Songer, A D; Ibbs, C W and Napier, T R (1994) Process model for public sector design-build planning. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 120(4), pp. 857-874. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Design-build contracting is becoming an increasingly viable alternative to traditional contracting techniques in the public sector. This interest has led to dialogue among public sector agencies for establishing greater understanding of the design-build process and its implementation. The present paper discusses results of recent research conducted to develop a formalized model for public sector design-build. The model includes identifying (1) Sequential, concurrent, and hierarchical management activities; (2) management decisions required throughout the process; and (3) relationships between activities and decisions required to plan the project. The five phases of design-build planning presented in the model include identifying facilities for design-build, performing project coordination, developing the request for proposal, performing proposal evaluation, and conducting contract administration. Though the scope of the research is primarily design-build contracting for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Military Construction Army program, it can be generalized to other public sector agencies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | proposal, management decision, program, agency, becoming, contract administration, military construction, traditional contracting, public sector, engineer, coordination, implementation |
| Subjects: | management, decision-making and reasoning, software systems, contract management, sociology, philosophical process, administrative law, infrastructure and transport systems, profession, project planning, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Organizational Design, Legal Issues, Digital Applications, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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