Larkin, K; Odeyinka, H and Eadie, R (2012) An exploration of theoretical concepts and methods for assessing risk impacts on the variability between contract sum and final account in design and build projects. In: Smith, S D (ed.) Proceedings of 28th Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2012, Edinburgh, UK.
Abstract
Design and Build procurement has been steadily increasing in popularity over the past number of years. Although it can provide some advantages, it can also lead to being a risky procurement method for both owner and contractor if the risks are not identified in advance and managed throughout. Therefore the overall aim of this study is to identify, assess and model the risk factors impacting the variability between the contract sum and final account in client-led and contractor-led Design and Build projects. The work presented in this paper is at the preliminary stage of the research programme and it looks into the possibility of developing a methodology for assessing risk impacts on the variability between contract sum and final account in design and build projects. As a first step, a detailed review of literature was made to establish the growing use of design and build procurement and the risk inherent in this procurement method. Secondly, different perspectives of risk were examined using the cognitive model of risk so as to position this study in the wider context of existing body of knowledge in this domain. The insights gained from the foregoing steps then helped in devising a methodological framework for assessing the variability between the contract sum and final account in client-led and contractor-led Design and Build projects.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contract sum; design and build; final account; risk; variability |
| Index terms: | programme, risk impact, owner, procurement method, variability, design and build, final account, body of knowledge, risk factor, methodology, exploration |
| Subjects: | environmental resource management, contractual arrangements, knowledge management, project controls, payment, sociology, statistical analysis, environmental hazards, research methods |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Time Control, Research Practice, Information Management, Procurement, Sustainability, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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