YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Management in Engineering
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Management in Engineering
    • 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

    Advancing Airport Project Delivery: A Comparison of Design–Build and Traditional Methods in Terms of Schedule and Cost Performance

    Source: Journal of Management in Engineering:;2023:;Volume ( 039 ):;issue: 006::page 04023041-1
    Author:
    Ramy Khalef
    ,
    Islam H. El-adaway
    DOI: 10.1061/JMENEA.MEENG-5490
    Publisher: ASCE
    Abstract: Current airport infrastructure is in a state of decline, with reports scoring it at an underperforming classification of D+. To address this issue, significant improvement and advancement of the infrastructure is needed. With backing on an authoritative level, the nation can expect an increase in the number of improvement projects. Airport stakeholders have long been accustomed to delivering their projects using traditional methods, such as design–bid–build (DBB). Design–build (DB) is an alternative delivery method that has added benefits for project metrics, such as schedule and cost performance. There is a lack of research evaluating DB within the context of airport projects. This study fills this knowledge gap. The goal of this research is to provide an improved understanding of DB with respect to DBB on fundamental key risks that impact schedule and cost performance in airport projects. This goal is achieved by a multistep interdependent methodology comprised of: (1) collecting and assessing data on 34 risk factors, (2) calculating the risk ratings of each factor, and (3) statistically analyzing the risks for their actual effect, as well as how they are perceived by between different stakeholder groups. The results show that the traditional DBB delivery method results in greater risks for most risk factors than does DB. Furthermore, contractors perceived DBB more negatively than DB. The top significant risk in DBB is the low level of team collaboration. Conversely, while statistically insignificant, unclarity or incompleteness in project scope was the most critical risk factor in affecting DB. To this end, DB implementation has promise for handling many risks better than DBB, and greater integration of DB should be prioritized in future airport projects to reap those added benefits. Ultimately, this research contributes to the body of knowledge by providing insight for airport stakeholders on the crucial risk factors that must be considered in project delivery.
    • Download: (2.031Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Advancing Airport Project Delivery: A Comparison of Design–Build and Traditional Methods in Terms of Schedule and Cost Performance

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4293977
    Collections
    • Journal of Management in Engineering

    Show full item record

    contributor authorRamy Khalef
    contributor authorIslam H. El-adaway
    date accessioned2023-11-27T23:56:54Z
    date available2023-11-27T23:56:54Z
    date issued8/25/2023 12:00:00 AM
    date issued2023-08-25
    identifier otherJMENEA.MEENG-5490.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4293977
    description abstractCurrent airport infrastructure is in a state of decline, with reports scoring it at an underperforming classification of D+. To address this issue, significant improvement and advancement of the infrastructure is needed. With backing on an authoritative level, the nation can expect an increase in the number of improvement projects. Airport stakeholders have long been accustomed to delivering their projects using traditional methods, such as design–bid–build (DBB). Design–build (DB) is an alternative delivery method that has added benefits for project metrics, such as schedule and cost performance. There is a lack of research evaluating DB within the context of airport projects. This study fills this knowledge gap. The goal of this research is to provide an improved understanding of DB with respect to DBB on fundamental key risks that impact schedule and cost performance in airport projects. This goal is achieved by a multistep interdependent methodology comprised of: (1) collecting and assessing data on 34 risk factors, (2) calculating the risk ratings of each factor, and (3) statistically analyzing the risks for their actual effect, as well as how they are perceived by between different stakeholder groups. The results show that the traditional DBB delivery method results in greater risks for most risk factors than does DB. Furthermore, contractors perceived DBB more negatively than DB. The top significant risk in DBB is the low level of team collaboration. Conversely, while statistically insignificant, unclarity or incompleteness in project scope was the most critical risk factor in affecting DB. To this end, DB implementation has promise for handling many risks better than DBB, and greater integration of DB should be prioritized in future airport projects to reap those added benefits. Ultimately, this research contributes to the body of knowledge by providing insight for airport stakeholders on the crucial risk factors that must be considered in project delivery.
    publisherASCE
    titleAdvancing Airport Project Delivery: A Comparison of Design–Build and Traditional Methods in Terms of Schedule and Cost Performance
    typeJournal Article
    journal volume39
    journal issue6
    journal titleJournal of Management in Engineering
    identifier doi10.1061/JMENEA.MEENG-5490
    journal fristpage04023041-1
    journal lastpage04023041-18
    page18
    treeJournal of Management in Engineering:;2023:;Volume ( 039 ):;issue: 006
    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