| description abstract | Alternative contracting methods have become popular replacements for traditional practices based on low-bid acquisition. The benefits of decreased project duration, increased job quality, and improved delivery processes have demonstrated their value to the public over the years through the implementation of such methods as A + B, design-build (D-B), incentive/disincentive (I/D), no excuse bonus (NEB), and lump sum (LS) contracting. In their continued efforts to gauge the performance of their Alternative Contracting Program in the administration of highway construction projects, the Florida DOT (FDOT) sought to evaluate the effectiveness of these methods compared with the traditional design-bid-build (DBB) system. The research team first examined literature and surveyed past project participants on common practice. Next, interviews were conducted to garner further insight on method-specific performance and general sentiment. To assess the effective administration of alternative contracting methods, this report provides the results of the surveys, interviews, method reviews, and recommendations. The results show that attitudes have improved over time both within and between project participants. Increased exposure, understanding, and use of newer alternative contracting methods has improved the manner in which state highway agencies more accurately select projects that use these methods. The data obtained from the implementation of these methods in this research will provide further substantive support for the use of nontraditional methods of project procurement. Furthermore, the expressed opinions of the designers, contractors, and inspectors in this research help shed light on the perceived benefits and drawbacks of each alternative contracting method. Moreover, understanding the personal views in the use of each method will aid in preventing and resolving party conflict. | |
