%DOCUMENT% index.html

Project Management for Construction Fundamental Concepts for Owners, Engineers, Architects and Builders

by
Chris Hendrickson
and
Tung Au

Department of Civil Engineering
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA l52l3
June 28, 1999

Copyright C. Hendrickson and T. Au, 1988

Prepared under contract for publication with

Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey

1988

Preface

This book develops a specific viewpoint in discussing the participants, the processes and the techniques of project management for construction. This viewpoint is that of owners who desire completion of projects in a timely, cost effective fashion. Some profound implications for the objectives and methods of project management result from this perspective:

• The "life cycle" of costs and benefits from initial planning through operation of a facility are relevant to decision making. An owner is concerned with a project from the cradle to the grave. Construction costs represent only one portion of the overall life cycle costs.
• Optimizing performance at one stage of the process may not be beneficial overall if additional costs or delays occur elsewhere. For example, saving money on the design process will be a false economy if the result is excess construction costs.
• Fragmentation of project management among different specialists may be necessary, but good communication and coordination among the participants is essential to accomplish the overall goals of the project.
• Productivity improvements are always of importance and value. As a result, introducing new materials and automated construction processes is always desirable as long as they are less expensive and are consistent with desired performance.
• Quality of work and performance are critically important to the success of a project since it is the owner who will have to live with the results.

While this book is devoted to a particular viewpoint with respect to project management for construction, it is not solely intended for owners and their direct representatives. By understanding the entire process, all participants can respond more effectively to the owner's needs in their own work, in marketing their services, and in communicating with other participants. In addition, the specific techniques and tools discussed in this book (such as economic evaluation, scheduling, management information systems, etc.) can be readily applied to any portion of the process.

As a result of the focus on the effective management of entire projects, a number of novel organizational approaches and techniques become of interest. First and foremost is the incentive to replace confrontation and adversarial relationships with a spirit of joint endeavor and accomplishment. For example, we discuss the appropriate means to evaluate risks and the appropriate participants to assume the unavoidable risks associated with constructed facilities. Scheduling, communication of data, and quality assurance have particular significance from the viewpoint of an owner, but not necessarily for individual participants. The use of computer-based technology and automation also provides opportunities for increased productivity in the process. Presenting such modern management options in a unified fashion is a major objective of this book.

The unified viewpoint of the entire process of project management in this book differs from virtually all other literature on the subject. Most textbooks in the area treat special problems, such as cost estimating, from the viewpoint of particular participants such as construction managers or contractors. This literature reflects the fragmentation of the construction process among different organizations and professionals. Even within a single profession such as civil engineering, there are quite distinct groups of specialists in planning, design, management, construction and other sub-specialties. Fragmentation of interest and attention also exists in nearly all educational programs. While specialty knowledge may be essential to accomplish particular tasks, participants in the process should also understand the context and role of their special tasks.

This book is intended primarily as a text for advanced undergraduates or beginning graduate students in engineering, construction, architecture or facilities management. Examples and discussion are chosen to remind readers that project management is a challenging, dynamic and exciting enterprise and not just a record of past practices. It should also be useful to professionals who wish an up-to-date reference on project management.

Chapters 1 to 3 present an overview of the construction management and design process which should be of interest to anyone engaged in project management for construction. One need not have detailed knowledge about individual tasks or techniques for this part. Individuals can read these chapters and understand the basic philosophy and principles without further elaboration.

Chapters 4 through 14 describe specific functions and techniques useful in the process of project management. This part presents techniques and requirements during project planning, including risk assessment, cost estimation, forecasting and economic evaluation. It is during this planning and design phase in which major cost savings may be obtained during the eventual construction and operation phases. It also addresses programming and financing issues, such as contracting and bidding for services, financing, organizing communication and insuring effective use of information. It further discusses techniques for control of time, cost and quality during the construction phase. Beginning courses in engineering economics (including cash flow analysis and discounting), use of computers, probability and statistics would be useful. Furthermore, access to a personal computer with spreadsheet or equation solving software would be helpful for readers attempting some of the problems in Chapters 4 to 14. Numerous software programs could be used for this purpose, including both spreadsheet and equation solving programs. Problems in some chapters could also be done on any number of existing software packages for information management and project scheduling. However, the use of personal computers in this fashion is not required in following the text material. Each instructor may exercise discretion in omitting some of the material in these chapters if they are redundant with other classes or too advanced for students in his or her own class.

