Projects delivering on time and budget is still complex. This study presents actual project performance comparisons of the Design-Bid-Build “DBB” and Design-Build “DB” systems into Libyan projects. By analyzing 124 projects delivered by two methods and two types of companies (local and foreign) to provide objective comparison of cost and schedule performance. The results show that average DB cost was about 1.45 times larger than DBB. The project achieved by local and foreign companies, average cost overrun for DBB was 34%, and 26% respectively, Whilst only 10% and 0% for DB for local and foreign companies. The average time extension by local and foreign companies for DBB was 39.8%, and 43%, whilst only 32% and 0% for DB for local and foreign companies. DB projects executed by foreign company had little change order than DBB. This paper compares two project delivery systems, namely Design-Bid-Build and Design-Build, as well as two types of construction companies, local and foreign. Data for 124 projects were collected from Libyan Audit Bureau. In terms of the construction time and cost, the paper concludes that the foreign companies did a better job than the local companies. Also, provides quantitative data to support the delivery system selection with understanding its performance criteria.
| Published in | Engineering and Applied Sciences (Volume 2, Issue 1) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.eas.20170201.12 |
| Page(s) | 17-21 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2017. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Project Delivery Systems, Design/Build, Design/Bid/Build, Construction Cost Overrun, Project Time Delay, Time Performance, Cost Performance
| [1] | American Institute of Architects. (1975). “Design-Bid-Build Task Force Report.” Washington D.C. |
| [2] | Ibrahim Albalushi, Fathoni Usman and Ali S. Alnuaimi, (2013). “Construction Cost Overrun and Variations: Investigation on Its Causes and Consequences.” Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 7(14), Pages: 311-323. |
| [3] | Saleh Al Hadi Tumi,Abdelnaser Omran and Abdul Hamid Kadir Pakir, (2009)“Causes Of Delay In Construction Industry In Libya.”Int. Conference on Economics and Administration, Faculty of Administration and Business, University of Bucharest, Romania, ICEA – FAA Bucharest. |
| [4] | William Ibbs, and Ying-Yi Chih, (2011). “Alternative methods for choosing an appropriate project delivery system (PDS).” Facilities, Vol. 29 No. 13/14, pp. 527-541. |
| [5] | Morris, S. (1990) “Cost and Time Overruns in Public Sector Projects.” Economic and Political Weekly, Nov. 24, Vol. XXV, No. 47, pp. M154 -168. |
| [6] | Lædre, O., Austeng, K., Haugen, T., and Klakegg, O. (2006). “Procurement routes in public building and construction projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 10.1061/ (ASCE) 0733-9364, 132:7(689), 689–696. |
| [7] | Assaf, S. A., and Al-Hejji, S. (2006). “Causes of delay in large construction projects.” Int. J. Project Manage., 24(4), 349 –357. |
| [8] | Irelend, V. (1984). “Virtually Meaningless Distinctions between Nominally Different Procurement Methods.” Proceedings of 4thInt. Symposium on Organization and Management ofConstruction, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, Vol. 1 pp.203-212. |
| [9] | William Ibbs; Young Hoon Kwak; Tzeyu Ng; and A. Murat Odabasi, (2003). “Project Delivery Systems and Project Change: Quantitative Analysis.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., Vol. 129, No. 4, Pages 382-387. |
| [10] | Cingle Ⅲ, George and John G Wachter (2010). “The Project DeliverySystem Rating Index (PDSRI).” Available at http://www.aist.org. |
| [11] | Esmaeili, Behzad; Pellicer, Eugenio; and Molenaar, Keith R. (2014). “Critical Success Factors for Construction Projects.” 18th Int. Congress on Project Management and Engineering, Alcañiz. |
| [12] | Qing Chen; Zhigang Jin; Bo Xia; Peng Wu; and Martin Skitmore, (2015). “Time and Cost Performance of Design–Build Projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., ASCE, ISSN 0733-9364/04015074(7). |
| [13] | Konchar, M., and Sanvido, V. (1998). “Comparison of U.S. project delivery systems.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364, 124:6(435), 435 –444. |
| [14] | Hale, D. R., Shrestha, P. P, Gibson, G. E., and Migliaccio, G. C. (2009). “Empirical comparison of design/build and design/bid/build project delivery methods.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000017, 579-587. |
| [15] | Memon, A. H., I. A. Rahman, M. R. Abdullah and A. A. Azis, (2011). “Time Overrun in Construction Projects from the Perspective of Project Management Consultant (PMC).” Journal of Surveying, Construction and Property, 2(1): 54-66. |
