Pesek, A E (2017) Impact of construction document deficiencies on heavy/civil low-bid infrastructure projects and the introduction of a contractor document review assessment. PhD thesis, Arizona State University, USA.
Abstract
The objective of the study was to examine the impact construction document deficiencies have on heavy/civil low-bid infrastructure projects. It encompasses the expertise of 202 heavy/civil construction professionals comprised of contactors and public project owners. The study was designed to determine the frequency and timing of when a contractor discovers construction document deficiencies on heavy/civil low bid projects. The information was correlated with further study data of when a contractor ultimately reports the discovered construction document deficiencies to the public project owner. This research data was compiled and analyzed to determine if contractors are withholding construction document deficiencies from public owners until after the project contract has been executed. The withholding of document deficiencies can benefit contractors by resulting in additional owner incurred costs and potential justification for project time extensions. As a result, further research was required to examine the impact construction document deficiencies have on project cost and schedule. Based on the study findings, it has led to the development of a Contractor Document Review Assessment. The Contractor Document Review Assessment is a risk mitigation device in which contractors and public project owners can identify construction document deficiencies on heavy/civil low-bid construction projects before the project contract has been executed.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Sullivan, K |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bidding; construction project; documentation; infrastructure project; project cost |
| Index terms: | owner, construction professional, infrastructure project, public owner, documentation, project cost, public project, construction project, risk mitigation, bidding |
| Subjects: | bidding, financial risk, infrastructure engineering, production management, sociology, infrastructure and transport systems, economics, professional development |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Project Management, Procurement, Cost Management, Information Management, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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