File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Identifying design development factors in Australian PPP projects using an AHP framework

TitleIdentifying design development factors in Australian PPP projects using an AHP framework
Authors
Keywordsdesign
public-private partnerships
Analytic hierarchy process
design management
Issue Date2013
Citation
Construction Management and Economics, 2013, v. 31, n. 1, p. 20-39 How to Cite?
AbstractIn Australia consortiums will come together and create an initial design concept or sketch design at the public-private partnership (PPP) bid stage. If the bid is successful this initial design is then developed further. However, a winning bid may have been evaluated on financial criteria alone and the consortium's capability to develop the design through to project delivery may not have been thoroughly evaluated. In theory, design is a key process in PPP projects and the aim of the research was to understand what capabilities are important in the development of a design through this process. To clarify these issues, a range of activities and organizational factors linked to design development are proposed using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method. This method was chosen in order to see which design development factors were ranked more highly by experts. In this research the hierarchy was designed employing the categories of exploratory and exploitative design development. Below each of these overarching categories, there were four design development functional distinctions: the two exploratory distinctions were Design (D) and Design Management (DM). The two exploitative distinctions were Design Support (DS) and Design Infrastructure (DI). A further list of 36 design development sub-criteria was developed under the above categories. These sub-criteria formed the basis of a survey of respondents drawn from a database of industry sources in the public domain as well as a list gathered from a large developer involved in PPP projects. It included relatively senior managers, PPP project managers and architects. Survey respondents identified a recent PPP project that they had worked on. From the 36 responses it can be seen that the exploratory Design (D) and Design Management (DM) activities were ranked more highly than the exploitative activities of Design Support (DS) and Design Infrastructure (DI) associated with a PPP project organization. This suggests that PPP frameworks should account for these exploratory factors as well as the exploitative factors associated with compliance, quality systems and project team infrastructure. This indicates that in PPP projects design development through the effective management of an initial design is a critical factor. © 2013 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/265643
ISSN
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.880
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorRaisbeck, Peter-
dc.contributor.authorTang, Llewellyn C.M.-
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-03T01:21:16Z-
dc.date.available2018-12-03T01:21:16Z-
dc.date.issued2013-
dc.identifier.citationConstruction Management and Economics, 2013, v. 31, n. 1, p. 20-39-
dc.identifier.issn0144-6193-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/265643-
dc.description.abstractIn Australia consortiums will come together and create an initial design concept or sketch design at the public-private partnership (PPP) bid stage. If the bid is successful this initial design is then developed further. However, a winning bid may have been evaluated on financial criteria alone and the consortium's capability to develop the design through to project delivery may not have been thoroughly evaluated. In theory, design is a key process in PPP projects and the aim of the research was to understand what capabilities are important in the development of a design through this process. To clarify these issues, a range of activities and organizational factors linked to design development are proposed using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method. This method was chosen in order to see which design development factors were ranked more highly by experts. In this research the hierarchy was designed employing the categories of exploratory and exploitative design development. Below each of these overarching categories, there were four design development functional distinctions: the two exploratory distinctions were Design (D) and Design Management (DM). The two exploitative distinctions were Design Support (DS) and Design Infrastructure (DI). A further list of 36 design development sub-criteria was developed under the above categories. These sub-criteria formed the basis of a survey of respondents drawn from a database of industry sources in the public domain as well as a list gathered from a large developer involved in PPP projects. It included relatively senior managers, PPP project managers and architects. Survey respondents identified a recent PPP project that they had worked on. From the 36 responses it can be seen that the exploratory Design (D) and Design Management (DM) activities were ranked more highly than the exploitative activities of Design Support (DS) and Design Infrastructure (DI) associated with a PPP project organization. This suggests that PPP frameworks should account for these exploratory factors as well as the exploitative factors associated with compliance, quality systems and project team infrastructure. This indicates that in PPP projects design development through the effective management of an initial design is a critical factor. © 2013 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofConstruction Management and Economics-
dc.subjectdesign-
dc.subjectpublic-private partnerships-
dc.subjectAnalytic hierarchy process-
dc.subjectdesign management-
dc.titleIdentifying design development factors in Australian PPP projects using an AHP framework-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/01446193.2012.729133-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-84870907210-
dc.identifier.volume31-
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.identifier.spage20-
dc.identifier.epage39-
dc.identifier.eissn1466-433X-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000213330200003-
dc.identifier.issnl0144-6193-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats