Shr, J F and Chen, W T (2004) Setting maximum incentive for incentive/disincentive contracts for highway projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 130(1), pp. 84-93. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
An increasing number of State Highway Agencies (SHAs) are utilizing Incentive/Disincentive (I/D) bidding for highway construction. The I/D bidding concept is designed to shorten the total contract time by giving the contractor an incentive for early completion and a disincentive for late completion of a project. SHAs are then presented with the problem of determining the maximum incentive that may be awarded to the contractor. This maximum incentive amount is affected by construction cost, time, and the incentive/disincentive formula. Many SHAs use a fixed amount or fixed percent of construction cost as a maximum incentive amount. However, overestimation of the maximum incentive amount may waste public money and underestimation will reduce the effectiveness of the incentive. This research offers a quantifying model to determine a reasonable maximum incentive amount and uses projects from the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to illustrate this model that is only suitable for linear I/D. A functional relationship between the construction cost and time duration is developed from the FDOT's data. The curve with the functional relationship between the construction cost and time duration is then combined with the incentive/disincentive line to determine the optimum maximum days for incentive and incentive amount. Finally, several projects completed by the FDOT will be used to illustrate the validity of this model.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bids; contracts; highway construction |
| Index terms: | agency, duration, effectiveness, construction cost, validity, highway construction, bidding |
| Subjects: | performance management, sociology, financial and cost management, project controls, bidding, evaluation and assessment methods, civil engineering |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Quality Management, Time Control, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Cost Management |
| 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