Matching Items (2)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Best Value
- Creators: Alzara, Majed
- Creators: Badger, William W.
Description
Commodity contracts are often awarded on the basis of price. A price-based methodology for making such awards fails to consider the suppliers' ability to minimize the risk of non-performance in terms of cost, schedule, or customer satisfaction. Literature suggests that nearly all risk in the delivery of commodities is in the interfacing of nodes within a supply chain. Therefore, commodity suppliers should be selected on the basis of their past performance, ability to identify and minimize risk, and capacity to preplan the delivery of services. Organizations that select commodity suppliers primarily on the basis of price may experience customer dissatisfaction, delayed services, low product quality, or some combination thereof. One area that is often considered a "commodity" is the delivery of furniture services. Arizona State University, on behalf of the Arizona Tri-University Furniture Consortium, approached the researcher and identified concerns with their current furnishing services contract. These concerns included misaligned customer expectations, minimal furniture supplier upfront involvement on large capital construction projects, and manufacturer design expertise was not being utilized during project preplanning. The Universities implemented a best value selection process and risk management structure. The system has resulted in a 9.3 / 10 customer satisfaction rating (24 percent increase over the previous system), for over 1,100 furniture projects totaling $19.3M.
ContributorsSmithwick, Jake (Author) / Sullivan, Kenneth T. (Thesis advisor) / Kashiwagi, Dean T. (Committee member) / Badger, William W. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
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