.ASCE [email protected]
Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, 3136 TAMU, Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843-3136 (corresponding author). E-mail: [email protected]

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.

Cited by

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share