YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

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

    Source: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management:;2016:;Volume ( 142 ):;issue: 009
    Author:
    David Ramsey
    ,
    Mounir El Asmar
    ,
    G. Edward Gibson
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001145
    Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
    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.
    • Download: (1.208Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

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

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4245639
    Collections
    • Journal of Construction Engineering and Management

    Show full item record

    contributor authorDavid Ramsey
    contributor authorMounir El Asmar
    contributor authorG. Edward Gibson
    date accessioned2017-12-30T13:06:13Z
    date available2017-12-30T13:06:13Z
    date issued2016
    identifier other%28ASCE%29CO.1943-7862.0001145.pdf
    identifier urihttp://138.201.223.254:8080/yetl1/handle/yetl/4245639
    description abstractDesign-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.
    publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
    titleQuantitative Performance Assessment of Single-Step versus Two-Step Design-Build Procurement
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume142
    journal issue9
    journal titleJournal of Construction Engineering and Management
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001145
    page04016033
    treeJournal of Construction Engineering and Management:;2016:;Volume ( 142 ):;issue: 009
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian