An Empirical Analysis of the Effectiveness of Design-Build Construction Contracts
Abstract
Although the use of Design/Build as a construction project delivery method is quite common in private industry, it is a fairly recent phenomenon in the public sector. Further, while anecdotal reports of cost and time savings abound, little if any research has been published to date (as far as this author could determine) which would document evidence of quantifiable savings attributable solely to the use of design/build procedures. This apparent absence of reliable data on the subject could be explained by a reluctance on the part of private firms to release cost performance data which they may consider to be critical to their competitive advantage in the market. This paper opens with a review of the development of design/build, then contrasts its features and benefits with traditional design/bid/build. Several types of design/build organizations are examined, with their relative advantages and disadvantages. The development of Federal Acquisition Regulations, and the government's historic reliance on competitive bidding is reviewed. The gradual acceptance by Federal Agencies of design/build contracts as a legitimate facilities procurement procedure is discussed in the context of these regulatory constraints. The focus of the research is an in depth examination of the actual performance of two variations of design/build as currently implemented by the Navy. The Navy's 1.5 billion dollar annual construction volume, and the systematic execution of a number of programmatically identical projects during the same time frame provides a unique opportunity to examine the effects of design/build relative to control projects procured using traditional procedures.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Aug 01, 1993
- Accession Number
- ADA268764
Entities
People
- John W. Mouritsen
Organizations
- Purdue University