Quantitative Performance Assessment of Single-Step versus Two-Step Design-Build Procurement

Mounir El Asmar · G. Edward Gibson

30 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Construction Engineering and Management

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Construction Project Management and Performance BIM and Construction Integration Public-Private Partnership Projects

Abstract

Design-build (DB) is an alternative project delivery system that is distinguished by a DB team acting as the single point of responsibility for a project in which the design and construction phases overlap. There are two main methods used to procure DB services: single-step and two-step procurement. Single-step DB involves a request for proposal (RFP) phase, whereas two-step DB involves both request for qualifications (RFQ) and RFP phases. There is an industry perception that more resources are spent to procure single-step DB projects as compared with two-step DB projects. Therefore, this paper focuses on quantifying the resource expenditures and efficiency impacts of single-step and two-step DB through investigating several procurement and project performance metrics. The paper presents results stemming from 32 completed projects. The results of the analysis show that the total cost to industry to develop single-step proposals is approximately 5% of the total project cost, whereas the cost to develop two-step proposals is approximately 1% of the total project cost. Additionally, the relative procurement duration was 18% of the total project time for single-step DB and 22% of the total project time for two-step DB. Moreover, the percentage of design completed at the RFP and award stages are presented. For single-step DB, 23% of the design was completed at the RFP stage, and 43% at the award stage. For two-step DB, 12% of the design was completed at the RFP stage, and 32% at the award stage. Most importantly, the findings contribute to the DB body of knowledge by quantifying a significant five-fold procurement cost difference between the two DB procurement methods, helping the industry implement procurement policy changes.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 30 citations exist upstream.

References

2004Factors Affecting the Success of a Construction Project 1998Comparison of U.S. Project Delivery Systems 2002Framework of Success Criteria for Design/Build Projects 2013Quantifying Performance for the Integrated Project Delivery System as Compared to Established Delivery Systems 1999Public-Sector Design/Build Evolution and Performance 2004Predicting Performance of Design-Build and Design-Bid-Build Projects 2006Comparing Procurement Methods for Design-Build Projects 2000Contractor Selection for Design/Build Projects

Cited by

2018Effect of Level of Owner-Provided Design on Contractor’s Design Quality in DB/EPC Projects 2019Cost and Schedule Performance Analysis of Transportation Public–Private Partnership Projects 2022Identifying Design-Build Decision-Making Factors and Providing Future Research Guidelines: Social Network and Association Rule Analysis

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.