Quantitative methods for design-build team selection

El Asmar, M; Lotfallah, W; Whited, G and Hanna, A S (2010) Quantitative methods for design-build team selection. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(8), pp. 904-912. ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

The use of design/build (DB) contracting by transportation agencies has been steadily increasing as a project delivery system for large complex highway projects. However, moving to DB from traditional design-bid-build procurement can be a challenge. One significant barrier is gaining acceptance of a best-value selection process in which technical aspects of a proposal are considered separately and then combined with price to determine the winning proposal. These technical aspects mostly consist of qualitative criteria, thus making room for human errors or biases. Any perceived presence of bias or influence in the selection process can lead to public mistrust and protests by bidders. It is important that a rigorous quantitative mathematical analysis of the evaluation process be conducted to determine whether bias exists and to eliminate it. The paper discusses two potential sources of bias-evaluators and weighting model-in the DB selection process and presents mathematical models to detect and remove biases should they exist. A score normalization model deals with biases from the evaluators; then a graphical weight-space volume model and a Monte Carlo statistical sampling model are developed to remove biases from the weighting model. The models are then tested and demonstrated using results from the DB bridge replacement project for the collapsed Mississippi River bridge of Interstate 35W in Minneapolis.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: bids; design/build; Monte Carlo method; quantitative analysis; selection
Index terms: proposal, mathematical model, quantitative analysis, mathematical analysis, replacement, bias, quantitative method, transportation agency, design-bid-build, project delivery, bidder, highway construction, presence, sampling
Subjects: project delivery, bidding, project planning, environmental science, contractual arrangements, data analysis and analytics, mathematical modelling, data collection methods, materials science, transportation engineering, civil engineering, probability and distributions
Topics: Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Procurement, Sustainability
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