Pulaski, M H (2005) The alignment of sustainability and constructability: A continuous value enhancement process. PhD thesis, Pennsylvania State University, USA.
Abstract
The demand for sustainable buildings is a rapidly emerging trend in the building industry. Often achieving significant gains in operating performance and enhancing facility health, the benefits of these buildings are substantial. However, the process of delivering (procuring, designing and constructing) these facilities is more difficult than for traditional projects and controlled using project management techniques. As such, existing project management techniques on sustainable building projects struggle to handle the high levels of complexity present. In many projects, environmental objectives are viewed as "tack ons" to normal project management requirements. This often leads to inefficiencies in the delivery process that inhibit many cost-saving opportunities from being realized, and that can lead to increased capital costs. However, a number of exemplary or "high performance" projects have overcome the first cost hurdle by identifying a series of sustainable solutions that also improved project performance in terms of schedule, cost and quality. A process-based model, called the Continuous Value Enhancement Process (CVEP), is developed to systematically generate and evaluate project alternatives leading to high performance solutions that improve project performance and increase levels of sustainability. Developed specifically to address the challenges facing the Pentagon Renovation---which will become the world's largest green office renovation---CVEP is experimentally implemented and tested to research its ability to support project management decision making in ways that elevate sustainability and project performance. Results of the detailed case study investigation show CVEP produced first cost and life cycle cost savings. The results also demonstrate CVEP has the following capabilities: (1) provides a systematic evaluation process, (2) is capable of collecting high performance building solutions, (3) produces significant project decisions and identifies their appropriate timing for use on future projects, (4) produces new and innovative solutions, and (5) is applicable to projects outside the Pentagon. The results of the research show that it is possible to develop targeted project management techniques, like CVEP, to improve the cost-effectiveness provision of sustainable buildings.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Horman, M |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | complexity; effectiveness; sustainability; building industry; decision making; life cycle; project management techniques; renovation; sustainable building; experiment; life cycle cost; project performance; case study |
| Index terms: | project management technique, life cycle, savings, case study, constructability, project management, renovation, building industry, effectiveness, project performance, investigation, life cycle cost, experiment, cost-effectivenes, capital cost, complexity, sustainable building, decision-making, green office |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, value management, operations management, economic analysis, research methods, construction integration, economics, performance management, accounting and finance, design practice, renovation and retrofit, sustainable construction, project management theory and practice, decision analysis, systems engineering, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Cost Management, Research Practice, Design Practice, Risk Management, Sustainability, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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