Assessing state transportation agency constructability implementation

Dunston, P S; Gambatese, J A and McManus, J F (2005) Assessing state transportation agency constructability implementation. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 131(5), pp. 569-578. ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

Although guidance is available for state transportation agencies to establish constructability review processes (CRPs), nationwide implementation has been slow due, in part, to a lack of clarity regarding related costs and benefits and a perception that CRPs are resource intensive. This study funded by the National Cooperative Highway Research Program reveals that while numerous states have attempted implementation in various forms, obstacles have frequently either hindered or halted progress. Four elements appear to be essential for the successful implementation and continuance of a CRP: (1) institutionalization of the CRP Champion, (2) an emphasis on a quality-driven as opposed to a schedule-driven design process, (3) clear yet flexible guidelines for executing constructability reviews across the broad range of project types and sizes, and (4) a vehicle for meaningful expert input from construction contracting professionals. A benefit-cost model, founded on the proposition that CRP implementation provides efficiencies that result in significant cost and schedule reductions, is demonstrated using case studies. A need for more precise identification of costs and quantification of benefits is noted.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: benefit cost ratios; constructability; project management
Index terms: design process, program, cost model, quantification, efficiency, case study, transportation agency, institutionalization, implementation, constructability, project management
Subjects: contractual arrangements, financial and cost management, data collection methods, design methods, measurement and scaling, sociology, transportation engineering, performance management, construction integration, software systems, project management theory and practice
Topics: Quality Management, Design Practice, Digital Applications, Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Cost Management, Procurement, Roles and Professions
Descriptive scope: 4 PCEA

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