Division of Cost Deviations in Integrated Project Delivery Systems Using Cooperative Game Theory
Publication: Construction Research Congress 2024
ABSTRACT
Several contract forms such as the ConsensusDocs 300, AIA-C-191, etc. were developed to provide a relational agreement between the stakeholders of an integrated project delivery (IPD). Nonetheless, none of the standard contracts provides a methodology for the fair division of cost deviations. As such, this paper proposes a model that fairly distributes cost savings and/or overruns by applying cooperative game theory, specifically the Shapely value. The proposed approach first utilizes the project’s earned value calculation to account for each stakeholder’s cost deviation. Then through Shapely value, the authors were able to calculate each stakeholder’s fair share of the cost deviation, beyond the contract target band. The mechanism was applied to a case study, and the results were assessed for a better visualization of the concept. The research contributes to the body of knowledge by introducing a fair distribution mechanism of cost deviations based on the stakeholders’ marginal contribution throughout the project’s duration. This approach thus acts as a constant motivator for the stakeholders to further collaborate in the IPD.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this chapter.
REFERENCES
Ahmed, M. O., M. Abdul Nabi, I. H. El-adaway, D. Caranci, J. Eberle, Z. Hawkins, and R. Sparrow. 2021. “Contractual Guidelines for Promoting Integrated Project Delivery.” J. Constr. Eng. Manag., 147 (11): 05021008. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0002173.
AIA CC (The American Institute of Architects, California Council). 2014. “Integrated Project Delivery: An Updated Working Definition.” The American Institute of Architects, California Council. https://leanipd.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/IPD-A-Working-Definition-FINAL.pdf.
Collins, W., and K. Parrish. 2014. “The Need for Integrated Project Delivery in the Public Sector.” Constr. Res. Congr. 2014, 719–728. Atlanta, Georgia: American Society of Civil Engineers.
Eissa, R., M. S. Eid, and E. Elbeltagi. 2020. “A Cooperative Game Theoretic Model for Revenue Sharing in Construction Joint Ventures.” Constr. Res. Congr. 2020, 1149–1157. Tempe, Arizona: American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston VA.
El Asmar, M., A. S. Hanna, and W.-Y. Loh. 2013. “Quantifying Performance for the Integrated Project Delivery System as Compared to Established Delivery Systems.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 139 (11): 04013012. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000744.
El-Adaway, I., I. Abotaleb, and S. Eteifa. 2018. “A Relational Contractual Framework for Promoting Collaborative Project Environments.” Constr. Res. Congr. 2018, 74–84. New Orleans, Louisiana: American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston VA.
Gomez, S., N. Naderpajouh, G. Ballard, M. Hastak, T. J. Weidner, and P. Barriga. 2018. “Implications of the Integrated Project Delivery Research in Practice.” Constr. Res. Congr. 2018, 86–96. New Orleans, Louisiana: American Society of Civil Engineers.
Guo, S., J. Wang, and H. Xiong. 2022. “The influence of effort level on profit distribution strategies in IPD projects.” Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-02-2022-0107.
Kent, D. C., and B. Becerik-Gerber. 2010. “Understanding Construction Industry Experience and Attitudes toward Integrated Project Delivery.” J. Constr. Eng. Manag., 136 (8): 815–825. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000188.
Liu, M., F. H. Griffis, and A. Bates. 2013. “Compensation Structure and Contingency Allocation in Integrated Project Delivery.” 2013 ASEE Annu. Conf. Expo. Proc., 23.312.1–23.312.12. Atlanta, Georgia: ASEE Conferences. Washington, DC, USA.
Manata, B., V. Miller, S. Mollaoglu, and A. J. Garcia. 2018. “Measuring Key Communication Behaviors in Integrated Project Delivery Teams.” J. Manag. Eng., 34 (4): 06018001. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000622.
Pishdad-Bozorgi, P., and D. Srivastava. 2018. “Assessment of Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) Risk and Reward Sharing Strategies from the Standpoint of Collaboration: A Game Theory Approach.” Constr. Res. Congr. 2018, 196–206. New Orleans, Louisiana: American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston VA.
Project Management Institute. (Sixth Ed.). 2019. The standard for earned value management. Newtown Square: Project Management Institute, Inc.
Shehadeh, A., O. Alshboul, and O. Hamedat. 2022. “Risk Assessment Model for Optimal Gain–Pain Share Ratio in Target Cost Contract for Construction Projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manag., 148 (2): 04021197. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0002222.
Staub-French, S., et al. 2022. Investigating Factors Leading to IPD Project Success in Canada. 143. University of British Columbia; Ecole de Technologie Superieure; Integrated Project Delievery Alliance.
Teng, Y., X. Li, P. Wu, and X. Wang. 2017. “Using cooperative game theory to determine profit distribution in IPD projects.” Int. J. Constr. Manag., 19 (1): 32–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2017.1358075.
Xie, H., and H. Liu. 2017. “Studying Contract Provisions of Shared Responsibilities for Integrated Project Delivery under National and International Standard Forms.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr., 9 (3): 04517009. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000220.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Construction Research Congress 2024
Pages: 31 - 41
History
Published online: Mar 18, 2024
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.