Park, J (2011) Best-value in Korean public building construction. PhD thesis, University of Southampton, UK.
Abstract
Although the low-bid system has played a major role in public building construction sector for a long time, this system has arguably delivered work of low quality, an continued and rising number of claims within the industry. With these challenges in mind, the Korean government has sought to examine and possibly adopt best-value procurement as an alternative approach to delivering public building construction projects within Korea. The reality however is that although delivering arguably a number of advantages, best-value does present the government with its own peculiar challenges because of a lack of a precise understanding of what 'best-value' means. Hence, in this study, the author seeks to examine the concept of best-value and its application to Korean public building construction. To achieve the stated objectives, the author draws upon extant literature in 'value' procurement to critically examine the impact of 'best-value' concepts in Korean public building procurement. Data is obtained from a survey of 180 managers involved in the procurement and management of public buildings in Korea. Utilising 'best-value' criteria drawn from literature, the author employs Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to weight 'best-value' criteria identified through the survey. Based on the results of the AHP exercise, the following are found; (i) value depends on the state of each individual building which can be defined from a 'need' perspective, (ii) the primary criteria for 'best-value' in Korea public construction projects were 'serviceability', 'safety', 'comfort' 'environmental friendliness', 'economical feasibility' and 'artistry' and finally that (iii) the importance of each primary criteria was dependent on the building type.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | best value; building procurement; procurement |
| Index terms: | public building construction, public building, manager, building procurement, survey, best value, public construction, comfort, exercise |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, occupational health and safety management, health behaviours and lifestyles, practitioner, construction type, bidding, contractual arrangements, building construction |
| Topics: | Procurement, Engineering Principles, Health and Safety, Design Practice, Construction Technology, Roles and Professions, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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