Griffis, F H and Butler, M (1988) Case for cost-plus contracting. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 114(1), pp. 83-94. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper represents a case for cost-plus contracting by first discussing reasons why cost-plus contracting is not preferred by most owners. The final cost is not guaranteed, there is usually poor supervision by the contractor and the owner, there is a tendency for more charges by the end user, the labor force tend to drag out the jobs, etc. The writers then discuss how to properly manage a cost-plus contract by addressing each of the risks and making suggestions on how to mitigate them. The use of cost-plus contracts shows promise in getting more construction for the money.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | end user, supervision, cost-plus, labour force, owner |
| Subjects: | sociology, economics, stakeholder, contractual arrangements, control systems |
| Topics: | Supply Chain Management, Project Management, Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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