Williams T, W M R P (2013) Target cost contracts: Adopting innovative incentive mechanisms to improve the project delivery process. In: Smith, S D and Ahiaga-Dagbui, D D (eds.) Proceedings of 29th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2013, Reading, UK.
Abstract
Target Cost Contracts are widely recognised as cost-led procurement models which incentivise client and contractor to work collaboratively and develop mutual gains. Their use on recent high profile projects and inclusion in the recently published UK Government Construction Strategy recognises Target Cost Contracts as a “cost-led procurement model.” They have been identified as a model capable of producing the “15-20%” cost savings required for public sector construction projects by 2015, and act as key drivers for their use. This research aims to facilitate innovation in future Target Cost Contracts by expanding the current incentives offered to include a wider variance of stakeholders and performance metrics. A cross-sectional study utilising semi-structured interviews to test the initial findings generated by the literature review was employed to validate the use of such innovative incentives. Incentivising alternative performance metrics is required to generate greater motivation amongst project stakeholders, although there was insufficient evidence to suggest that incentive frameworks could achieve this. Incentive frameworks to include the design team and alternative performance metrics have been defined for testing in future research which could be pilot tested in practice.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | target cost contract; incentivisation; nec3; performance metrics; key performance indicator |
| Index terms: | project stakeholder, incentivization, target cost, motivation, design team, literature review, testing, variance, cost saving, strategy, key performance indicator, evidence, public sector, performance metric, construction project, project delivery, interview |
| Subjects: | performance measurement, project delivery, management, evaluation and assessment methods, production management, professional practice, psychology, sociology, administrative law, data analysis and analytics, risk assessment, economics, measurement and scaling, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Project Management, Quality Management, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Procurement, Human Resources, Legal Issues, Design Practice, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Risk Management, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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