Comparison of Utility Managers’ and Project Managers’ Satisfaction Rating of Alternative Project Delivery Methods Used in Water and Wastewater Infrastructures

Abstract

Since the 1990s, the use of design-build (DB) and construction manager at-risk (CMAR) as alternative project delivery (APD) methods for water and wastewater projects has significantly increased, fast outpacing the growth of traditional project delivery methods. Currently, U.S. municipalities face challenges of an aging infrastructure, which requires replacing and expanding water and wastewater facilities at more than 7,000 utilities nationwide. This study compared and analyzed the differences between utility managers (UMs) and project managers (PMs) regarding their satisfaction levels of the various benefits when using APD methods. Respondents included UMs and PMs having experience in DB and CMAR water and wastewater projects. In this study, PMs were significantly more satisfied with the quality of project, change orders, and lower rate of disputes than UMs. In addition, PMs experienced a significantly higher schedule advantage than UMs. Most respondents were satisfied with the various advantages provided by APD methods.

Keywords

construction management contracting customer service or satisfaction utilities wastewater sewer highways buildings

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Society of Civil Engineers. (2013). Report card for America’s infrastructure. Washington, DC: Author.

Arora

(2000, October). Design-build method of project delivery—Different perspectives; a fad or a panacea. Proceedings 2000 Water Environmental Federation annual conference, Anaheim, CA.

Baird

G. M.

(2011). Reducing costs through open procurement and alternative project delivery. Journal of American Water Works Association, 103(18), 20-23.

Beringer

Brown

P. R.

Coffey

J. C.

Dahl

Kelly

E. S.

Blai

(1999). DBO and DBM gain popularity. Journal of American Water Works Association, 91(4), 18-24.

Chan

A. P.

Scott

Lam

E. W.

(2002). Framework of success criteria for design/build projects. Journal of Management in Engineering, 18, 120-128. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2002)18:3(120)

Culp

(2011). Alternative project delivery methods for water and wastewater projects: Do they save time and money. Journal of Leadership and Management in Engineering, 11, 231-240. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)LM.1943-5630.0000133

Kelly

E. S.

Haskins

Reiter

P. D.

(1998). Implementing a DBO project. Journal of American Water Works Association, 90(6), 34-46.

Miller

Garvin

Ibbs

Mahoney

(2000). “Toward a new paradigm: Simultaneous use of multiple project delivery methods.” Journal of Management in Engineering, 16(3), 58-67.

Molenaar

K. R.

Bogus

S. M.

Priestley

J. M.

(2004). Design/build for water/wastewater facilities: State of the industry survey and three case studies. Journal of Management in Engineering, 20, 16-24. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2004)20:1(16)

10.

Shorney-Darby

(2011). Design-build for water and wastewater projects. Denver, CO: American Water Works Association.

11.

Tran

Molenaar

(2014). Impact of risk on design-build selection for highway design and construction projects. Journal of Management in Engineering, 30, 153-162.

12.

Water Design Build Council. (2009a). Independent comparative evaluation of DB versus conventional DBB project delivery for municipal water and wastewater facilities. Washington, DC: Author.

13.

Water Design Build Council. (2009b). Survey of municipal clients on design-build for water and wastewater systems. Washington, DC: Author.

14.

West Valley Construction Company, Inc. (2013). Integrated design build. Retrieved from www.wvcc.com/design_build.htm

15.

White

T. J.

Jones

W. R.

Waer

M. A.

Hayes

Quarendon

(2005). Phoenix tests the waters with DBO alternative project delivery. Journal of American Water Works Association, 97(5), 90-92.