Blomberg, D; Cotellesso, P; Sitzabee, W and Thal, A E (2014) Discovery of internal and external factors causing military construction cost premiums. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 140(3): 4013060, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Each year, the United States invests $30 billion in federal construction. Military construction (MILCON) represents 40% ($12 billion) of that capital investment. This study confirmed the existence of MILCON cost premiums compared with private sector construction through an analysis of existing research. This study also evaluated two nearly identical projects and used expert interviews and surveys to determine which factors influence the cost premiums. The projects represented a rare opportunity to compare projects that had the same end requirement: method of execution and acquisition, design/build and firm-fixed price; and location but differed by government construction agent. In addition to identifying the 28 factors that moderately or largely influence cost premiums, five overarching cost-premium themes emerged: failing to balance risk, additional public-sector requirements, stifling or not applying innovation, selection of construction specifications, and parameterization of the execution process. Additionally, once complete, two nearly identical projects differed by over a year of construction time and $7 million in spite of the contract requirement similarities. Research frequently cites federal laws and policies as the primary cost-premium driver; however, this research demonstrated that internal construction agent policies also cause increased cost premiums. Mitigating the causes of internal cost premiums could improve public-sector construction cost performance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | assets; construction costs; contract management; cost and schedule; design/build; government; military engineering; procurement |
| Index terms: | survey, interview, United States, specification, capital investment, contract management, agent, private sector, construction cost, acquisition, military construction, construction time, military engineering |
| Subjects: | contract management, infrastructure engineering, Geography, contractual condition, project controls, industry analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, business, data collection methods, practitioner, economic analysis, financial and cost management |
| Topics: | Time Control, Contract Administration, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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