Garg, S and Misra, S (2023) Framework for estimating quality-related incentive and disincentive in construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 149(5): 04023018, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Having provisions in contracts that incentivize "better"performance has been identified as an effective means to encourage the contractor to perform better. In the construction industry, such incentive-disincentive (I/D) schemes have more widely been used for time, cost, and safety performance goals, they are conspicuous in their absence for quality-related performance. In fact, there is only limited literature available on the latter. This study presents a framework to estimate the quality I/D amounts in construction projects. The relationship between the cost of conformance and a "project defect score"has been used to estimate the I/D amount. The proposed framework for quality I/D has been validated for its effectiveness from the data of three actual recently completed projects. The findings clearly show that the proposed quality I/D scheme helped achieve a win-win situation between client and contractor. Though this study is based on data from the building industry, the proposed framework can be fine-tuned with more data and extended to other areas of construction.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | estimate, construction industry, effectiveness, building industry, safety performance, estimating, construction project |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, occupational health and safety management, production management, performance management, financial and cost management |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Project Management, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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