Naoum, S G (1994) Critical analysis of time and cost of management and traditional contracts. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 120(4), pp. 687-705. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper presents some findings of a PhD research program conducted by Naoum in 1989, which sought to investigate whether the means of procurement influenced project performance. Ten factors were identified to measure project performance: (1) Preconstruction time; (2) construction time; (3) total time; (4) speed of construction; (5) unit cost of building; (6) time overrun; (7) cost overrun; and client satisfaction with (8) time, (9) cost, and (10) quality. A theoretical framework was used to assist in comparing project performance in a case study sample of 39 management contracts and 30 traditional contracts. From the evidence available in the writer’s study, it must be concluded that in neither the management nor the traditional system lies the solution to all the problems facing the construction industry. To achieve project success, the parties need to match the various organizational forms to the client’s characteristics, criteria, and priorities with respect to time, cost, and quality. The statistical analysis suggests that management contracting performs significantly better in some respects than traditional contracting, in particular, when time was the essence of the contract and when the project was highly complex. However, the research did not provide enough evidence to support the view that management contracting can reduce the overall building cost, or that the system can increase the standard of quality.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | program, evidence, unit cost, time overrun, project success, case study, cost overrun, statistical analysis, traditional contracting, client satisfaction, project performance, construction industry, construction time, management contracting |
| Subjects: | software systems, project management theory and practice, project controls, industry analysis, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, client relations, data science, contractual arrangements, financial and cost management |
| Topics: | Time Control, Digital Applications, Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Cost Management |
| 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