Lahdenperä, P (2024) Design–build with a development phase: An initiation and the first trials. Construction Economics and Building, 24(4-5), pp. 18-42. ISSN 2204-9029
Abstract
Design–build (DB) is a much-used project delivery system with operational variations for different needs and situations. Yet, novel applications have to be strived for as all current applications have some drawbacks. Accordingly, by means of a constructive research approach, this study focuses on a DB procedure that exploits the parties' collaboration in order to improve the economic efficiency of construction projects. It is called "design–build with a development phase" (DBd). In the procedure, the owner and the selected contractor continue the development of the project solution in co-operation, adhering to the principle of benefit sharing, which is enabled by pre-agreed rules and the benchmark solution, formed as a result of price-inclusive contractor selection. More precisely, this paper presents the DBd procedure and how it was initially constructed and eventually applied in some road infrastructure projects. The paper also reports the related experiences, which were positive based on the improved value for money in the trial projects. Thus, the paper offers a novel option for the industry to improve its performance and contributes by disproving the dominant view, which has been guiding the formulation and use of the current project delivery practices, that price-inclusive competition and collaborative development thereafter could not be matched successfully.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | collaboration; design–build; development phase; project delivery systems; public procurement |
| Index terms: | variation, collaboration, construction project, competition, value-for-money, efficiency, contractor selection, owner, infrastructure project, project delivery, option |
| Subjects: | project delivery, performance management, management, contractual condition, decision analysis, sociology, infrastructure and transport systems, tendering, evaluation, production management, market analysis |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Contract Administration, Organizational Design, Procurement, Risk Management, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Quality Management, Value 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