Quantitative methods for design-build team selection

Mounir El Asmar, Wafik Lotfallah, Gary Whited, Awad S. Hanna

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The use of design/build (DB) contracting by transportation agencies has been steadily increasing as a project delivery system for large complex highway projects. However, moving to DB from traditional design-bid-build procurement can be a challenge. One significant barrier is gaining acceptance of a best-value selection process in which technical aspects of a proposal are considered separately and then combined with price to determine the winning proposal. These technical aspects mostly consist of qualitative criteria, thus making room for human errors or biases. Any perceived presence of bias or influence in the selection process can lead to public mistrust and protests by bidders. It is important that a rigorous quantitative mathematical analysis of the evaluation process be conducted to determine whether bias exists and to eliminate it. The paper discusses two potential sources of bias-evaluators and weighting model-in the DB selection process and presents mathematical models to detect and remove biases should they exist. A score normalization model deals with biases from the evaluators; then a graphical weight-space volume model and a Monte Carlo statistical sampling model are developed to remove biases from the weighting model. The models are then tested and demonstrated using results from the DB bridge replacement project for the collapsed Mississippi River bridge of Interstate 35W in Minneapolis.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)904-912
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume136
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2010
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Quantitative methods
Design/build
Rivers
Mathematical models
Sampling
Selection process
Weighting
Evaluator
Project delivery
Protest
Replacement
Normalization
Procurement
Contracting
Human error
Mathematical model
Bid
Mathematical analysis
Evaluation
Acceptance

Keywords

  • Bids
  • Construction industry
  • Design/build
  • Monte Carlo method
  • Quantitative analysis
  • Selection

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Civil and Structural Engineering
  • Strategy and Management
  • Industrial relations
  • Building and Construction

Cite this

Quantitative methods for design-build team selection. / El Asmar, Mounir; Lotfallah, Wafik; Whited, Gary; Hanna, Awad S.

In: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 136, No. 8, 08.2010, p. 904-912.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

El Asmar, Mounir ; Lotfallah, Wafik ; Whited, Gary ; Hanna, Awad S. / Quantitative methods for design-build team selection. In: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 2010 ; Vol. 136, No. 8. pp. 904-912.
@article{1f9af62c52bd44deac166e1c0d588bd8,
title = "Quantitative methods for design-build team selection",
abstract = "The use of design/build (DB) contracting by transportation agencies has been steadily increasing as a project delivery system for large complex highway projects. However, moving to DB from traditional design-bid-build procurement can be a challenge. One significant barrier is gaining acceptance of a best-value selection process in which technical aspects of a proposal are considered separately and then combined with price to determine the winning proposal. These technical aspects mostly consist of qualitative criteria, thus making room for human errors or biases. Any perceived presence of bias or influence in the selection process can lead to public mistrust and protests by bidders. It is important that a rigorous quantitative mathematical analysis of the evaluation process be conducted to determine whether bias exists and to eliminate it. The paper discusses two potential sources of bias-evaluators and weighting model-in the DB selection process and presents mathematical models to detect and remove biases should they exist. A score normalization model deals with biases from the evaluators; then a graphical weight-space volume model and a Monte Carlo statistical sampling model are developed to remove biases from the weighting model. The models are then tested and demonstrated using results from the DB bridge replacement project for the collapsed Mississippi River bridge of Interstate 35W in Minneapolis.",
keywords = "Bids, Construction industry, Design/build, Monte Carlo method, Quantitative analysis, Selection",
author = "{El Asmar}, Mounir and Wafik Lotfallah and Gary Whited and Hanna, {Awad S.}",
year = "2010",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000194",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "136",
pages = "904--912",
journal = "Journal of Construction Engineering and Management - ASCE",
issn = "0733-9364",
publisher = "American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Quantitative methods for design-build team selection

AU - El Asmar, Mounir

AU - Lotfallah, Wafik

AU - Whited, Gary

AU - Hanna, Awad S.

PY - 2010/8

Y1 - 2010/8

N2 - The use of design/build (DB) contracting by transportation agencies has been steadily increasing as a project delivery system for large complex highway projects. However, moving to DB from traditional design-bid-build procurement can be a challenge. One significant barrier is gaining acceptance of a best-value selection process in which technical aspects of a proposal are considered separately and then combined with price to determine the winning proposal. These technical aspects mostly consist of qualitative criteria, thus making room for human errors or biases. Any perceived presence of bias or influence in the selection process can lead to public mistrust and protests by bidders. It is important that a rigorous quantitative mathematical analysis of the evaluation process be conducted to determine whether bias exists and to eliminate it. The paper discusses two potential sources of bias-evaluators and weighting model-in the DB selection process and presents mathematical models to detect and remove biases should they exist. A score normalization model deals with biases from the evaluators; then a graphical weight-space volume model and a Monte Carlo statistical sampling model are developed to remove biases from the weighting model. The models are then tested and demonstrated using results from the DB bridge replacement project for the collapsed Mississippi River bridge of Interstate 35W in Minneapolis.

AB - The use of design/build (DB) contracting by transportation agencies has been steadily increasing as a project delivery system for large complex highway projects. However, moving to DB from traditional design-bid-build procurement can be a challenge. One significant barrier is gaining acceptance of a best-value selection process in which technical aspects of a proposal are considered separately and then combined with price to determine the winning proposal. These technical aspects mostly consist of qualitative criteria, thus making room for human errors or biases. Any perceived presence of bias or influence in the selection process can lead to public mistrust and protests by bidders. It is important that a rigorous quantitative mathematical analysis of the evaluation process be conducted to determine whether bias exists and to eliminate it. The paper discusses two potential sources of bias-evaluators and weighting model-in the DB selection process and presents mathematical models to detect and remove biases should they exist. A score normalization model deals with biases from the evaluators; then a graphical weight-space volume model and a Monte Carlo statistical sampling model are developed to remove biases from the weighting model. The models are then tested and demonstrated using results from the DB bridge replacement project for the collapsed Mississippi River bridge of Interstate 35W in Minneapolis.

KW - Bids

KW - Construction industry

KW - Design/build

KW - Monte Carlo method

KW - Quantitative analysis

KW - Selection

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77955334631&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77955334631&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000194

DO - 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000194

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:77955334631

VL - 136

SP - 904

EP - 912

JO - Journal of Construction Engineering and Management - ASCE

JF - Journal of Construction Engineering and Management - ASCE

SN - 0733-9364

IS - 8

ER -