The current and future performance of road project delivery methods

Road authorities are increasingly becoming asset managers. As a result, activities previously procured through several agreements may now be included under one agreement. The client's decision between traditional or more integrated project delivery is fundamental in setting up a framework for design, construction and maintenance. To assist clients in the strategic selection of the most efficient project delivery methods, this research determines the performance of Design-Bid-Build, Construction Management, Design-Build, and Design-Build-Maintain. Performance is determined based on the data provided by interviewees in five countries (Finland, UK, Australia, New Zealand, and USA) and on an extensive literature review. The concept of economic efficiency was developed to compare performance levels of the project delivery methods. The more value a project delivery system generates in relation to project cost, the more economically efficient it is for procuring roads. The analysis shows that the broader and more integrated service packages (DB and DBM) can provide better value for money and meet the needs and wants of the client better than DBB or CM. Achievement of the full performance potential presupposes, though, that some improvements to the delivery systems are made to address their current weaknesses. It must also be taken into consideration that each method should be applied only in appropriate circumstances. It is still often appropriate to use DBB, when projects are relatively small, simple, have well-defined end results, and offer no opportunities to innovate or to generate revenue. CM will retain its potential in big projects that are implemented under very restricted conditions or require flexibility to accommodate client changes. As DBM may be used in some, very large projects, this leaves DB as the normal alternative to DBB.