Does best value procurement cost more than low-bid? A total project cost perspective

Lines, B C; Kakarapalli, R and Nguyen, P H D (2022) Does best value procurement cost more than low-bid? A total project cost perspective. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 18(1), pp. 85-100. ISSN 1557-8771

Abstract

Although construction owners have long utilized Best-Value (BV) procurement within alternative delivery, they have historically been less willing to do so when selecting contractor teams in traditional Design-Bid-Build (D-B-B). In D-B-B, the availability of 100% complete construction documents implies that the lowest bidder should be selected. As conventional wisdom suggests, why select a more expensive contractor only to receive an equivalent scope of work in return? In response to this question, this study investigated the full cost implications to owners who utilized BV procurement within 118 D-B-B projects. Because BV involves potentially selecting a contractor whose bid is more expensive than the lowest bidder, an attempt was made to measure the cost of the selected contractor relative to the low bid alternative. Results indicated that while BV-procured contractors do come at a premium on average, they still provide lower bids than the market rate. Further, employing BV-procured contractors can be beneficial to owners in terms of project cost and schedule performance. This study contributes to the body of knowledge by developing two new metrics–the BV Premium and Total BV Cost–to quantitatively measure the project cost implications for owners who employ BV procurement to buy construction services within D-B-B.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: best-value procurement; bv premium; design-bid-build delivery method; total bv cost
Index terms: best value procurement, bidder, design-bid-build, owner, delivery method, documents, body of knowledge, schedule performance, project cost
Subjects: professional development, economics, sociology, project controls, delivery method, bidding, knowledge management, contractual arrangements, tendering
Topics: Procurement, Time Control, Information Management, Cost 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