Project Delivery Methods-Free-Samples for Students-Myassignment

Question: Analyse various Project Delivery Methods. Answer: Introduction WestLINK aim at increasing the chances of success of this project by integrating the design and management of the activities. Thus, this report briefly analyses various project delivery methods and recommend the best option based on the various assumptions and rationale. Some of the project delivery methods that are briefly highlighted include design-bid-build, design-build and CM@Risk among others. The report further highlights various types of financial contract based on the most relevant project criteria. The discussed financial contract type must be the most pertinent for this type of project and include Lump sum, guaranteed maximum price and cost plus fixed fee contracts. Lastly, the report analysis and recommend the most viable procurement method that can be used to widen the project scope and size. Specifically, the report evaluates Competitive, Best value and Negotiated procurement methods and recommends the most suitable one for a process of this magnitude. Background of case study The case involve the preparation of a comprehensive plan for a client on how to select the best and most viable project delivery system, the financial contract type and the most relevant procurement procedure. The Sydney motorway network is embarking on the improvement and construction of various roads to supplement the existing one. In order to attract funding from the Australian Government to effectively execute the project, this plan is necessary. The proposal will ensure effective monitoring of the quality of the work and ensure relevant approaches are undertaken towards the completion of the project. Some of the inherent challenges that necessitate such a plan include the companys inability to sustain the fast-tracking and control of related costs. Correspondingly, without such a plan, it will be difficult for the company to ensure that workers are safe from the massive traffic from Paramatta road given that more than 140,000 vehicles occasionally move through the corridor. Besi des, a strict 2023 deadline for the project completion implies that WestLINK must adhere to the specified plan that is subsequently detailed. Project delivery methods According to Mollaoglu-Korkmaz et al. (2011), project delivery method refers to a detailed system that is used in the organization and financing specific projects, facilitating operations and maintaining related services. Specifically, project delivery involves such processes and mechanisms involve in the design and building projects. WestLINK must enter into a contractual relationship with the Australian government among other important agencies to effectively design and successfully construct the project. There are numerous factors that influences the selection of project delivery methods. For instance, the experience of the company to the contacted, qualifications and capabilities must be taken into consideration. Likewise, the scale, form, purpose and project complexity are also important factors that cannot be ignored whatsoever (Harold Kerzner, 2013). A project sequence, establishment of timelines, costs and the inherent ability to fast-track project progress are other important factors that will influence project delivery methods (Laslo, 2010). GOALS/CRITERIA CRITERIA WEIGHT Project delivery methods Design-bid-build Design-build CM@Risk Score Weighted score Score Weighted score Score Weighted score Project delivery speed 30 5 150 8 240 5 150 Seamless communication 20 5 100 5 100 5 100 Cost control 30 4 120 6 180 6 180 Work with local subcontractors 20 5 100 6 120 5 100 Total 470 640 530 Design-build with a weighted score of 640 is recommended. This method involves a single entity that is responsible for the design and construction of the project. The company responsible for the project design must ensure that all relevant performance specifications are met before suggesting the start of the actual project (Harold Kerzner, 2013). A single contractor is tasked with developing a contractual relationship with the project owners to identify related costs and better their relations at early stages. The figure below shows this relationship. Under this project delivery method, the involvement of a single entity will save the project owner from the typically difficult bidding process, enhance communication and facilitate effective control and design of the project (Kent Becerik-Gerber, 2010). However, the project owner must give clear details on the specific need and objectives of the project coupled with regular management of the contract to ensure absolute understanding of the stipulated activities (Burke, 2013). Also, the project owner has limited option on the choice of the most appropriate project subcontractor and this may significantly affect delivery. This report recommend this project delivery method to execute the specified construction activities. Under this project delivery method, the project owner is required to seek professional design services who will provide a detailed project design before initiating the actual construction activities. The project is opts to unify such relevant entities to conduct the design and construction activities. According to Mollaoglu-Korkmaz et al. (2011), the best project delivery method must adhere to various financial, organizational and time constraints that are clearly stipulated under the agreement. As outlined in the figure above, the project owner contracts a project design professional who may include a design-build professional and subsequently seeks the services of a general contractor who will facilitate construction process (Kent Becerik-Gerber, 2010). This project delivery method is recommended because it is tested and both the project owner and contractor have increased control and involvement in the design process. The table below gives a summary of recommended project delivery system. Project delivery system Project deliver roles Owner decision maker Project management Design Contracting Construction Coordination of construction Construction coordination and administration Design- build Owner (O) General contractor (GC) GC GC GC O GC and O General contr. owner CM