The last two chapters of this book discuss some future prospects for new technology in the construction field. We expect that these new technologies will have a substantial impact on productivity improvement in the next two decades even though they are not part of standard practice today. By including these chapters, we are challenging readers with the remarkable opportunities for innovation and improvement that exist in the field. These latter chapters may also be reserved for an advanced course.

It is our hope that students beginning their career in project management for construction will be prepared to adopt the integrated approach emphasized in this book. Furthermore, experienced professionals in various fields may discover in this book some surprises that even they have not anticipated. High level decision makers in owner organizations who are not directly involved in the project management process may find the basic philosophy and principles of interest, especially in Chapters 1 through 3, as owners must invariably pay for constructed facilities, for better or worse. If the book can fulfill even a small part of its promises to influence the future of project management for construction, our efforts will have been amply rewarded.

We wish to acknowledge our appreciation to Dr. William J. Hall for his encouragement and assistance in expediting the publication of this book. We are indebted to several colleagues at Carnegie Mellon University, Drs. Paul Christiano, Steven Fenves and Daniel Rehak who reviewed parts of the manuscript and offered valuable suggestions. We also wish to thank Debbie Scappatura and Shirley Knapp for their efforts in typing the manuscript. This book also reflects the contributions of numerous students and colleagues in industry who have challenged us with problems and shared their own ideas and experience over many years. We are grateful to all of these individuals.

Some material in this book has been taken from several papers authored by us and published by the American Society of Civil Engineers. Materials taken from other sources are acknowledged in footnotes, tables or figures. We gratefully acknowledge the permissions given to us by these individuals, publishers and organizations.

Finally, a series of photographs depicting various stages of construction of the PPG building in Pittsburgh, PA is inserted in sequence between chapters. We wish to thank PPG Industries for its cooperation in providing these photographs.

1. The Owners' Perspective

1.1 Introduction

Like the five blind men encountering different parts of an elephant, each of the numerous participants in the process of planning, designing, financing, constructing and operating physical facilities has a different perspective on project management for construction. Specialized knowledge can be very beneficial, particularly in large and complicated projects, since experts in various specialties can provide valuable services. However, it is advantageous to understand how the different parts of the process fit together. Waste, excessive cost and delays can result from poor coordination and communication among specialists. It is particularly in the interest of owners to insure that such problems do not occur. And it behooves all participants in the process to heed the interests of owners because, in the end, it is the owners who provide the resources and call the shots.

By adopting the viewpoint of the owners, we can focus our attention on the complete process of project management for constructed facilities rather than the historical roles of various specialists such as planners, architects, engineering designers, constructors, fabricators, material suppliers, financial analysts and others. To be sure, each specialty has made important advances in developing new techniques and tools for efficient implementation of construction projects. However, it is through the understanding of the entire process of project management that these specialists can respond more effectively to the owner's desires for their services, in marketing their specialties, and in improving the productivity and quality of their work.

The introduction of innovative and more effective project management for construction is not an academic exercise. As reported by the "Construction Industry Cost Effectiveness Project" of the Business Roundtable:[The Business Roundtable, More Construction for the Money, Summary Report of the Construction Industry Cost Effectiveness Project, January 1983, p. 11.]

By common consensus and every available measure, the United States no longer gets it's money's worth in construction, the nation's largest industry ... The creeping erosion of construction efficiency and productivity is bad news for the entire U.S. economy. Construction is a particularly seminal industry. The price of every factory, office building, hotel or power plant that is built affects the price that must be charged for the goods or services produced in it or by it. And that effect generally persists for decades ... Too much of the industry remains tethered to the past, partly by inertia and partly by historic divisions...

1.2 The Project Life Cycle

The acquisition of a constructed facility usually represents a major capital investment, whether its owner happens to be an individual, a private corporation or a public agency. Since the commitment of resources for such an investment is motivated by market demands or perceived needs, the facility is expected to satisfy certain objectives within the constraints specified by the owner and relevant regulations. With the exception of the speculative housing market, where the residential units may be sold as built by the real estate developer, most constructed facilities are custom made in consultation with the owners. A real estate developer may be regarded as the sponsor of building projects, as much as a government agency may be the sponsor of a public project and turns it over to another government unit upon its completion. From the viewpoint of project management, the terms "owner" and "sponsor" are synonymous because both have the ultimate authority to make all important decisions. Since an owner is essentially acquiring a facility on a promise in some form of agreement, it will be wise for any owner to have a clear understanding of the acquisition process in order to maintain firm control of the quality, timeliness and cost of the completed facility.

