abstract: Water utilities across the United States are facing numerous challenges, such as limited funding and increasing project complexity, in constructing and upgrading their aging infrastructure. One innovative method to overcome these challenges is through the use of alternative project delivery methods (APDM), such as construction management at-risk (CMAR) and design-build (DB). Previous research has shown that APDM have the potential to deliver higher performing water infrastructure projects when compared to the traditional design-bid-build (DBB) method. However, there is a need to further examine APDM practices and develop tools that may support utilities in the delivery of their APDM water infrastructure projects. This study fills the knowledge gap by conducting several studies that may support public and private utilities in improving the delivery of their APDM water infrastructure projects. First, APDM implementation practices for water infrastructure projects are identified by assessing the state of practice, particularly during project procurement and execution. Second, DB project administration best practices are determined to support utilities seeking to add DB to their organization’s project delivery toolbox. Third, a pioneering web-based project delivery method decision-support tool was developed to aid utilities in selecting the appropriate delivery method for their water project. Finally, project-specific factors and attributes that impact project delivery performance are investigated through exploratory modeling and analysis. The study collected data on 75 completed treatment plant projects, conducted interviews with ten utilities that successfully deliver their water projects using DB, and worked closely with several industry experts through industry workshops and panels. Key findings related to water infrastructure project delivery revealed in this study included: (1) guaranteed maximum price (GMP) is the preferred compensation type for APDM projects; (2) utilities statistically having the lowest comfort level with delivering CMAR projects; (3) qualifications-based procurement is an effective DB project delivery practice; (4) the identification of 13 key project delivery method selection factors; and (5) the three highest predictors that impact unit cost performance are project complexity, project team chemistry and communication, and project size. / Dissertation/Thesis / Doctoral Dissertation Civil, Environmental and Sustainable Engineering 2020

Master of Science / Department of Architectural Engineering and Construction Science / Julia A. Keen / The purpose of this report is to provide information on Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) as a construction project delivery method and identify some of the obstacles that are limiting its implementation into the design and construction industry. This report includes a general overview of IPD and a comparison to traditional project delivery methods: Design-Bid-Build, Design-Build, and Construction Manager at Risk. The advantages of IPD and its possible positive impact on the industry is introduced followed by the three major obstacles that must be evaluated and resolved before this delivery method can begin to be embraced by the industry. The three major obstacles include: contracts, insurance, and IPD structure for facilitation. Each of these obstacles is explored in detail and solutions being successfully implemented by industry professionals are presented. Finally, conclusions about the future of IPD are presented along with future research that needs to be conducted for a better overall understanding of IPD.

Collaborative project delivery methods are believed to contribute to faster completions times, lower overall project costs and higher quality. Contracts are expected to influence the degree of collaboration on a given project since they allow or restrict certain lines of communication in the decision making process. Various delivery systems rank differently on the spectrum of collaboration. Because collaborative project delivery methods require owners and AEC stakeholders to meet frequently early in the delivery process, they are thought to add additional upfront costs to the project. The purpose of this study is to test if collaborative project delivery methods impart enough value so that the upfront cost incurred at the beginning of project is eventually surpassed by realized savings. Ideally, the extreme forms of project delivery methods, that is, Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and Design-Bid-Build (DBB), should be compared to test the effects of collaboration on benefits to the owner. Due to difficulty in obtaining data on IPD and similarly scaled DBB projects, for this study, their close cousins, CM-at-Risk (CMR) and Competitive Sealed Proposal (CSP) were compared. The study engaged statistical comparison of cost of change orders and overall project cost performance of 17 CMR and 13 CSP projects of similar scales by same owner. Project cost performance observed under CMR projects was found significantly more than those under CSP. This study is expected to help boost confidence in the benefits of collaborative project delivery methods. It is likely that the results will encourage acceptance of IPD for public projects. Owners who were previously discouraged by the increased upfront cost of collaborative projects may also find interest in the results of this study.

