Abstracts – Browse Results

Search or browse again.

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 12 results ...

Anastasopoulos, P C, Labi, S, Bhargava, A, Bordat, C and Mannering, F L (2010) Frequency of Change Orders in Highway Construction Using Alternate Count-Data Modeling Methods. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 886–93.

El Asmar, M, Lotfallah, W, Whited, G and Hanna, A S (2010) Quantitative Methods for Design-Build Team Selection. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 904–12.

Ji, S, Park, M and Lee, H (2010) Data Preprocessing–Based Parametric Cost Model for Building Projects: Case Studies of Korean Construction Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 844–53.

Kent, D C and Becerik-Gerber, B (2010) Understanding Construction Industry Experience and Attitudes toward Integrated Project Delivery. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 815–25.

  • Type: Journal Article
  • Keywords: Surveys; Project delivery; Collaboration; Construction industry; Surveys; Integrated project delivery; Collaboration; Construction industry; Delivery methods;
  • ISBN/ISSN: 0733-9364
  • URL: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000188
  • Abstract:
    Integrated project delivery (IPD) seeks to improve project outcomes through a collaborative approach of aligning the incentives and goals of the project team through shared risk and reward, early involvement of all parties, and a multiparty agreement. Although there has been a huge interest in IPD in principle, the current adoption status by the construction industry is unknown. Several professional organizations are supporting the advancement of IPD, and several projects have demonstrated its benefits; however, the amount of projects using IPD remains relatively small. This research is based on the results of a web-based survey that was designed to target a wide range of construction professionals in an effort to shed light on current status of IPD use and its future widespread adoption by the construction industry. The paper attempts to provide hard data concerning the knowledge and experience levels of construction professionals regarding IPD as well as their opinions concerning its benefits and problems as a project delivery method.

Kim, B and Reinschmidt, K F (2010) Probabilistic Forecasting of Project Duration Using Kalman Filter and the Earned Value Method. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 834–43.

Korkmaz, S, Riley, D and Horman, M (2010) Piloting Evaluation Metrics for Sustainable High-Performance Building Project Delivery. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 877–85.

Lai, A W Y and Pang, P S M (2010) Measuring Performance for Building Maintenance Providers. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 864–76.

Mostafavi, A and Karamouz, M (2010) Selecting Appropriate Project Delivery System: Fuzzy Approach with Risk Analysis. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 923–30.

Nguyen, L D and Ibbs, W (2010)  Case Law and Variations in Cumulative Impact Productivity Claims. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 826–33.

Xu, Y, Chan, A P C and Yeung, J F Y (2010) Developing a Fuzzy Risk Allocation Model for PPP Projects in China. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 894–903.

Zheng, S and Tiong, R L K (2010) First Public-Private-Partnership Application in Taiwan’s Wastewater Treatment Sector: Case Study of the Nanzih BOT Wastewater Treatment Project. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 913–22.

Zou, P X W, Chen, Y and Chan, T (2010) Understanding and Improving Your Risk Management Capability: Assessment Model for Construction Organizations. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(08), 854–63.