Hyun, C; Cho, K; Koo, K; Hong, T and Moon, H (2008) Effect of delivery methods on design performance in multifamily housing projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(7), pp. 468-482. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Existing studies on the performance evaluation by the delivery method generally indicate that the design build (DB) method is superior to the design-bid-build (DBB) method in terms of construction duration, cost, and quality. As opposed to the performance of construction duration and cost, where quantitative evaluation is relatively possible, most performance evaluations of quality are based on interviews with the owners. Therefore, this paper aimed at evaluating the level of design performance to conduct a quantitative evaluation on the performance of quality. To achieve this goal, this paper analyzed the impact of delivery methods on design performance in terms of the quantitative evaluation based on the case studies analyzing construction drawings and specifications of public multifamily housing projects delivered through the DB and DBB methods since 2000. The Delphi and analytic hierarchy process methods were used to develop objective standards and contents for evaluating the design performance. An analysis of variance test was conducted to analyze which delivery methods would have an effect on the design performance. Construction industry practitioners can use the results of this study in selecting a delivery method appropriate to the project characteristics.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | delivery; design/build; housing; project management |
| Index terms: | delivery method, owner, design-bid-build, variance, case study, duration, construction industry, project management, design build, drawing, housing project, interview, specification, performance evaluation, housing, practitioner |
| Subjects: | practitioner, data collection methods, construction type, contractual arrangements, technical documentation, contractual condition, project management theory and practice, performance measurement, industry analysis, housing and residential development, delivery method, project controls, measurement and scaling, sociology |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Project Management, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Construction Technology, Procurement, Design Practice, Urban Studies, Quality Management, Contract Administration, Time Control |
| 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