Competitive Bidding, Competitive Sealed Proposal, construction management agency, construction management at risk, Design-Build, Design-Build-Bridging, and job order contracting are seven project delivery methods that are commonly used in the state of Texas today. This paper empirically compares the cost, schedule, and change order management performance of these project delivery methods in 2009 Engineering News Record (ENR) Best Construction Projects in Texas, using the data collected from the projects representative of the population. Also information is collected on lessons learned from these projects. The thesis included development of survey instrument, getting approval from Institutional Review Board (IRB), data collection from the industry, statistical analysis and inferences. Based on the data collected, project performances were measured in terms of five identified variables and then plotted in the form of probability distribution curves to understand the characteristics of the target population. Then, the results were grouped into six categories based on project delivery methods used and compared to understand their impacts on these projects. Findings revealed predominant usage of CM at Risk PDM, and better cost and schedule performance of CM at Risk, Design-Build, and Owner customized PDM. Detailed performance metrics, results, interpretations and conclusions are presented.

ABSTRACT OPPORTUNITIES AND BARRIERS OF ARCHITECT LED DESIGN-BUILD PROJECTS Deniz,Ay&ccedil / a M.Sc. in Building Science, Department of Architecture Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Soofia Tahira Elias Ozkan September 2012, 77 pages From past to today, technological developments have resulted in new systems in parallel with digital age. Innovations have been started to be replaced with the traditional solutions. Standardizations have also started to be renewed in accordance with the high technology and complexity of the projects. Under these circumstances, design and construction activities have been separated in the construction industry. As a result, alternative project delivery systems have been developed and selecting the right delivery system has gained importance depending upon the complexity of the projects The main objective of this study was to propose a model that supports architect&rsquo / s leadership in design-build systems throughout an international airport project as a case study. Thus, construction industry will gain awareness for the organization structures in which architectural groups lead the other disciplines to achieve success in design-build systems considering time cost quality triangle. In this study, organization charts including project construction process and factors affecting design and construction activities were investigated. The matrix relationship in production level of the organization charts among the project disciplines has been analyzed. According to the evaluation of models reflecting the existing status, alternative models supporting architect&rsquo / s leadership are proposed.

Design Build is rapidly becoming one of the most commonly used project delivery methods in the construction industry. The United States Corp of Engineers (USACE) has started implementing its own version of Design Build with the introduction of Military Transformation in April 2005. Per the Department of the Army (2008) Military Transformation is a term employed by the Corps to implement the use of alternate project delivery method as a means of achieving best value. The United States Air Force (AF) and the Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) are expected to establish a target of 75% of all future Military Construction Projects (MILCONs) executed when using the Design Build method. The use of this delivery method results in significant changes to the relationships between the various parties associated with facility project delivery compared to the traditional Design Bid Build method. AFRC construction project procedures and requirements must also change.

According to September 2011 information from the U.S. Census Bureau, the construction industry in the United States is valued at nearly eight hundred billion dollars annually. A 2004 collaborative study by Construction Industry Institute and Lean Construction Institute suggests that as much as fifty seven percent of time, effort, and material investment in construction projects do not add value to the final product. When compared with twenty six percent wastes in the manufacturing industry, it becomes obvious that the construction industry has a problem. Construction projects that come in over budget and behind schedule have become the rule rather than the exception, leading to contentious business relationships and costly litigation. This study will strive to identify and analyze the primary sources of these problems. Research and industry experience point to a lack of communication and cooperation among the various entities required to complete a construction project as the leading causes of waste in the industry. Further analysis suggests that traditional forms of construction contracts encourage adversarial and non-cooperative behavior between parties. Additionally, poor communication between various contributors opens the door for additional wasted cost. Fortunately, the development of tools such as Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and Building Information Modeling (BIM) present new options to construction professionals that are proving to help address some of the challenges the industry faces today. IPD as a project delivery method creates a culture of collaboration and teamwork, where a culture of risk avoidance and conflict once stood, while BIM provides a platform for better communication among parties. When used together, these tools can reduce or eliminate many of the major sources of waste within the industry. This thesis will provide descriptions, analysis, and case studies that demonstrate the use of these tools and the potential they have to make a positive impact on the construction industry. / text

