Gransberg, D D and Molenaar, K (2003) A synthesis of design-builder selection methods for public infrastructure projects. Journal of Construction Procurement, 9(2), pp. 40-51. ISSN 1358-9180
Abstract
A nation-wide survey of U.S. public agencies that procure infrastructure projects using Design-Build (DB) contracting found that there are numerous methods for awarding these contracts. Many of these variations are being referred to by the same name. Thus, confusion exists throughout the industry as to whether the terms used in each context describe the same methodology. This confusion is creating inconsistencies and inefficiencies in the industry. Analysis of survey results yielded at least eight different systems to evaluate and award DB projects. The Design-Build Institute of America (DBIA) outlines five processes by which these methods can be grouped. This paper attempts to synthesise the various methods into five generic categories and then compares the strengths and weaknesses of each. An example project selection is provided using a number of the methods to illustrate the differences among the selection out comes. The paper concludes that the selection method must match the appropriate project characteristics to optimize project delivery with respect to the salient aspects of the project, but it does not promote one single method in each case. Additionally, the paper promotes a standard technical vocabulary by which DB contractor selection methodologies can be synthesised to eliminate misunderstanding and to further enhance the intricacies of the delivery method.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | design-build, best-value, construction, infrastructure, public works |
| Index terms: | contractor selection, public infrastructure, delivery method, project selection, public work, infrastructure project, project delivery, design-builder, selection method, survey, variation, methodology, agency |
| Subjects: | research methods, tendering, infrastructure engineering, practitioner, delivery method, sociology, infrastructure and transport systems, contractual condition, project delivery, data collection methods, value management |
| Topics: | Procurement, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Contract Administration |
| 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