UK and US construction management contracting procedures and practices: A comparative study

Sabitu Oyegoke, A (2001) UK and US construction management contracting procedures and practices: A comparative study. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 8(5-6), pp. 403-417. ISSN 0969-9988

Abstract

This study provides a framework for comparing construction management contracts in the UK and the US construction practices. It starts by reviewing previous studies on UK and US contracting practices and explores the main delivery methods, inform of comparison with construction management contracting systems. It examines construction management contracting types, processes and procedures and interaction between the construction manager and other stakeholders. This study was based on a literature review and the result shows the similarities and differences between the American and British CM systems within each practice and between both practices; the distribution of responsibilities and risks both in pre-construction and during the construction stages; and allocation of responsibility in both practices.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: compensation structure; construction management; first-tier contractor; management contract; risk and responsibilities distribution; stakeholders
Index terms: comparative study, construction stages, management contracting, interaction, compensation, delivery method, pre-construction, construction manager, literature review
Subjects: research design and methodology, profession, dispute resolution, project delivery, data analysis and analytics, contractual arrangements, delivery method, behavioral psychology
Topics: Legal Issues, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Project Management
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