Abstracts – Browse Results

Search or browse again.

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 10 results ...

Chua, D K and Godinot, M (2006) Use of a WBS Matrix to Improve Interface Management in Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(01), 67–79.

Fan, S and Tserng, H P (2006) Object-Oriented Scheduling for Repetitive Projects with Soft Logics. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(01), 35–48.

Hegazy, T (2006) Computerized System for Efficient Delivery of Infrastructure Maintenance/Repair Programs. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(01), 26–34.

Lee, D and Arditi, D (2006) Total Quality Performance of Design/Build Firms Using Quality Function Deployment. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(01), 49–57.

Lee, D and Shi, J J (2006) Construction Business Automation System. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(01), 88–96.

Nitithamyong, P and Skibniewski, M J (2006) Success/Failure Factors and Performance Measures of Web-Based Construction Project Management Systems: Professionals’ Viewpoint. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(01), 80–87.

Oyetunji, A A and Anderson, S D (2006) Relative Effectiveness of Project Delivery and Contract Strategies. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(01), 3–13.

  • Type: Journal Article
  • Keywords: Project management; Delivery; Decision making; Contracts; Construction industry;
  • ISBN/ISSN: 0733-9364
  • URL: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2006)132:1(3)
  • Abstract:
    Project delivery systems define the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved in a project. They also establish an execution framework in terms of sequencing of design, procurement, and construction. The decision made in the selection of a project delivery system for a project impacts all phases of execution of the project and greatly impacts the efficiency of project execution. Such decisions should be facilitated by thorough analysis. Structured, quantitative decision analysis processes have been shown to have several benefits over the simplistic, holistic, and informal processes that typically characterize subjective evaluations. However, a dearth of quantitative values of project delivery systems established and validated through research has invariably left project managers with no alternative than to make project delivery selection decisions on the basis of subjective evaluations. Development of the needed quantitative values for application in a decision analysis process would greatly enhance the quality of the decision-making process and provide a defensible rationale for selection of project delivery systems for capital projects. This paper presents research findings that provide the needed quantitative values in this area. Based on the quantitative values defined here, interested parties can develop and implement quantitative evaluation of project delivery alternatives to identify the optimal solution for a given project. Multicriteria decision analysis was found to be the suitable approach for a quantitative, analytical evaluation of project delivery systems. Consequently, the quantitative values presented in this paper were developed in accordance with the requirements of the multicriteria decision analysis technique known as simple multiattribute rating technique with swing weights (SMARTS). Utilizing the quantitative values presented here and applying the analysis technique of SMARTS, a decision support tool has been developed and validated for the Construction Industry Institute. The decision support tool is presently being utilized by member companies of the Construction Industry Institute that were privy to its development. With the presentation of the quantitative values in this paper, other parties interested in developing similar tools would benefit from the research results presented here.

Randolph Thomas, H and Horman, M J (2006) Fundamental Principles of Workforce Management. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(01), 97–104.

Vanhoucke, M (2006) Work Continuity Constraints in Project Scheduling. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(01), 14–25.

Yang, M, Chen, S and Chen, S (2006) Innovative Central Opening Strut System for Foundation Excavation. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(01), 58–66.