Ansell, M; Holmes, M; Evans, R; Pasquire, C and Price, A (2009) Delivering best value in highways major maintenance schemes: Case study. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 135(4), pp. 235-245. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The Construction Management Framework (CMF) is a contract established by the Highways Agency in the United Kingdom, where collaborative working is used within a framework setting to deliver the best value in highways major renewals and improvements schemes. This research aims to establish the effectiveness of the CMF in achieving this aim. It aims to define best value as it is understood collectively by the participants in the framework, and evaluate the performance measurement used in terms of its relevance and suitability to deliver the best value. The research also looks at perceptions of the performance of the CMF by those companies included in the framework, and the benefits and disadvantages of using this type of arrangement in highway work. Data collected from the client were compared to that given by the contractors, supply chain, and construction managers of the CMF; results showed a perception by those involved in the framework that construction management is suited to the type of work it is currently used for, and there is potential for similar CMFs to be used elsewhere in the construction industry. However, the research also found that there is a need to improve the performance measures so that value is properly reflected in the goals of the CMF; and the presentation of evidence that demonstrates the benefits that can be gained using this procurement route.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | case reports; highways and roads; partnership; procurement |
| Index terms: | partnership, performance measurement, case study, construction industry, best value, effectiveness, United Kingdom, performance measure, suitability, agency, renewal, evidence, construction manager |
| Subjects: | bidding, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, profession, industry analysis, design criteria, sociology, partnership management, Geography, performance management, renovation and retrofit, performance measurement |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Quality Management, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Procurement, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Engineering Principles |
| 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