Laryea, S and Watermeyer, R B (2018) Comparison of two infrastructure project implementation models in a developing country. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 171(1), pp. 3-17. ISSN 17514304
Abstract
A comparative analysis of public sector infrastructure projects implemented using a traditional public sector model against projects implemented using a modern management contractor model is presented. Traditionally, the implementation of public sector construction projects in South Africa is undertaken by an implementer such as the Department of Public Works. However, in 2014, the Western Cape Education Department created a framework contract and employed two management contractors with single-point accountability to implement maintenance and upgrading projects alongside those implemented in the traditional manner. A total of 122 projects implemented by management contractors are evaluated and compared with 35 implemented by the Western Cape Department of Transport and Public Works based on the cost performance, time performance and professional services costs of the two approaches. The practice of including contingency and provisional sums in contracts distorts the cost performance analysis, and superficial comparisons can be misleading. The management contracts delivered more projects on time. The professional services costs associated with management contracts was 9·2% compared to 15·6% for public works projects. The overall evidence demonstrates that the management contracting system is efficient and suited to the nature of maintenance and upgrading projects and delivers significant advantages.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contracting; procurement; project management |
| Index terms: | developing country, comparative analysis, upgrading, accountability, time performance, professional service, construction project, evidence, South Africa, cost performance, management contractor, public sector, public work, implementation, infrastructure project, management contracting, project management |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, strategic management, evaluation and assessment methods, organization, practitioner, liability law, Geography, production management, infrastructure engineering, development economics, data analysis and analytics, project controls, infrastructure and transport systems, administrative law, economics, project management theory and practice |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Project Management, Geographical Context, Procurement, Legal Issues, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Roles and Professions, International Construction, Organizational Design, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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