Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/68566
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorYu, Ten_US
dc.contributor.authorShen, GQen_US
dc.contributor.authorShi, Qen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-08-29T01:46:06Z-
dc.date.available2017-08-29T01:46:06Z-
dc.date.issued2017-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of construction engineering and management, 2017, v. 143, no. 4, 04016111en_US
dc.identifier.issn0733-9364en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/68566-
dc.description.abstractThe choice of delivery method is one of the most important decisions that can determine the quality of construction projects. Two basic delivery methods, design-bid-build and design-build, have been compared in terms of project quality; however, an important quality dimension, performance quality, has generally been ignored in previous studies. In this study, the authors used existing economic theories to develop a model to examine the performance quality and project profits of these two delivery methods. The equilibrium points of the model were analyzed with consideration given to influencing factors such as cost coefficient, cooperation efficiency, and coordination cost. Four propositions were made to facilitate the quality-profit comparisons between design-bid-build and design-build. The first proposition showed that to maximize personal profit, the project coordinator should always keep a balance between design quality and construction quality, regardless of the delivery method. The other three propositions indicated that both methods can generate relatively higher levels of performance quality and project profits in an appropriate project environment. Based on these propositions, the authors ranked the performance quality and profits of the two methods within different conditions and used a real project to exhibit the practical value of these findings. Via case study, cooperation efficiency was identified as the most critical factor that determines the selection of delivery method. In addition, three key steps were summarized to facilitate the application of the model developed in this study.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipDepartment of Building and Real Estateen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineersen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of construction engineering and managementen_US
dc.subjectDesign-bid-builden_US
dc.subjectDesign-builden_US
dc.subjectEconomic theoriesen_US
dc.subjectPerformance qualityen_US
dc.subjectProject profitsen_US
dc.subjectQuality-profit equilibrium pointsen_US
dc.subjectContractingen_US
dc.titleComparing the performance quality of design-bid-build and design-build delivery methodsen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.volume143en_US
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001262en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000398514000015-
dc.source.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.eissn1943-7862en_US
dc.identifier.artn04016111en_US
item.fulltextFull Text (via PolyU elinks)-
crisitem.author.deptDepartment of Building and Real Estate-
crisitem.author.facultyFaculty of Construction and Environment-
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

119
Last Week
77
Last month
Checked on Sep 17, 2017

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.