Evaluating uncertainties to deliver enhanced service performance in education PPPs: A hierarchical reliability framework

Geng, L; Herath, N; Hui, F K P; Liu, X; Duffield, C and Zhang, L (2023) Evaluating uncertainties to deliver enhanced service performance in education PPPs: A hierarchical reliability framework. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 30(9), pp. 4464-4485. ISSN 0969-9988

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to develop a hierarchical reliability framework to evaluate the service delivery performance of education public–private partnerships (PPPs) effectively and efficiently during long-term operations. Design/methodology/approach: The research design included development and test phases. In the development phase, three performance layers, i.e. indicator, component and system, in the education service delivery system were identified. Then, service component reliability was computed through first order reliability method (FORM). Finally, the reliability of the service system was obtained using dynamic component weightings. A PPP school example in Australia was set up in the test phase, where performance indicators were collected from relevant contract documents and performance data were simulated under three assumptive scenarios. Findings: The example in the test phase yielded good results for the developed framework in evaluating uncertainties of service delivery performance for education PPPs. Potentially underperforming services from the component to the system level at dynamic timepoints were identified, and effective preventative maintenance strategies were developed. Research limitations/implications: This research enriches reliability theory and performance evaluation research on education PPPs. First, a series of performance evaluation indicators are constructed for assessing the performance of the service delivery of the education PPP operations. Then, a reliability-based framework for service components and system is developed to predict service performance of the PPP school operations with consideration of a range of uncertainties during project delivery. Practical implications: The developed framework was illustrated with a real-world case study. It demonstrates that the developed reliability-based framework could potentially provide the practitioners of the public sector with a basis for developing effective preventative maintenance strategies with the aim of prolonging the service life of the PPP schools. Originality/value: Evaluating education PPPs is challenging as it involves long-term measurement of various service components under uncertainty. The developed reliability-based framework is a valuable tool to ensure that reliability is maintained throughout the service life of education PPPs in the presence of uncertainty.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: education ppps; reliability; service delivery evaluation; uncertainty
Index terms: project delivery, presence, public sector, Australia, partnership, research design, service delivery, case study, service life, performance evaluation, contract document, practitioner, methodology, strategy, performance indicator
Subjects: management, performance measurement, research methods, performance management, service delivery, contractual condition, Geography, partnership management, asset management, administrative law, data collection methods, research design and methodology, practitioner, environmental science, project delivery
Topics: Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Procurement, Sustainability, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Quality Management, Legal Issues, Contract Administration
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTE

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here