Stamatiadis, N; Goodrum, P; Shocklee, E and Wang, C (2014) Quantitative analysis of state transportation agency's experience with constructability reviews. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 140(2): 04013043, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The project development process aims to deliver the most appropriate roadway project given its context. Past work has shown that significant gains are realized when construction expertise is integrated early and throughout the project-delivery process. The Kentucky Transportation Cabinet has initiated a process that reviews design documents prior to construction to address issues that may result in time delays and cost increases. However, these efforts are not utilizing a systematic review process that would allow detailed documentation of the issues identified and provide a lessons-learned database for future use. The study undertaken classifies the constructability issues that typically impact highway construction projects. This paper first identifies the common constructability categories through a national review and then quantifies the frequency and severity of constructability issues by comment type and category, review year, reviewer, and comment severity. The paper's primary contribution to the body of knowledge is the determination that constructability issues are dynamic and change over time, there is a need for consistency among reviewers, and that team reviews are more appropriate than a single-reviewer approach.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | constructability reviews; plan reviewers; project design; project planning and design |
| Index terms: | quantitative analysis, documentation, cost increase, constructability, time delay, systematic literature review, highway construction, transportation agency, database, project planning, body of knowledge, project design, project development, documents |
| Subjects: | construction integration, professional development, data management, transportation engineering, project controls, control systems, data analysis and analytics, project delivery, research evaluation and metrics, civil engineering, contractual arrangements, economics, knowledge management |
| Topics: | Information Management, Procurement, Time Control, Engineering Principles, Design Practice, Research Practice, Project Management, Cost Management, Digital Applications |
| 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