From the perspective of an owner, the project life cycle for a constructed facility may be illustrated schematically in Figure 1-1. Essentially, a project is conceived to meet market demands or needs in a timely fashion. Various possibilities may be considered in the conceptual planning stage, and the technological and economic feasibility of each alternative will be assessed and compared in order to select the best possible project. The financing schemes for the proposed alternatives must also be examined, and the project will be programmed with respect to the timing for its completion and for available cash flows. After the scope of the project is clearly defined, detailed engineering design will provide the blueprint for construction, and the definitive cost estimate will serve as the baseline for cost control. In the procurement and construction stage, the delivery of materials and the erection of the project on site must be carefully planned and controlled. After the construction is completed, there is usually a brief period of start-up or shake-down of the constructed facility when it is first occupied. Finally, the management of the facility is turned over to the owner for full occupancy until the facility lives out its useful life and is designated for demolition or conversion.

The Project Life Cycle of a Constructed Facility
  

Of course, the stages of development in Figure 1-1 may not be strictly sequential. Some of the stages require iteration, and others may be carried out in parallel or with overlapping time frames, depending on the nature, size and urgency of the project. Furthermore, an owner may have in-house capacities to handle the work in every stage of the entire process, or it may seek professional advice and services for the work in all stages. Understandably, most owners choose to handle some of the work in-house and to contract outside professional services for other components of the work as needed. By examining the project life cycle from an owner's perspective we can focus on the proper roles of various activities and participants in all stages regardless of the contractual arrangements for different types of work.

In the United States, for example, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has in-house capabilities to deal with planning, budgeting, design, construction and operation of waterway and flood control structures. Other public agencies, such as state transportation departments, are also deeply involved in all phases of a construction project. In the private sector, many large firms such as DuPont, Exxon, and IBM are adequately staffed to carry out most activities for plant expansion. All these owners, both public and private, use outside agents to a greater or lesser degree when it becomes more advantageous to do so.

The project life cycle may be viewed as a process through which a project is implemented from cradle to grave. This process is often very complex; however, it can be decomposed into several stages as indicated by the general outline in Figure 1-1. The solutions at various stages are then integrated to obtain the final outcome. Although each stage requires different expertise, it usually includes both technical and managerial activities in the knowledge domain of the specialist. The owner may choose to decompose the entire process into more or less stages based on the size and nature of the project, and thus obtain the most efficient result in implementation. Very often, the owner retains direct control of work in the planning and programming stages, but increasingly outside planners and financial experts are used as consultants because of the complexities of projects. Since operation and maintenance of a facility will go on long after the completion and acceptance of a project, it is usually treated as a separate problem except in the consideration of the life cycle cost of a facility. All stages from conceptual planning and feasibility studies to the acceptance of a facility for occupancy may be broadly lumped together and referred to as the Design/Construct process, while the procurement and construction alone are traditionally regarded as the province of the construction industry.

Owners must recognize that there is no single best approach in organizing project management throughout a project's life cycle. All organizational approaches have advantages and disadvantages, depending on the knowledge of the owner in construction management as well as the type, size and location of the project. It is important for the owner to be aware of the approach which is most appropriate and beneficial for a particular project. In making choices, owners should be concerned with the life cycle costs of constructed facilities rather than simply the initial construction costs. Saving small amounts of money during construction may not be worthwhile if the result is much larger operating costs or not meeting the functional requirements for the new facility satisfactorily. Thus, owners must be very concerned with the quality of the finished product as well as the cost of construction itself. Since facility operation and maintenance is a part of the project life cycle, the owners' expectation to satisfy investment objectives during the project life cycle will require consideration of the cost of operation and maintenance. Therefore, the facility's operating management should also be considered as early as possible, just as the construction process should be kept in mind at the early stages of planning and programming.