APA Style
Medhat Abdelrahman Youssef, Gamal Abukhder, Abdelhamid S. A. Gliah. (2017). Libyan Construction Projects Delivery Systems: Empirical Comparison Between Design-Build And Design-Bid-Build. Engineering and Applied Sciences, 2(1), 17-21. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.eas.20170201.12
ACS Style
Medhat Abdelrahman Youssef; Gamal Abukhder; Abdelhamid S. A. Gliah. Libyan Construction Projects Delivery Systems: Empirical Comparison Between Design-Build And Design-Bid-Build. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2017, 2(1), 17-21. doi: 10.11648/j.eas.20170201.12
AMA Style
Medhat Abdelrahman Youssef, Gamal Abukhder, Abdelhamid S. A. Gliah. Libyan Construction Projects Delivery Systems: Empirical Comparison Between Design-Build And Design-Bid-Build. Eng Appl Sci. 2017;2(1):17-21. doi: 10.11648/j.eas.20170201.12
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.eas.20170201.12,
author = {Medhat Abdelrahman Youssef and Gamal Abukhder and Abdelhamid S. A. Gliah},
title = {Libyan Construction Projects Delivery Systems: Empirical Comparison Between Design-Build And Design-Bid-Build},
journal = {Engineering and Applied Sciences},
volume = {2},
number = {1},
pages = {17-21},
doi = {10.11648/j.eas.20170201.12},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.eas.20170201.12},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.eas.20170201.12},
abstract = {Projects delivering on time and budget is still complex. This study presents actual project performance comparisons of the Design-Bid-Build “DBB” and Design-Build “DB” systems into Libyan projects. By analyzing 124 projects delivered by two methods and two types of companies (local and foreign) to provide objective comparison of cost and schedule performance. The results show that average DB cost was about 1.45 times larger than DBB. The project achieved by local and foreign companies, average cost overrun for DBB was 34%, and 26% respectively, Whilst only 10% and 0% for DB for local and foreign companies. The average time extension by local and foreign companies for DBB was 39.8%, and 43%, whilst only 32% and 0% for DB for local and foreign companies. DB projects executed by foreign company had little change order than DBB. This paper compares two project delivery systems, namely Design-Bid-Build and Design-Build, as well as two types of construction companies, local and foreign. Data for 124 projects were collected from Libyan Audit Bureau. In terms of the construction time and cost, the paper concludes that the foreign companies did a better job than the local companies. Also, provides quantitative data to support the delivery system selection with understanding its performance criteria.},
year = {2017}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Libyan Construction Projects Delivery Systems: Empirical Comparison Between Design-Build And Design-Bid-Build AU - Medhat Abdelrahman Youssef AU - Gamal Abukhder AU - Abdelhamid S. A. Gliah Y1 - 2017/05/02 PY - 2017 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.eas.20170201.12 DO - 10.11648/j.eas.20170201.12 T2 - Engineering and Applied Sciences JF - Engineering and Applied Sciences JO - Engineering and Applied Sciences SP - 17 EP - 21 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2575-1468 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.eas.20170201.12 AB - Projects delivering on time and budget is still complex. This study presents actual project performance comparisons of the Design-Bid-Build “DBB” and Design-Build “DB” systems into Libyan projects. By analyzing 124 projects delivered by two methods and two types of companies (local and foreign) to provide objective comparison of cost and schedule performance. The results show that average DB cost was about 1.45 times larger than DBB. The project achieved by local and foreign companies, average cost overrun for DBB was 34%, and 26% respectively, Whilst only 10% and 0% for DB for local and foreign companies. The average time extension by local and foreign companies for DBB was 39.8%, and 43%, whilst only 32% and 0% for DB for local and foreign companies. DB projects executed by foreign company had little change order than DBB. This paper compares two project delivery systems, namely Design-Bid-Build and Design-Build, as well as two types of construction companies, local and foreign. Data for 124 projects were collected from Libyan Audit Bureau. In terms of the construction time and cost, the paper concludes that the foreign companies did a better job than the local companies. Also, provides quantitative data to support the delivery system selection with understanding its performance criteria. VL - 2 IS - 1 ER -
Information
Email: