presentation.pptx

Department of Construction Engineering and Management, National Institute of Transportation (NIT), School of Civil and
Environmental Engineering (SCEE), National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Islamabad, Pakistan.
“Selection of suitable highway construction project
delivery method by multiple criteria decision-making
framework”
Thesis Supervisor: Dr. Khurram Iqbal Ahmad Khan
Department of Construction Engineering and Management
NIT, SCEE, National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Islamabad
G.E.C. Members: 1. Dr. Abdur Rehman Nasir
Department of Construction Engineering and Management,
NIT, SCEE, National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Islamabad.
2. Lect. Muhammad Hasnain
Department of Construction Engineering and Management,
NIT, National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Islamabad
Final Defense Presentation
by
Zeeshan Ul Hassan
NUST2016 MSCE&M00000170739
Department of Construction Engineering and Management, National Institute of Transportation (NIT), School of Civil and Environmental Engineering
(SCEE), National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Islamabad, Pakistan.
Department of Construction Engineering and Management, National Institute of Transportation (NIT), School of Civil and Environmental Engineering (SCEE),
National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Islamabad, Pakistan

Introduction of Student
1. Name Zeeshan Ul Hassan
2. Reg No. NUST 2016 MSCE&M 00000170739
3. Discipline /Department
Construction Engineering & Management
(NIT), SCEE
4. Date of Admission in MS Program September 2016
5. Coursework CGPA 3.33 / 4.00
6.
Previous Qualification
B.Sc. Civil Engineering 3.24/4.00 NUST, H-12
F.Sc. (Pre Engineering) 1st Div F.G Degree College Wah Cantt
Matric (Sciences) 1st Div Sir Syed College Wah Cantt

Selection of suitable highway construction project delivery method
by multiple criteria decision making framework
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Research Methodology
4. Data Analysis and Results
5. Conclusions & Recommendations

Selection of suitable highway construction project delivery method by multiple criteria decision
making framework
Study background
• A project delivery system is the one in which owner and contractor
are contractually bound to have certain predetermined conditions
to carry forward the project (An et al., 2018).
• No absolute project delivery method is universally suitable for all
kind of projects and it depends on the condition and nature or
project (Mahdi and Alreshaid, 2005) .
• In one research it has been investigated that design-build method
offers greater price certainty and reduced cost growth than
design-bid-build (Shrestha et al., 2011).
• (Tran et al., 2013) found out from case study that the design-build
is optimal project delivery method for a bridge replacement
project

making framework
Study background
• Most highway infrastructure projects in Australia, Canada, New
Zealand, Sweden, the UK and the US adopt a common delivery
model known as the ‘traditional model’, or Design-Bid Build (DBB)
(Pakkala, 2002).
• Other than cost growth, the entire schedule related merits of
DBB are superior than the DB project delivery method after
analyzing 67 globally construction projects. (Hale et al., 2009)
(Ibbs et al., 2003).
• In another research it has been cited that Design Build is
effective with comparative to Design Bid Build by analyzing
in eight different categories. (Hyun et al., 2008)

making framework
Study background
• It has been set up that the construction speed per lane of Highway
project using design Build is faster than design bid build(Shrestha
et al., 2011).
• After analysis for risk assessment it has been found out that
traditional DBB is risk averse in comparison to other types of
project delivery method (Tran and Molenaar, 2015).
• Selection of projected delivery is perceived at the designing phase
so the selection should be appropriate for the project success.

making framework
Problem statement
• Factors such as cost control, Risk allocation, and schedule
compression are effected by selection of project delivery
method (Touran et al. , 2011).
• Amongst the many reasons of project failures, selection of
inappropriate Project Delivery Method is one of them (Jaafari .,
2001) (Moon et al. , 2011) .

Research objectives
• To identify the factors affecting selection of
project delivery method.
• To prioritize the project delivery methods for
highway projects using Multi Criteria Decision
Making approach
• Develop a framework for the selection of
appropriate project delivery methods
making framework

making framework
Different project delivery methods
Four types of project delivery methods were found in the study are as follow;
• Design Bid/Build (DBB)
• Design/Build (DB)
• Public Private Partnership (PPP)
• Construction management at risk (CMA)

making framework
Literature Review
• Majority of US highway projects are built by DBB delivery method (Beard et
al., 2001).
• The nature of project determines the appropriate project delivery method, like
for bridge construction DB is best and the same is horrible for its maintenance
(Park and Kwak, 2017).
• . Fuzzy numbers (FN) most often used are triangular FN, trapezoidal FN and
Gaussian FN.

making framework
Factors Identification
• 38 factors are gathered from 24 research papers which are further
summarized from content analysis to have precise information.
• Google Survey Form
• Based on their analysis of literature and respondent from preliminary
questionnaire, significance of factors is calculated to develop final
questionnaire for data collection.
• The TOPSIS method uses n-dimensional Euclidean
distance to rank the alternatives on the basis
of their distance from ideal solution
(Opricovic and Tzeng, 2004).

making framework
Factors
• Design characteristics
Regulatory
• Project size and
• Complexity.
• Coordination and
• Project Location
• Construction quality
• Complexity of decision
making
• Cost saving
• Contractor input in
design
• Contractor
characteristics
• Risk allocation
• Time reduction
• Design quality
• Technology availability
• Schedule
• Quality
• Risk
• Culture
• Uniqueness
• Size of Project
• Scope of Project
• Disputes
• Contractor’s capability

Preliminary
study
Detailed
Literature
Review
Research gap Problem statement Research objectives
Identification of factors
effecting selection of
project delivery method
Literature review
Data
Collection
Data
Analysis
and
Results
Content Analysis / Preliminary
Survey
Development of
questionnaire for survey
Data Analysis through
Fuzzy TOPSIS
Data collection
Development of
Framework for PDM
selection
Validation
Expert Opinion/
Sensitivity test
making framework

Why TOPSIS…
• TOPSIS method used linear normalization and consider the Euclidean distance from
positive and negative ideal solution (Opricovic and Tzeng, 2004).
• For Large scale project including so many number of factors and alternatives,
pairwise comparison like AHP is a cumbersome problem, where TOPSIS takes the
lead. (Junior et al. , 2014)
• In a case study on already constructed dams, TOPSIS was more reliable as compare
to AHP because the top four recommended locations for dam from AHP were never
constructed. (Jozaghi et al., 2018).
• Analysis with addition of another alternative of the same rating has changed the
order preference of supplier selection using Fuzzy AHP, while the results remains
same using Fuzzy TOPSIS (Junior et al., 2014)
making framework

making framework
Fuzzy TOPSIS
1. Assigning alternatives and criteria corresponding to each
other in a matrix to correlate.
2. Normalization.
3. Assigning weightages to different project delivery methods
from user input.
4. Multiplication of normalized performance value and the
weightage criteria of that criteria.
5. Ideal best and ideal worst value is determined.

making framework
Fuzzy TOPSIS
6. Euclidean distance of ideal best and ideal worst value.
𝑆𝑗+ =
𝑗=1
𝑚
𝑉𝑖𝑗 − 𝑉
𝑗
+ 2
𝑆𝑗− =
𝑗=1
𝑚
𝑉𝑖𝑗 − 𝑉
𝑗
− 2
7. Assign ranking to the available alternatives according to
their importance
𝑃𝑖 =
𝑆𝑖−
𝑆𝑖−+ 𝑆𝑖+

making framework
Proposed framework approach:
Objectives Tools & Techniques Sources
• To identify the factors effecting
selection of project delivery method.
 Literature review
 Research papers
 Reports
 Articles
 Thesis
 Books
• To prioritize the project delivery
methods for highway projects using
MCDM approach
 Questionnaire
survey
 Expert opinion
 Research papers
 Thesis
 Experts opinion
 Technical professionals/
practitioners
• Develop a framework for the
selection of appropriate project
delivery methods
 Fuzzy TOPSIS
 Questionnaire
 Expert opinion
 Experts opinion
 Technical professionals/
practitioners

making framework
Research Methodology
• https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1z5sfO2tQ5ma5n4AP7iaIvOVRGIP_r
bN8giEoKolKCqE/edit
• Final Questionnaire consist of 12 factors and results shows the impact
of those factors for each type of 4 type project delivery method.
• Data Analysis

making framework
Weightages of the Factors
Weightages Factors
0.1145 Project Schedule and its Importance
0.1115 Project Complexity and Initial Risk
0.1097 Project Cost
0.0859 Project Construction Quality Assurance
0.0856 Owner Experience and Attribute
0.0839 Construction and Managerial Risk
0.0758 Scope of Project and its Clarity
0.0723 Owner Involvement and Control Over Design
0.0684 Design Quality
0.0653 Cost Variation Probability
0.0643 Experience and Capability of Contractor
0.0627 Client In-house Resources

making framework
Distribution of Factors
Cost Project Schedule and its Importance
Cost Project Complexity and Initial Risk
Cost Project Cost
Benefit Project Construction Quality Assurance
Benefit Owner Experience and Attribute
Cost Construction and Managerial Risk
Cost Scope of Project and its Clarity
Benefit Owner Involvement and Control Over Design
Benefit Design Quality
Cost Cost Variation Probability
Benefit Experience and Capability of Contractor
Benefit Client In-house Resources

making framework
Fuzzy TOPSIS
• MCDM technique Fuzzy TOPSIS is applied on the
results obtained from the respondent.
• Normalization of Score
• Weighted Normalized Score
• Fuzzy Positive and Negative Ideal Solution
• Closeness coefficient
• Ranking of the alternatives

making framework
Fuzzy TOPSIS

making framework
Framework for the selection of Project Delivery method

making framework
Conclusions
• Based on the analysis and data collected from the
respondents Design Build is found to be most
relevant factor for the selection of Project Delivery
method specific to Highway Projects in Pakistan.
• Time duration for the project is the main
determining factor for choosing the type of project
delivery method for Highway Projects.

