Pocock, J B (1996) The relationship between alternative project approaches, integration, and performance. PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA.
Abstract
This work compares the performance of traditional design-bid-build projects with alternative approaches. It verifies that partnered, design-build, and combination projects offer significant advantages in cost growth, schedule growth, modifications, and design deficiencies. Next, a method is developed for measuring "degree of interaction" (DOI) as an approximation of project integration. This method is used to show that DOI has a direct impact on project performance. Finally, DOI score is used to predict future project performance. In comparing 209 completed military construction projects, partnered projects had the least average schedule growth, design-build projects had the least average cost growth and design deficiencies, and combination projects averaged the fewest modifications. Traditional projects had the worst average schedule growth, modifications, and design deficiencies. The significance of these differences is confirmed with t-tests. Degree of interaction scores were calculated for 38 projects from this group of 209, representing each category. The alternative projects have significantly higher average DOI scores than traditional projects. Scatter plots comparing DOI and project performance show a clear relationship between the two. As DOI scores rise, project performance quickly improves and becomes more consistent. Regression analysis shows a modest but significant correlation between DOI and project performance, including user satisfaction. Beyond a certain DOI score (approximately 0. 4), performance tends to level off. Achieving this score takes only a modest increase in interaction. Threshold analysis separates the projects into those with DOI scores above and below 0. 4. Performance is significantly better for projects with higher DOI in all areas except design deficiencies. Interaction occurring early in the project is also shown to have a positive impact on project performance. Finally, these results are combined with statistical analysis to predict future project performance based on DOI scores. The probability of improved average performance for future projects with DOI>0. 4 ranges from 80% to 99% depending on the performance indicator. A hypothetical project with a $5 million budget, 365 day duration, and a DOI score over 0. 4, should save $119,500 in cost growth, 71 days in schedule growth, 21 fewer modifications, and 7 fewer design deficiencies, over a comparable project with DOI<0. 4.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Liu, L Y |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | duration; integration; military construction; probability; project performance; regression analysis; statistical analysis |
| Index terms: | design-bid-build, military construction, statistical analysis, regression analysis, interaction, duration, project performance, schedule growth, performance indicator, user satisfaction, integration |
| Subjects: | infrastructure and transport systems, statistical analysis, behavioral psychology, project controls, organizational analysis, project management theory and practice, performance management, contractual arrangements, data science, client relations |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Quality Management, Organizational Design, Time Control |
| 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