1.3 Major Types of Construction

Since most owners are generally interested in acquiring only a specific type of constructed facility, they should be aware of the common industrial practices for the type of construction pertinent to them. Likewise, the construction industry is a conglomeration of quite diverse segments and products. Some owners may procure a constructed facility only once in a long while and tend to look for short term advantages. However, many owners require periodic acquisition of new facilities and/or rehabilitation of existing facilities. It is to their advantage to keep the construction industry healthy and productive. Collectively, the owners have more power to influence the construction industry than they realize because, by their individual actions, they can provide incentives or disincentives for innovation, efficiency and quality in construction. It is to the interest of all parties that the owners take an active interest in the construction and exercise beneficial influence on the performance of the industry.

In planning for various types of construction, the methods of procuring professional services, awarding construction contracts, and financing the constructed facility can be quite different. For the purpose of discussion, the broad spectrum of constructed facilities may be classified into four major categories, each with its own characteristics.

Residential Housing Construction

Residential housing construction includes single-family houses, multi-family dwellings, and highrise apartments. During the development and construction of such projects, the developers or sponsors who are familiar with the construction industry usually serve as surrogate owners and take charge, making necessary contractual agreements for design and construction, and arranging the financing and sale of the completed structures. Residential housing designs are usually performed by architects and engineers, and the construction executed by builders who hire subcontractors for the structural, mechanical, electrical and other specialty work. An exception to this pattern is for single-family houses which may be designed by the builders as well.

The residential housing market is heavily affected by general economic conditions, tax laws, and the monetary and fiscal policies of the government. Often, a slight increase in total demand will cause a substantial investment in construction, since many housing projects can be started at different locations by different individuals and developers at the same time. Because of the relative ease of entry, at least at the lower end of the market, many new builders are attracted to the residential housing construction. Hence, this market is highly competitive, with potentially high risks as well as high rewards.

Illustration of Residential Housing Construction
  

Institutional and Commercial Building Construction

Because of the higher costs and greater sophistication of institutional and commercial buildings in comparison with residential housing, this market segment is shared by fewer competitors. Since the construction of some of these buildings is a long process which once started will take some time to proceed until completion, the demand is less sensitive to general economic conditions than that for speculative housing. Consequently, the owners may confront an oligopoly of general contractors who compete in the same market. In an oligopoly situation, only a limited number of competitors exist, and a firm's price for services may be based in part on its competitive strategies in the local market.

Illustration of Construction of the PPG Building in Pittsburgh, PA
  

Specialized Industrial Construction

Specialized industrial construction usually involves very large scale projects with a high degree of technological complexity, such as oil refineries, steel mills, chemical processing plants and coal-fired or nuclear power plants. The owners usually are deeply involved in the development of a project, and prefer to work with designers-builders such that the total time for the completion of the project can be shortened. They also want to pick a team of designers and builders with whom the owner has developed good working relations over the years.

Although the initiation of such projects is also affected by the state of the economy, long range demand forecasting is the most important factor since such projects are capital intensive and require considerable amount of planning and construction time. Governmental regulation such as the rulings of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the United States can also profoundly influence decisions on these projects.

Illustration of Construction of a Benzene Plant in Lima, Ohio
  

Infrastructure and Heavy Construction

The engineers and builders engaged in infrastructure construction are usually highly specialized since each segment of the market requires different types of skills. However, demands for different segments of infrastructure and heavy construction may shift with saturation in some segments. For example, as the available highway construction projects are declining, some heavy construction contractors quickly move their work force and equipment into the field of mining where jobs are available.

Illustration of Construction of the Dame Point Bridge in Jacksonville, Florida
  

1.4 Selection of Professional Services

When an owner decides to seek professional services for the design and construction of a facility, he is confronted with a broad variety of choices. The type of services selected depends to a large degree on the type of construction and the experience of the owner in dealing with various professionals in the previous projects undertaken by the firm. Generally, several common types of professional services may be engaged either separately or in some combination by the owners.

