Alzara, M (2016) Measuring the construction performance in Saudi Arabia and proposing new procurement model based on BV PIPS (a university case study). PhD thesis, Arizona State University, USA.
Abstract
Saudi Arabia has been facing issues with completing construction projects on time and on budget. It has been documented that 70% of public construction projects are delayed. Studies have identified the low-bid delivery method as an important factor in causing such delays. The procurement system (low-bid) ignores contractors’ performance, and that is reflected in projects’ performance. A case study was performed, at a University campus in northern Saudi Arabia, identifying the major causes of project delays and cost overruns. The University was experiencing delays from 50% to 150%. Also, the actual project costs for four projects were examined and found that all four projects’ costs were higher than the original bid. The delay and cost overruns factors were gathered from the University engineers. A literature research identified one construction management method, best value performance information procurement system (BV PIPS), has documented multiple times its ability to improve project performance. In a comparison using the result of a case study and the results of (BV PIPS), Saudi Arabia’s delivery system was identified as a potential cause of project performance issues. The current procurement system was analyzed and modified to adapt with the (BV PIPS). The proposed procurement system using BV PIPS, which can be implemented in Saudi Arabia, was created with owner side. A large survey was conducted of 761 classified contractors and 43 universities’ representatives who rated causes of delay factors and cost overruns. The delay factors were then compared to delay factors experienced on Saudi construction projects, identified by performing a literature research. The comparison identified 14 important causes of delays. Moreover, the survey showed that classified contractors and universities’ representatives unsatisfied with low-bid, and they agreed with BV PIPS which selecting vendors based on performance with price. The proposed model required a submitted level of experience (LE), risk assessment (RA), and value added (VA). Besides, project managers of vendors should be interviewed during the clarification phase. In addition, venders should submit the project’s scope, technical schedule, milestone schedule, and risk management plan. In the execution phase, vendors should submit a weekly risk report (WRR) and director’s report (DR).
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Kashiwagi, D |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | case study; interview; construction project; project cost; risk assessment; risk management; owner; project manager; Saudi Arabia; project performance |
| Index terms: | Saudi Arabia, risk assessment, delivery method, project manager, construction project, interview, management method, best value, risk management, survey, owner, project delay, public construction, project performance, case study, causes of delay, cost overrun, procurement system, project cost, engineer, construction performance |
| Subjects: | risk assessment, profession, economics, financial risk, sociology, management, contractual arrangements, data collection methods, project controls, Geography, production management, bidding, project management theory and practice, performance assessment, delivery method, building construction, financial and cost management |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Site Management, Research Practice, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Time Control, Project 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