CM GC GC GC CM Advisory mgmt. Owner Construction manager (CM) CM O GC CM CM The delivery method is also appropriate because the project has a strict 2023 deadline, and WestLINK is absolutely committed towards meeting the stipulated deadline without any significant cost overrun. The contractor and owner will also be able to fast trace the construction phases and identify possible costs earlier enough. The contractor is also solely responsible for any risk in the design and this is explicitly stipulated in the contractual agreement (Meskendahl, 2010). Financial contract type: Lump Sum contract GOALS/CRITERIA CRITERIA WEIGHT Financial contract types Lump Sum Unit price GMP CPFF Score Weighted score Score Weighted score Score Weighted score Score Weighted score Project delivery speed 30 7 210 5 150 4 120 5 150 Cost control 20 6 120 6 120 5 100 4 80 Quality work 25 6 150 4 100 6 150 6 150 Risk sharing 25 4 100 6 150 5 125 4 100 Total 100 580 520 495 480 After selecting the best project delivery system for the execution of the project, WestLINK must select the most appropriate contract type that will facilitate the process based on the above criteria. According to Mollaoglu-Korkmaz et al. (2011), a contract refers to an agreement between two or more individuals or bodies to avail specified tasks in exchange for certain payment or compensation. However, contract type highlights the layout that will be used to pay for the services that are stipulated under the contract. The recommended financial contract for this project is lump sum (also known as fixed price contract) with a total weighted score of 580. Under this contract, the project owner is obligated to pay the contractor a particular amount for completing a scale or work without necessarily providing a comprehensive cost breakdown. Specifically, the project owner agrees to pay the contractor an indicated contracted amount after the contract has been validated (Touran et al., 2010). The contractor is solely responsible for any cost overrun and can only issue a change not related to costs in the contract through an official order to the owner. Cost overruns can be as a result of the escalated cost of building materials, poor supplier performance and possible labour unrests. A single lump sum price is all that the project owner is obligated to pay the contractor before the validation of the contract (Schwalbe, 2015). Also, given the strict 2023 project deadline, the contractor must complete the project within the stipulated fixed cost under the agreement. The contractor can make profit from this contract is the project costs are below the estimated expenses (Kerzner, 2013). Also, the project owner is not eligible to claim the remaining amount after project completion. This type of contract is recommended because it eliminates the need for extensive project design and administration. Thus, the project owner must first give a clear definition of the project to enable the contractor to give a rough estimate of the total costs (Kerzner, 2013). If the project owner has a relatively tight time-frame, limited construction experience or tight budget constraints, then this type of financial contract is recommended. According to Mollaoglu-Korkmaz et al. (2011), lump sum contract obligates the contractor to avail specified services under the fixed lump sum amount as postulated under the contractual agreement. Under this contract type, if the estimated costs goes up, the profits are likely to go down. Procurement method: Negotiated contract GOALS/CRITERIA CRITERIA WEIGHT Procurement method Competitive Negotiated Best Value Score Weighted score Score Weighted score Score Weighted score Project delivery speed 35 4 140 8 280 6 210 Product quality 35 6 210 7 245 6 210 Selection flexibility 30 5 150 5 150 5 150 Total 100 560 675 570 Projct owners are tasked with selecting the best contractor based on the price, speed quality of previous work or a combination of both (Touran et al., 2010). The project owner should conduct a comprehensive assessment of the contractors and make the best decision. The recommended procurement method for selecting a contractor for a project of this magnitude is the negotiated contract with a weighted score of 675. Under this procurement method, a contractor is pre-selected based on market reputation and general qualification for the project (Pinto, 2007). The method is time saving as there are no bidding processes allowing the construction activities to start and move as quickly as possible. References Burke, R. (2013). Project management: planning and control techniques.New Jersey, USA. DESIGN-BUILD DONE RIGHT. A DESIGN-BUILD INSTITUTE OF AMERICA PUBLICATION, April 2015 Harold Kerzner, (2013) Project Management: A System Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. Chapter 19. Kent, D. C., Becerik-Gerber, B. (2010). Understanding construction industry experience and attitudes toward integrated project delivery.Journal of construction engineering and management,136(8), 815-825. Kerzner, H. (2011).Using the project management maturity model: strategic planning for project management. John Wiley Sons. Kerzner, H. (2013).Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. John Wiley Sons. Laslo, Z. (2010). Project portfolio management: An integrated method for resource planning and scheduling to minimize planning/scheduling-dependent expenses.International journal of project management,28(6), 609-618. Meskendahl, S. (2010). The influence of business strategy on project portfolio management and its successa conceptual framework.International Journal of Project Management,28(8), 807-817. Mollaoglu-Korkmaz, S., Swarup, L., Riley, D. (2011). Delivering sustainable, high-performance buildings: Influence of project delivery methods on integration and project outcomes.Journal of Management in Engineering,29(1), 71-78. Pinto, J. K. (2007).Project management: achieving competitive advantage. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Pearson/Prentice Hall. Schwalbe, K. (2015).Information technology project management. Cengage Learning. Touran, A., Gransberg, D. D., Molenaar, K. R., Ghavamifar, K. (2010). Selection of project delivery method in transit: Drivers and objectives.Journal of Management in Engineering,27(1), 21-27.