Financial Planning Consultants

Architectural and Engineering Firms

In the past two decades, this traditional approach has become less popular for a number of reasons, particularly for large scale projects. The A/E firms, which are engaged by the owner as the prime professionals for design and inspection, have become more isolated from the construction process. This has occurred because of pressures to reduce fees to A/E firms, the threat of litigation regarding construction defects, and lack of knowledge of new construction techniques on the part of architect and engineering professionals. Instead of preparing a construction plan along with the design, many A/E firms are no longer responsible for the details of construction nor do they provide periodic field inspection in many cases. As a matter of fact, such firms will place a prominent disclaimer of responsibilities on any shop drawings they may check, and they will often regard their representatives in the field as observers instead of inspectors. Thus, the A/E firm and the general contractor on a project often become antagonists who are looking after their own competing interests. As a result, even the constructibility of some engineering designs may become an issue of contention. To carry this protective attitude to the extreme, the specifications prepared by an A/E firm for the general contractor often protects the interest of the A/E firm at the expense of the interests of the owner and the contractor.

In order to reduce the cost of construction, some owners introduce value engineering, which seeks to reduce the cost of construction by soliciting a second design that might cost less than the original design produced by the A/E firm. In practice, the second design is submitted by the contractor after receiving a construction contract at a stipulated sum, and the saving in cost resulting from the redesign is shared by the contractor and the owner. The contractor is able to absorb the cost of redesign from the profit in construction or to reduce the construction cost as a result of the re-design. If the owner had been willing to pay a higher fee to the A/E firm or to better direct the design process, the A/E firm might have produced an improved design which would cost less in the first place. Regardless of the merit of value engineering, this practice has undermined the role of the A/E firm as the prime professional acting on behalf of the owner to supervise the contractor.

Design/Construct Firms

One of the most obvious advantages of the integrated design/construct process is the use of phased construction for a large project. In this process, the project is divided up into several phases, each of which can be designed and constructed in a staggered manner. After the completion of the design of the first phase, construction can begin without waiting for the completion of the design of the second phase, etc. If proper coordination is exercised. the total project duration can be greatly reduced. Another advantage is to exploit the possibility of using the turnkey approach whereby an owner can delegate all responsibility to the design/construct firm which will deliver to the owner a completed facility that meets the performance specifications at the specified price.

Professional Construction Managers

It should be obvious to all involved in the construction process that the party which is required to take higher risk demands larger rewards. If an owner wants to engage an A/E firm on the basis of low fees instead of established qualifications, it often gets what it deserves; or if the owner wants the general contractor to bear the cost of uncertainties in construction such as foundation conditions, the contract price will be higher even if competitive bidding is used in reaching a contractual agreement. Without mutual respect and trust, an owner cannot expect that construction managers can produce better results than other professionals. Hence, an owner must understand its own responsibility and the risk it wishes to assign to itself and to other participants in the process.

Operation and Maintenance Managers

Facilities Management

Facilities management is the discipline of planning, designing, constructing and managing space -- in every type of structure from office buildings to process plants. It involves developing corporate facilities policy, long-range forecasts, real estate, space inventories, projects (through design, construction and renovation), building operation and maintenance plans and furniture and equipment inventories.

A common denominator of all firms entering into these new services is that they all have strong computer capabilities and heavy computer investments. In addition to the use of computers for aiding design and monitoring construction, the service includes the compilation of a computer record of building plans that can be turned over at the end of construction to the facilities management group of the owner. A computer data base of facilities information makes it possible for planners in the owner's organization to obtain overview information for long range space forecasts, while the line managers can use as-built information such as lease/tenant records, utility costs, etc. for day-to-day operations.

1.5 Construction Contractors

Builders who supervise the execution of construction projects are traditionally referred to as contractors, or more appropriately called constructors. The general contractor coordinates various tasks for a project while the specialty contractors such as mechanical or electrical contractors perform the work in their specialties. Material and equipment suppliers often act as installation contractors; they play a significant role in a construction project since the conditions of delivery of materials and equipment affect the quality, cost, and timely completion of the project. It is essential to understand the operation of these contractors in order to deal with them effectively.

General Contractors

Specialty Contractors

Material and Equipment Suppliers

1.6 Financing of Constructed Facilities

A major construction project requires an enormous amount of capital that is often supplied by lenders who want to be assured that the project will offer a fair return on the investment. The direct costs associated with a major construction project may be broadly classified into two categories: (1) the construction expenses paid to the general contractor for erecting the facility on site and (2) the expenses for land acquisition, legal fees, architect/engineer fees, construction management fees, interest on construction loans and the opportunity cost of carrying empty space in the facility until it is fully occupied. The direct construction costs in the first category represent approximately 60 to 80 percent of the total costs in most construction projects. Since the costs of construction are ultimately borne by the owner, careful financial planning for the facility must be made prior to construction.