making framework
References:
• AN, X., WANG, Z., LI, H. & DING, J. 2018. Project Delivery System Selection with Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Set Group
Decision-Making Method. Group Decision and Negotiation, 27, 689-707.
• MAHDI, I. M. & ALRESHAID, K. 2005. Decision support system for selecting the proper project delivery method using analytical
hierarchy process (AHP). International journal of project management, 23, 564-572.
• SHRESTHA, P. P., O’CONNOR, J. T. & GIBSON JR, G. E. 2011. Performance comparison of large design-build and design-bid-build
highway projects. Journal of construction engineering and management, 138, 1-13.
• TRAN, D. Q., HARPER, C. M., MOLENAAR, K. R., HADDAD, N. F. & SCHOLFIELD, M. M. 2013. Project delivery selection matrix for
highway design and construction. Transportation Research Record, 2347, 3-10.
• OPRICOVIC, S. & TZENG, G.-H. 2004. Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European
journal of operational research, 156, 445-455.
• PAKKALA, P. 2002. Innovative project delivery methods for infrastructure. Finnish Road Enterprise, Helsinki, 19.
• CREEDY, G. D., SKITMORE, M. & WONG, J. K. 2010. Evaluation of risk factors leading to cost overrun in delivery of highway
construction projects. Journal of construction engineering and management, 136, 528-537.
• HALE, D. R., SHRESTHA, P. P., GIBSON JR, G. E. & MIGLIACCIO, G. C. 2009. Empirical comparison of design/build and design/bid/build
project delivery methods. Journal of construction engineering and management, 135, 579-587.
• IBBS, C. W., KWAK, Y. H., NG, T. & ODABASI, A. M. 2003. Project delivery systems and project change: Quantitative analysis. Journal of
construction engineering and management, 129, 382-387.

making framework
References:
• HYUN, C., CHO, K., KOO, K., HONG, T. & MOON, H. 2008. Effect of delivery methods on design performance in multifamily housing
projects. Journal of construction engineering and management, 134, 468-482.
• PARK, J. & KWAK, Y. H. 2017. Design-bid-build (DBB) vs. design-build (DB) in the US public transportation projects: The choice and
consequences. International Journal of Project Management, 35, 280-295.
• BEARD, J., LOULAKIS, E. M. & WUNDRAM, E. 2001. Design-build: Planning through development, McGraw Hill Professional.
• TRAN, D. Q. & MOLENAAR, K. R. 2015. Risk-based project delivery selection model for highway design and construction. Journal of
construction engineering and management, 141, 04015041.
• JOZAGHI, A., ALIZADEH, B., HATAMI, M., FLOOD, I., KHORRAMI, M., KHODAEI, N. & GHASEMI TOUSI, E. 2018. A Comparative Study of
the AHP and TOPSIS Techniques for Dam Site Selection Using GIS: A Case Study of Sistan and Baluchestan Province, Iran. Geosciences,
8, 494.
• JUNIOR, F. R. L., OSIRO, L. & CARPINETTI, L. C. R. 2014. A comparison between Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS methods to supplier
selection. Applied Soft Computing, 21, 194-209.
• Jaafari, A. (2001). Management of risks, uncertainties and opportunities on projects: time for a fundamental shift. International
journal of project management, 19(2), 89-101.
• Whitaker, R. (2007). Validation examples of the analytic hierarchy process and analytic network process. Mathematical and Computer
Modelling, 46(7-8), 840-859.
• Moon, H., Cho, K., Hong, T., & Hyun, C. (2011). Selection model for delivery methods for multifamily-housing construction
projects. Journal of Management in Engineering, 27(2), 106-115.
• Touran, A., Gransberg, D. D., Molenaar, K. R., & Ghavamifar, K. (2011). Selection of project delivery method in transit: Drivers and
objectives. Journal of Management in Engineering, 27(1), 21-27

presentation.pptx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to presentation.pptx

Similar to presentation.pptx (20)

More from IrfanAwan25

More from IrfanAwan25 (11)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

presentation.pptx

Editor's Notes