Raisbeck, P and Tang, L C M (2013) Identifying design development factors in Australian PPP projects using an AHP framework. Construction Management and Economics, 31(1), pp. 20-39. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
In Australia consortiums will come together and create an initial design concept or sketch design at the public-private partnership (PPP) bid stage. If the bid is successful this initial design is then developed further. However, a winning bid may have been evaluated on financial criteria alone and the consortium's capability to develop the design through to project delivery may not have been thoroughly evaluated. In theory, design is a key process in PPP projects and the aim of the research was to understand what capabilities are important in the development of a design through this process. To clarify these issues, a range of activities and organizational factors linked to design development are proposed using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method. This method was chosen in order to see which design development factors were ranked more highly by experts. In this research the hierarchy was designed employing the categories of exploratory and exploitative design development. Below each of these overarching categories, there were four design development functional distinctions: the two exploratory distinctions were Design (D) and Design Management (DM). The two exploitative distinctions were Design Support (DS) and Design Infrastructure (DI). A further list of 36 design development sub-criteria was developed under the above categories. These sub-criteria formed the basis of a survey of respondents drawn from a database of industry sources in the public domain as well as a list gathered from a large developer involved in PPP projects. It included relatively senior managers, PPP project managers and architects. Survey respondents identified a recent PPP project that they had worked on. From the 36 responses it can be seen that the exploratory Design (D) and Design Management (DM) activities were ranked more highly than the exploitative activities of Design Support (DS) and Design Infrastructure (DI) associated with a PPP project organization. This suggests that PPP frameworks should account for these exploratory factors as well as the exploitative factors associated with compliance, quality systems and project team infrastructure. This indicates that in PPP projects design development through the effective management of an initial design is a critical factor.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analytic hierarchy process; design; design management; public-private partnerships |
| Index terms: | consortium, database, manager, survey, design development, organizational factor, project delivery, project manager, critical factor, Australia, compliance, partnership, architect, project team, design management, project organization |
| Subjects: | practitioner, profession, data collection methods, business, risk assessment, Geography, organizational theory, health safety and environment, partnership management, design process, project delivery, data management |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Organizational Design, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Health and Safety, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Risk Management, Digital Applications, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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