ARCOM

Abstracts – Browse Results

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 7 results ...

Chen, Q, Reichard, G and Beliveau, Y (2008) Multiperspective Approach to Exploring Comprehensive Cause Factors for Interface Issues. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(06), 432–41.

Hassanein, A A and Hanna, R S (2008) Safety Performance in the Egyptian Construction Industry. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(06), 451–5.

Kim, D Y, Han, S H and Kim, H (2008) Discriminant Analysis for Predicting Ranges of Cost Variance in International Construction Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(06), 398–410.

Nasrallah, W F and Bou-Matar, R (2008) Exponential, Gamma, and Power Law Distributions in Information Flow on a Construction Site. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(06), 442–50.

Rojas, E M and Kell, I (2008) Comparative Analysis of Project Delivery Systems Cost Performance in Pacific Northwest Public Schools. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(06), 387–97.

Type: Journal Article
Keywords: Comparative studies; Delivery; Construction costs; Schools; Buildings, public;
ISBN/ISSN: 0733-9364
URL: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2008)134:6(387)
Abstract:
Alternative project delivery systems such as construction management at risk (CMR) are increasingly used in public school construction in the United States. CMR is expected to benefit owners with a guaranteed maximum price (GMP), decreased change order cost, and increased cost “certainty.” This paper empirically compares cost growth performance of the CMR and design-bid-build (DBB) methods in Pacific Northwest public school projects. Data were collected from state records and previous studies on 297 completed schools in Oregon and Washington. The analysis of the data shows no statistically significant difference between CMR and DBB in construction change order costs, school project costs exceeding the GMP in 75% of the cases, and a statistically significant difference in cost growth between CMR and DBB projects during buy out, making CMR projects less efficient at controlling cost growth at buy out. These results counter some of the traditional expectations of the CMR delivery method.

Taylor, T R B and Ford, D N (2008) Managing Tipping Point Dynamics in Complex Construction Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(06), 421–31.