The challenge to the construction industry in the United Kingdom (UK) to improve its performance in the delivery of projects to levels more acceptable to clients continues to receive attention from both industry and academia. This is because recommendations of past industry reports and research have not been able to address the fragmented approach to project delivery, often cited as the primary cause of the industry's poor performance, and the resulting unreliable delivery times and cost overruns. Effective integration of the delivery team could improve team cultures and attitudes, and encourage the collaborative working necessary for improved project delivery performance. This research aims to develop a framework for improving the integration of the project delivery team necessary for a more effective teamwork environment. The thesis begins with a review of the literature on project delivery and the concepts of team, teamwork and integration for performance improvement in multi-disciplinary environments. It explores, through interviews, how leading construction project managers have engendered and managed the integration of teams in large projects. A framework of working practices for improving the integration is developed from three live case studies. The framework is validated through industry-based workshops. Exploratory interviews, conducted in the first phase of the research process provided empirical evidence of how integration could act as a means of improving teamwork. The results highlighted that parties that make up the delivery team operated within organisationally defined boundaries but acknowledged that working together would yield better results. The extent of their integration was influenced by team practices and the procurement approach. The Design and Build system provided the most conducive environment for team integration. Case studies, conducted in the second phase of the research, concluded that integration was more effective within individual organisations and was influenced within the project delivery team by its structure and processes, work environment and culture. These issues had received attention individually, but this research established that they were interrelated. It proposes the comprehensive and structured approach to ensure effective integration. The framework developed within the research provides project leaders with a holistic and structured approach for achieving efficient teamwork through the appropriate integration of the project delivery team throughout the construction period. Such knowledge is necessary for achieving any meaningful improvements in how the project delivery team works together as a single unit.

This exploratory research examined the degree of adoption and impact of the concepts of Building Information Model (BIM), Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), Integrated Design Process (IDP) and Building Energy Simulation (BES) on the design processes of advanced architectural firms when executing sustainable design. Six offices identified by the press for a strong commitment to sustainable design and influence in the design of high performance buildings were selected as cases. In semi-standardized interviews, these firms presented their perceptions of the influence of BIM, BES, and IPD/IDP. The results show that a generalization of sustainable design processes is possible. A design process for sustainability (DEPROSU) model was created by collecting best practices from data gathered from the interviews and the critical literature review. Secondary contributions show that BIM, IDP/IPD and BES have a synergistic effect in sustainable design methods, and that the human resource profile from these firms has evolved towards multi-skilled professionals knowledgeable in BES, BIM, parametric design, sustainability and construction processes. This research provides evidence of commonalities found in the design processes of the selected firms. These commonalities, which have been represented in the DEPROSU model, can potentially be validated as protocols or standards for sustainable design, providing architectural design practices with concrete patterns for improvement and or validation of their design methods.

In recent decades, the use of construction manager-at-risk (CMAR) has surged as an innovative construction project delivery method in comparison to traditional competitive bid procurement methods. The conceptual pros and cons of the method are widely accepted throughout the construction industry; however, very little quantitative research exists validating such beliefs. The study presented in this technical paper empirically compares the performance of CMAR to that of the more traditional method of competitive sealed proposal (CSP) in the construction of higher educational facilities. In a study of 33 projects constructed by The Texas A&M University System, 19 procured using CMAR and 14 procured using CSP, observed results show a reduction in schedule growth and change order quantity when using CMAR over CSP. However, additional results show that CSP is more apt to result in decreased project and construction costs than CMAR. Business practices of The Texas A&M University System, statistical significance testing of research data, and practical applications of research findings are included.