Benchmarking of Large Design–Build Highway Projects

Abstract

For generations, highway projects in the United States have been delivered with the traditional design–bid–build (DBB) project delivery method. In 1990, FHWA introduced Special Experimental Project Number 14 (SEP-14) to encourage state agencies to use more efficient alternative methods for delivering projects. As of 2002, approximately 140 SEP-14 projects have been built according to the design–build (DB) delivery method. Although the use of the DB method for transportation projects has increased noticeably in the past decade, attempts to measure project performance under DB as against DBB have been limited to small projects. To fill this research gap, an input-versus-output benchmarking approach was used to assess the performance of large DB highway projects. By means of this approach, factors that could affect performance of highway projects were identified, and a comprehensive methodology for benchmarking was developed. A sample of four DB projects (with contract amounts ranging from $126 million to $1.4 billion) was analyzed to determine how project characteristics and DB practices (inputs) affect project performance in terms of cost and schedule (outputs). Project cost and schedule performance show clear trends against 15 input factors. More data points are needed to determine correlations between these inputs and outputs. In addition, 11 DBB projects (with contract amounts ranging from $50 million to $100 million) were selected for a statistical comparison with DB projects.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Gibson

G. E.

Jr. and Walewski

Project Delivery Methods and Contracting Approaches Available for Implementation by the Texas Department of Transportation. Research Report Number 2129-1, Appendix E. Center for Transportation Research, Texas Department of Transportation, Austin, 2001.

Miller

J. B.

Construction Project Delivery Systems, Public and Private Infrastructure. Aspen Wiley Law & Business, New York, 1999.

SAIC, AECOM Consult and University of Colorado at Boulder. Design–Build Effectiveness Study. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 2006. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/designbuild/designbuild.htm. Accessed May 4, 2007.

Koppinen

and Lahdenperä

The Current and Future Performance of Road Project Delivery Methods. VTT Publication 549. VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Tampere, Finland, 2004. www.vtt.fi/inf/pdf/publications/2004/P549.pdf. Accessed May 4, 2007.

Design–Build Institute of America. www.dbia.org. Accessed May 2005.

Camp

R. C.

Benchmarking: The Search for Industry Best Practices That Lead to Superior Performance. ASQC Quality Press, Milwaukee, Wis., 1989.

Brunso

T. P.

and Siddiqi

K. M.

Using Benchmarks and Metrics to Evaluate Project Delivery of Environmental Restoration Programs. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 129, No. 2 2004, pp. 119–130.

Booz

Allen Hamilton

. NCHRP Web Document 58: Research for Customer-Driven Benchmarking of Maintenance Activities. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2003. http://www.trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?id=2058. Accessed May 4, 2007.

Konchar

and Sanvido

Comparison of U.S. Project Delivery Systems. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 124, No. 6 1998, pp. 435–444.

10.

Thomas

S. R.

Macken

C. L.

Chung

T. H.

and Kim

Measuring the Impacts of Delivery System on Project Performance–Design–Build and Design–Bid–Build. Report No. BMM 2002–10. NIST GCR 02-84. U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Md., 2002. www.bfrl.nist.gov/oae/publications/gcrs/02840.pdf. Accessed May 4, 2007.

11.

Warne

T. R.

Design Build Contracting for Highway Projects: A Performance Assessment. Tom Warne & Associates, LLC, South Jordan, Utah, 2005.

12.

O'Connor

J. T.

and Gibson

E. G.

Jr . Monitoring and Evaluation of SH 130 Project Construction. Project proposal. Center for Transportation Research, University of Texas, Austin, 2003.

13.

O'Connor

J. T.

Gibson

E. G.

Jr. Shrestha

P. P.

Giovanni

M. C.

Plan for Performance Benchmarking of SH 130. Project 0-4461-P5, 2005. www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/pdf_reports/0_4661_P5.pdf. Accessed May 4, 2007.

14.

Design–Build Project Approvals Under SEP-14 as of 12/31/2002. www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/contracts/sep14a.htm. Accessed January 2005.

15.

Public Private Partnership Case Studies, I-15 Corridor Reconstruction Projects. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ppp/i_15.htm. Accessed January, 15, 2005.

16.

Route 288 Virginia website. Information and newsletter of Route 288, Virginia. www.route288.com. Accessed January 23, 2005.

17.

US 60 Design–Build Project. Arizona Department of Transportation. http://www.superstitionfreeway.com. Accessed 2004–2005. http://www.superstitionfreeway.com.

18.

El Wardani

M. A.

Messner

J. I.

Horman

M. J.

Comparing Procurement Methods for Design–Build Projects. Journal for Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 132, No. 3 2006, pp. 230–238.