Park, S H (2009) Whole life performance tender evaluation for design-build in the Korean public sector. PhD thesis, University of Reading, UK.
Abstract
The increasing use of design-build by the public sector in Korea has prompted the need for a greater emphasis on seeking ways to change the present tender selection system from one based on lowest price, to one based on best value over the whole life of the facility. The research investigated the current status of design-build in the public sector and the process of tender selection. It considered the relevant guidelines and ways in which whole life cost could be integrated into a system of whole life cost planning and appraisal (WLCPA). A criteria matrix of the top 80 critical factors, according to their relative importance throughout the project whole life, was developed. This was informed by an extensive survey of clients, contractors and sub-contractors, all with extensive experience in the industry. It was validated by a panel of experts to establish its practical application. The survey revealed that design-build and turnkey contracts are the most appropriate contract types for using WLCPA in Korea. Furthermore, cost, quality, scope and time are more important than contract/administration, risk, human resource, health and safety to all respondents over a project life cycle. In particular, 'cost' is the most important factor for all principal industry participants in Korea in assessing whole life performance. A whole life performance tender evaluation model is proposed to aid decision makers in the selection of an appropriate design-builder based on the integration of a framework using an analytical hierarchy process. Key criteria like whole life cost, service life planning and design quality, are important in the three key stages of the evaluation process. The model uses a systematic and holistic approach which enables a public sector client to make better decisions in design-builder selection, based on long term cost effectiveness and whole life. As the popularity of design-build as a method of public sector procurement in Korea grows, tender selection based on more than just the lowest tender will have both economic and environmental gains. The model produced in this research can aid decision-makers in a tender selection which will deliver whole life benefits.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cost planning; evaluation; health and safety; integration; life cycle; performance; public sector procurement; safety; service life; builder; client; contractor; sub-contractor; effectiveness; analytical hierarchy process; Korea; prototype development |
| Index terms: | survey, whole life cost, builder, prototype, public-sector client, public sector procurement, health and safety, design quality, relative importance, cost-effectivenes, cost planning, appraisal, sub-contractor, lowest tender, tender evaluation, integration, human resource, critical factor, public sector, life cycle, service life, design-builder, analytical hierarchy process, effectiveness, holistic approach, best value |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, bidding, professional practice, modelling and simulation, value management, practitioner, risk assessment, data collection methods, business, decision-making and optimization, administrative law, financial analysis, organizational analysis, sociology, asset management, health safety and environment, factor and component analysis, management, financial management, tendering, economics, performance management |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Human Resources, Organizational Design, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Legal Issues, Quality Management, Health and Safety, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Procurement |
| 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