Construction Financing

Construction loans provided for different types of construction vary. In the case of residential housing, construction loans and long-term mortgages can be obtained from savings and loans associations or commercial banks. For institutional and commercial buildings, construction loans are usually obtained from commercial banks. Since the value of specialized industrial buildings as collateral for loans is limited, construction loans in this domain are rare, and construction financing can be done from the pool of general corporate funds. For infrastructure construction owned by government, the property cannot be used as security for a private loan, but there are many possible ways to finance the construction, such as general appropriation from taxation or special bonds issued for the project.

Traditionally, banks serve as construction lenders in a three-party agreement among the contractor, the owner and the bank. The stipulated loan will be paid to the contractor on an agreed schedule upon the verification of completion of various portions of the project. Generally, a payment request together with a standard progress report will be submitted each month by the contractor to the owner which in turn submits a draw request to the bank. Provided that the work to date has been performed satisfactorily, the disbursement is made on that basis during the construction period. Under such circumstances, the bank has been primarily concerned with the completion of the facility on time and within the budget. The economic life of the facility after its completion is not a concern because of the transfer of risk to the owner or an institutional lender.

Facility Financing

Because of the sudden surge of interest rates in the late 1970's, many financial institutions offer, in addition to the traditional fixed rate long-term mortgage commitments, other arrangements such as a combination of debt and a percentage of ownership in exchange for a long-term mortgage or the use of adjustable rate mortgages. In some cases, the construction loan may be granted on an open-ended basis without a long-term financing commitment. For example, the plan might be issued for the construction period with an option to extend it for a period of up to three years in order to give the owner more time to seek alternative long-term financing on the completed facility. The bank will be drawn into situations involving financial risk if it chooses to be a lender without long-term guarantees.

1.7 Legal and Regulatory Requirements

The owners of facilities naturally want legal protection for all the activities involved in the construction. It is equally obvious that they should seek competent legal advice. However, there are certain principles that should be recognized by owners in order to avoid unnecessary pitfalls.

Legal Responsibilities

Mitigation of Conflicts

Government Regulation

U.S. Laws on Environmental Protection, 1895 - 1985
  

Owners must be aware of the impacts of these regulations on the costs and durations of various types of construction projects as well as possibilities of litigation due to various contentions. For example, owners acquiring sites for new construction may be strictly liable for any hazardous wastes already on the site or removed from the site under the U.S. Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability (CERCL) Act of 1980. For large scale projects involving new technologies, the construction costs often escalate with the uncertainty associated with such restrictions.

1.8 The Changing Environment of the Construction Industry

The construction industry is a conglomeration of diverse fields and participants that have been loosely lumped together as a sector of the economy. The construction industry plays a central role in national welfare, including the development of residential housing, office buildings and industrial plants, and the restoration of the nation's infrastructure and other public facilities. The importance of the construction industry lies in the function of its products which provide the foundation for industrial production, and its impacts on the national economy cannot be measured by the value of its output or the number of persons employed in its activities alone.

To be more specific, construction refers to all types of activities usually associated with the erection and repair of immobile facilities. Contract construction consists of a large number of firms that perform construction work for others, and is estimated to be approximately 85% of all construction activities. The remaining 15% of construction is performed by owners of the facilities, and is referred to as force-account construction. Although the number of contractors in the United States exceeds a million, over 60% of all contractor construction is performed by the top 400 contractors. The value of new construction in the United States (expressed in constant dollars) and the value of construction as a percentage of the gross national products from 1950 to 1985 are shown in Figure 1-0. It can be seen that construction is a significant factor in the Gross National Product although its importance has been declining in recent years.[The graph is derived from data in "Value of New Construction Put in Place, 1960-1983", Statistical Abstract of the United States, 105th Edition, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, 1985, pp. 722-723, as well as the information in earlier editions.] Not to be ignored is the fact that as the nation's constructed facilities become older, the total expenditure on rehabilitation and maintenance may increase relative to the value of new construction.

