Algraiw, I H A (2015) The engagement of expert opinions in the modeling of multi-attribute decision making for the selection of project delivery methods in building construction. PhD thesis, Missouri University of Science and Technology, USA.
Abstract
Choosing the most appropriate project delivery method (PDM) available is acknowledged as a crucial issue in the construction industry. Both the choice and application of an unsuitable PDM can result in project failure. Likewise, the selection of a suitable PDM can increase the chance for project success. A method of selecting from among the seven PDMs recognized by the Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) was created in an attempt to address this issue. This research was comprised of three objectives. The first objective was to determine the influential factors needed to select the appropriate PDMs available to the US construction industry. The importance of each influential factor was also examined to determine whether or not significant differences exist between the following: both public and private sectors, project contractual parties, and various regions across the US. An empirical survey was conducted to gather this information throughout the US construction industry. The relative performance and suitability of PDMs for the different conditions involved in building constructions were evaluated as part of the second objective. Another empirical survey was conducted in the US construction industry to help with this evaluation. The performance and suitability of each PDM was examined with respect to 36 project criterion. The information was analyzed to create a decision support model for the PDM selection. This research used the early engagement of experts' opinions in the modeling of multi-attribute decision making (MADM). A decision support model was established by linking together the Conjunctive Satisficing Method and the TOPSIS decision making approach, and applying them to the PDM selection. The face validation method, with a subset of the surveyed professionals, was used to validate the model. The results gathered from this research provide both the project owners and the decision makers with a framework that can be used to evaluate a project's priorities and delivery options. A practical tool was also created that utilizes the expertise needed to make critical decisions without the physical existence of an expert panel. Applying the provided MADM model to the selection of a PDM allows the decision maker to choose the best alternative promoting a building construction project's success.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Showalter, W E |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | decision support; failure; private sector; construction project; specifications; decision making; project delivery; project success; owner; professional |
| Index terms: | option, project delivery, modelling, construction industry, topsis, private sector, owner, project failure, project success, suitability, validation, construction project, influential factor, decision-making, survey, face, building construction, specification, decision support |
| Subjects: | psychology, analytical methods, project completion, building construction, decision-making and optimization, production management, project delivery, data collection methods, risk assessment, decision analysis, sociology, design criteria, industry analysis, professional development, project management theory and practice, contractual condition |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Contract Administration, Organizational Design, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Information Management, Stakeholder Management, Construction Technology, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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