| description abstract | Schedule, cost/budget, and quality are traditionally identified as the three key performance indicators (KPI) of success in project management and delivery. Government authorities charged with delivering public infrastructure are more frequently choosing to utilize design-build project delivery due to an expected improvement in schedule and cost/budget performance, as compared to the traditional design-bid-build project delivery method. Prioritizing schedule and budget results in a gap in the relationship between quality and successful project outcome. While quality control and quality assurance procedures remain prescriptive and similar to those required via design-bid-build, the responsibilities are typically shifted to the design-builder who is striving to meet the accelerated schedule and cost efficiencies achievable through the integrated design-build process. This scholarly paper identifies opportunities for improvements in government contract documents, specifically the request for proposal (RFP) to realign and optimize project quality as an emphasized metric or KPI for design-build success. The quality gap between owner’s needs and contract documents is identified, viable strategies are explored, and techniques developed and presented to improve RFP requirements and selection criteria to keep quality on par with schedule and budget. Restoring quality as a priority on par with schedule and budget develops a platform for continued successful design-build project delivery while potentially reducing a major source of dispute during both design and construction. Design-build project delivery in the transportation sector has been highly successful and broadly accepted within the transportation construction industry, however, there remains opportunity for improvement in the development of RFPs. There remains significant opportunity for refinement and advancement in RFP development techniques as owners and practitioners grow and evolve in the design-build (DB) delivery method. The iron triangle of achieving project goals related to cost/budget, schedule, and quality continues to be the benchmark for project success, yet design-build team selection is typically driven by potential schedule gains and cost certainties. This paper focuses on improvements in quality related RFP selection criteria development to close the gap and return quality to a top three criteria on par with schedule and cost. Six (6) modifications to quality related evaluation criteria in an RFP are identified, explored, and discussed in detail. Implementation of these quality criteria modifications from the onset of the selection process may result in multiple benefits in project delivery including reduced nonconformances, achievement of design lifespan, and reduced conflicts among project participants. | |
