Adamtey, S (2021) Cost and time performance analysis of progressive design-build projects. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 19(3), pp. 686-697. ISSN 1726-0531
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to investigate and determine the time and cost performance of progressive design-build (PDB) projects compared with that of design-build (DB) projects. The objective is to provide empirical evidence on the performance of PDB delivery method. Design/methodology/approach: A quantitative research approach was used by analyzing time and cost data collected on 75 PDB and 92 DB projects from the database of Design-Build Institute of America. One-way analysis of variance was used to determine statistical difference in time and cost performance between PDB and DB. Findings: PDB projects have a comparatively better time performance than cost performance. When compared with DB projects, there was a statistically significant difference in time overrun with PDB performing better than DB (0.41 vs 8.0%). Additionally, about 80% of PDB projects had shorter or as scheduled duration compared to 74% for DB. There was no statistically significant difference of cost performance between PDB and DB. Research limitations/implications: The main limitation is the sample size of 72 PDB projects. It is recommended that further research should be conducted using a larger sample size to confirm the findings of this study. Practical implications: PDB will be more beneficial for projects with sensitive deadlines. For an owner deciding between PDB and DB, the advantage of using PDB is in its time performance, which may lead to the project being completed on or ahead of time. As such, PDB can serve as another “tool in the toolbox” for owners to help in reducing construction delays. Originality/value: This paper is the first attempt to provide an empirical evidence of the cost and time performance of PDB based on analyzing multiple projects. Owners will be better informed when selecting PDB for their projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cost performance; design build; progressive design-build; time performance |
| Index terms: | cost performance, evidence, construction delay, time performance, methodology, design build, progressive design-build, cost data, duration, database, owner, delivery method, sample size, quantitative research, time overrun, variance |
| Subjects: | project controls, data management, delivery method, sociology, measurement and scaling, accounting and finance, economics, research methods, contractual arrangements, data analysis and analytics, evaluation and assessment methods, research design and methodology |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Time Control, Cost Management, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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