Cash flow system development framework within integrated project delivery (IPD) using BIM tools

Elghaish, F; Abrishami, S; Abu Samra, S; Gaterell, M; Hosseini, M R and Wise, R (2021) Cash flow system development framework within integrated project delivery (IPD) using BIM tools. International Journal of Construction Management, 21(6), pp. 555-570. ISSN 1562-3599

Abstract

Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) endeavour to revamp AEC project outcomes through a collaborative method of regulating project stakeholders' goals through creation of a platform that provide early participants involvement and shared risk and rewards. IPD does not include a tender stage to select the optimal bid, therefore, this article presents a methodology framework to develop a cash flow approach using BIM tools. This article adopts Activity Based Costing (ABC), due to its ability to allocate different costs precisely to each construction process. Given that the BIM and IPD target is to achieve the best collaboration among project parties, the proposed framework backing this by displaying all estimated cost data of each package as minimum/maximum estimated cash inflow, during the buyout stage, for informed decision making. This article extends the knowledge relating to IPD implementing process, as well as, improving cost management process based on BIM. Extant literature review highlights the gap of utilising BIM tools to develop cash flow curves, as well as the IPD cost structure requirements. To demonstrate the applicability and validity of the proposed model, it is applied to a real-life case study, which displays promising results in terms of developing IPD’s cash flow management approach.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: 4D; 5D; building information modelling; activity-based costing; cash flow; cash flow; integrated project delivery
Index terms: cash flow, project party, literature review, integrated project delivery, project stakeholder, decision-making, methodology, construction process, collaboration, case study, package, cash flow management, platform, building information modelling, cost management, project outcome, validity, tender stage, cost data, costing
Subjects: contractual arrangements, data analysis and analytics, project completion, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, sociology, decision analysis, building construction, information systems, accounting and finance, tendering, research methods, management, financial management, digital design
Topics: Project Management, Research Practice, Cost Management, Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Digital Applications, Site Management, Organizational Design
Descriptive scope: 5 PCTEA

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