Matching Items (2)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Best Value
- Creators: Al-Tassan, Abdulrahman
Description
In this paper, the impact of running a Best Value system in a student-run/volunteer group is measured, documented, and analyzed. The group being used for this test is the Arizona State University Society of Automotive Engineers Formula Team. The Arizona State University Society of Automotive Engineers Formula Team has participated in national Formula SAE competitions since at least 1992, however, in the last twenty years, the team has only been able to produce one car that was able to finish the competition on time. In a similar time period, Best Value has been successfully tested on over 1860 professional projects with a 95% satisfaction rating. Using the Best Value approach to increase transparency and accountability through simple metrics and documentation, the 2016 Arizona State University Society of Automotive Engineers Formula Team was able to complete their car in 278 days. In comparison, it took 319 days for the 2015 team and 286 for the average collegiate team. This is an improvement of 13% when compared to the 2015 team and 3% when compared to the average collegiate team. With these results it can be deduced that the Best Value approach is a viable method for improving efficiency of student-run and volunteer organizations. It is the recommendation of this report that the Arizona State University Society of Automotive Engineers Formula Team continue to utilize Best Value practices and run this system again each year moving forward. This consistent documentation should result in continuous improvement in the time required to complete the car as well as its quality.
ContributorsWojtas, Thomas Samuel (Author) / Trimble, Steven (Thesis director) / Kashiwagi, Dean (Committee member) / Kashiwagi, Jacob (Committee member) / WPC Graduate Programs (Contributor) / Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Program (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-05
Description
Saudi Arabia has been facing issues with completing construction projects on time and on budget. It has been documented that 70% of public construction projects are delayed. Studies have identified the low-bid delivery method as an important factor in causing such delays. The procurement system (low-bid) ignores contractors’ performance, and that is reflected in projects’ performance. A case study was performed, at a University campus in northern Saudi Arabia, identifying the major causes of project delays and cost overruns. The University was experiencing delays from 50% to 150%. Also, the actual project costs for four projects were examined and found that all four projects’ costs were higher than the original bid. The delay and cost overruns factors were gathered from the University engineers. A literature research identified one construction management method, best value performance information procurement system (BV PIPS), has documented multiple times its ability to improve project performance. In a comparison using the result of a case study and the results of (BV PIPS), Saudi Arabia’s delivery system was identified as a potential cause of project performance issues. The current procurement system was analyzed and modified to adapt with the (BV PIPS). The proposed procurement system using BV PIPS, which can be implemented in Saudi Arabia, was created with owner side. A large survey was conducted of 761 classified contractors and 43 universities’ representatives who rated causes of delay factors and cost overruns. The delay factors were then compared to delay factors experienced on Saudi construction projects, identified by performing a literature research. The comparison identified 14 important causes of delays. Moreover, the survey showed that classified contractors and universities’ representatives unsatisfied with low-bid, and they agreed with BV PIPS which selecting vendors based on performance with price. The proposed model required a submitted level of experience (LE), risk assessment (RA), and value added (VA). Besides, project managers of vendors should be interviewed during the clarification phase. In addition, venders should submit the project’s scope, technical schedule, milestone schedule, and risk management plan. In the execution phase, vendors should submit a weekly risk report (WRR) and director’s report (DR).
ContributorsAlzara, Majed (Author) / Kashiwagi, Dean (Thesis advisor) / Kashiwagi, Jacob (Committee member) / Al-Tassan, Abdulrahman (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016