Labib, Y N; Lotfallah, W B; Hanna, A S and Boulos, N W (2021) Development and application of performance index for comparative assessment of public capital projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 147(2): 04020175, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Studies have estimated that infrastructure investment in the US will fall short by USD 13-20 trillion over the next decade due to growing urbanization. Public entities should seek to maximize the use of their available funds by increasing efficiency, supporting collaborative environments, and promoting value over initial low cost. This comprehensive study provides public entities with factual evidence of the performance of their projects under various delivery methods and bidding systems, as well as guidance toward practical implementations to increase their projects' success using a unique data-driven mathematical model, the Project Performance Index (PPI), introduced in this paper. This index is a multivariate performance assessment metric that incorporates schedule, communication, change management, and spending metrics and is validated using confirmatory factor analysis. The results concluded that design-build (DB) projects outperformed each of hybrid single prime (HSP) and multiple prime (MP) projects (by 39% on average), construction manager at risk (CMAR) outperformed each of HSP and MP (by 32% on average), and also HSP outperformed MP (by 7.8% on average). Additionally, the study found that a 40%-45% enhancement in performance can be achieved by employing alternative delivery methods like DB and CMAR.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | evidence, bidding, mathematical model, change management, confirmatory factor analysis, capital project, project performance, implementation, performance assessment, urbanization, efficiency, delivery method, low cost, construction manager at risk, infrastructure investment |
| Subjects: | project management theory and practice, management, performance management, statistical analysis, delivery method, assessment methods, evaluation and assessment methods, mathematical modelling, contractual arrangements, bidding, economic analysis, strategic project management, urban planning |
| Topics: | Procurement, Governance, Project Management, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Human Resources, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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