Examination of Project Duration, Project Intensity, and Timing of Cost Certainty in Highway Project Delivery Methods

Arthur L. C. Antoine · Douglas Alleman · Keith R. Molenaar

52 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Management in Engineering

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 Public-Private Partnership Projects Value Engineering and Management

Abstract

Although agencies design and construct the vast majority of federally funded highways through the traditional design-bid-build (DBB) method, the use of construction manager/general contractor (CM/GC) and design-build (DB) is increasing. Previous research articles on the performance of these delivery methods include projects of different characteristics and projects from different sectors. This study examined solely US highway projects through a unique analysis of comparable projects. This study compared the project delivery methods that are frequently used in two separate cost pools, $2 million to $10 million and $10 million to $50 million. In the cost pool of $2 million to $10 million, the delivery methods of DBB and low-bid-procured DB (DB/LB) were compared. The delivery methods of DBB, CM/GC, and best-value-procured DB (DB/BV) were compared in the cost pool of $10 million to $50 million. The results show that the alternative contracting methods of CM/GC and DB are superior to the traditional DBB method for the performance metrics of project duration, project intensity, and timing of cost certainty in both cost pools. In comparing the alternative contracting methods in the $10 million to $50 million cost range, the CM/GC method was found to outperform DB/BV, which has not yet been shown in the research literature. With pressure on state transportation agencies to be efficient with funds, the alternative contracting methods are viable options for shortening project durations, establishing early cost certainty during project delivery, and delivering projects at a more intense pace. The findings presented are useful for practitioners to better understand how project delivery methods can meet their needs for US highway construction.

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 — 52 citations exist upstream.

References

2000Data Cleaning: Problems and Current Approaches.1998Comparison of U.S. Project Delivery Systems 2009Empirical Comparison of Design/Build and Design/Bid/Build Project Delivery Methods 2003Project Delivery Systems and Project Change: Quantitative Analysis 1998Model for Public Sector Design-Build Project Selection 2011Performance Comparison of Large Design-Build and Design-Bid-Build Highway Projects 1996Selecting Design-Build: Public and Private Sector Owner Attitudes 2000Design-Build: Planning Through Development

Cited by

2021Critical success factors for implementing design-build: analysing Malaysian public projects

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.