Abstracts – Browse Results
Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 23 results ...
Afzal, F, Yunfei, S, Sajid, M and Afzal, F (2019) Integrated priority decision index for risk assessment in chaos: cost overruns in transport projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(04), 825–49.
Bonanomi, M M, Hall, D M, Staub-French, S, Tucker, A and Talamo, C M L (2019) The impact of digital transformation on formal and informal organizational structures of large architecture and engineering firms. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(04), 872–92.
Cole, R J (1999) Building environmental assessment methods: clarifying intentions. Building Research & Information, 27(04), 230–46.
Cole, R J (1999) Postscript: Green Building Challenge 2000. Building Research & Information, 27(04), 342–3.
Cole, R J and Larsson, N K (1999) GBC '98 and GBTool: background. Building Research & Information, 27(04), 221–9.
Cole, R J and Mitchell, L (1999) Customizing and using GBTool: two case-study projects. Building Research & Information, 27(04), 257–76.
Comet, C (2009) Social capital and profits of small firms in the French construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 27(04), 411–8.
El-Sayegh, S M (2009) Multi-criteria decision support model for selecting the appropriate construction management at risk firm. Construction Management and Economics, 27(04), 385–98.
- Type: Journal Article
- Keywords: bidding; contracting; construction management at risk; decision support models; selection factors
- ISBN/ISSN: 0144-6193
- URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190902759009
- Abstract:
Selecting the appropriate firm is of paramount importance especially when using a unique delivery method such as construction management at risk. In addition to general contracting services, the construction management at risk firm provides construction management services throughout the design and construction phases. A new decision support model is proposed to assist owners in the selection decision. Key selection factors were identified through a literature review. They are divided into four categories: firm characteristics; technical and commercial bid; construction management services; and general contracting services. Each consists of five selection factors. The selection criteria were determined using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) based on a questionnaire that was sent to construction professionals. The proposed model consists of five functions: strategic alignment; selection criteria; initial screening; firms' evaluations; and sensitivity analysis. The heart of the model is the use of the AHP to develop the decision criteria and compare candidate firms. A case study is also presented to demonstrate the application of the model.
Feghaly, J, El Asmar, M, Ariaratnam, S and Bearup, W (2019) Selecting project delivery methods for water treatment plants. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(04), 936–51.
Glaumann, M, Malm, T and Larsson, J (1999) Evaluation of green buildings in Sweden. Building Research & Information, 27(04), 276–85.
Kannimuthu, M, Raphael, B, Ekambaram, P and Kuppuswamy, A (2019) Comparing optimization modeling approaches for the multi-mode resource-constrained multi-project scheduling problem. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(04), 893–916.
Li, H, Lu, W and Huang, T (2009) Rethinking project management and exploring virtual design and construction as a potential solution. Construction Management and Economics, 27(04), 363–71.
Lingard, H C, Cooke, T and Blismas, N (2009) Group-level safety climate in the Australian construction industry: within-group homogeneity and between-group differences in road construction and maintenance. Construction Management and Economics, 27(04), 419–32.
Liu, J and Cheah, C Y J (2009) Real option application in PPP/PFI project negotiation. Construction Management and Economics, 27(04), 331–42.
Luo, M, Fan, H and Liu, G (2019) Measuring regional differences of construction productive efficiency in China. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(04), 952–74.
Ma, H, Liu, Z, Zeng, S, Lin, H and Tam, V W (2019) Does megaproject social responsibility improve the sustainability of the construction industry?. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(04), 975–96.
Manoliadis, O G, Pantouvakis, J-P and Christodoulou, S E (2009) Improving qualifications-based selection by use of the fuzzy Delphi method. Construction Management and Economics, 27(04), 373–84.
Rees, W E (1999) The built environment and the ecosphere: a global perspective. Building Research & Information, 27(04), 206–20.
Smyth, H and Fitch, T (2009) Application of relationship marketing and management: a large contractor case study. Construction Management and Economics, 27(04), 399–410.
Todd, J A and Geissler, S (1999) Regional and cultural issues in environmental performance assessment for buildings. Building Research & Information, 27(04), 247–56.
Tone, K, Skitmore, M and Wong, J K W (2009) An investigation of the impact of cross-cultural communication on the management of construction projects in Samoa. Construction Management and Economics, 27(04), 343–61.
Viles, E, Rudeli, N C and Santilli, A (2019) Causes of delay in construction projects: a quantitative analysis. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(04), 917–35.
Wang, S, Tang, J, Zou, Y and Zhou, Q (2019) Research on production process optimization of precast concrete component factory based on value stream mapping. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(04), 850–71.