Value of New Construction in U.S., 1950-1985
  

Owners who pay close attention to the peculiar characteristics of the construction industry and its changing operating environment will be able to take advantage of the favorable conditions and to avoid the pitfalls. Several factors are particularly noteworthy because of their significant impacts on the quality, cost and time of construction.

New Technologies

The effects of new technologies on construction costs have been mixed because of the high development costs for new technologies. However, it is unmistakable that design professionals and construction contractors who have not adapted to changing technologies have been forced out of the mainstream of design and construction activities. Ultimately, construction quality and cost can be improved with the adoption of new technologies which are proved to be efficient from both the viewpoints of performance and economy.

Labor Productivity

While aggregate construction industry productivity is important as a measure of national economy, owners are more concerned about the labor productivity of basic units of work produced by various crafts on site. Thus, an owner can compare the labor performance at different geographic locations, under different working conditions, and for different types and sizes of projects.

Construction costs usually run parallel to material prices and labor wages. Actually, over the years, labor productivity has increased in some traditional types of construction and thus provides a leveling or compensating effect when hourly rates for labor increase faster than other costs in construction. However, labor productivity has been stagnant or even declined in unconventional or large scale projects.

Public Scrutiny

Figure 1-0 can serve to indicate public attitudes towards the siting of new facilities. It represents the cumulative percentage of individuals who would be willing to accept a new industrial facility at various distances from their homes. For example, over fifty percent of the people surveyed would accept a ten-story office building within five miles of their home, but only twenty-five percent would accept a large factory or coal fired power plant at a similar distance. An even lower percentage would accept a hazardous waste disposal site or a nuclear power plant. Even at a distance of one hundred miles, a significant fraction of the public would be unwilling to accept hazardous waste facilities or nuclear power plants.

Public Acceptance toward New Facilities
  

This objection to new facilities is a widespread public attitude, representing considerable skepticism about the external benefits and costs which new facilities will impose. It is this public attitude which is likely to make public scrutiny and regulation a continuing concern for the construction industry.

International Competition

A bidding competition for a major new offshore drilling platform illustrates the competitive environment in construction. As described in the Wall Street Journal:[See Petzinger, Thomas Jr., "Upstart's Winning Bid for Offshore Platform Stuns its Older Rivals," Wall Street Journal, p. 1, c. 6, Nov. 20, 1985.]

Through most of the postwar years, the nation's biggest builders of offshore oil platforms enjoyed an unusually cozy relationship with the Big Oil Companies they served. Their top officials developed personal friendships with oil executives, entertained them at opulent hunting camps- and won contracts to build nearly every major offshore oil platform in the world....But this summer, the good-old boy network fell apart. Shell [Oil Co.] awarded the main contract for [a new] platform - taller than Chicago's Sears Tower, four times heavier than the Brooklyn Bridge - to a tiny upstart.

Of course, U.S. firms including A/E firms, contractors and construction managers are also competing in foreign countries. Their success or failure in the international arena may also affect their capacities and vitality to provide services in the domestic U.S. market.

Contractor Financed Projects

This type of joint venture has become more important in the international construction market where aggressive contractors often win contracts by offering a more attractive financing package rather than superior technology. With a deepening shadow of international debts in recent years, many developing countries are not in a position to undertake any new project without contractor-backed financing. Thus, the contractors or joint ventures in overseas projects are forced into very risky positions if they intend to stay in the competition.

1.9 The Role of Project Managers

In the project life cycle, the most influential factors affecting the outcome of the project often reside at the early stages. At this point, decisions should be based on competent economic evaluation with due consideration for adequate financing, the prevalent social and regulatory environment, and technological considerations. Architects and engineers might specialize in planning, in construction field management, or in operation, but as project managers, they must have some familiarity with all such aspects in order to understand properly their role and be able to make competent decisions.

Since the 1970's, many large-scale projects have run into serious problems of management, such as cost overruns and long schedule delays. Actually, the management of megaprojects or superprojects is not a practice peculiar to our time. Witness the construction of transcontinental railroads in the Civil War era and the construction of the Panama Canal at the turn of this century. Although the megaprojects of this generation may appear in greater frequency and present a new set of challenge, the problems are organizational rather than technical. As noted by Hardy Cross:[See H. Cross, Engineers and Ivory Towers, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York, 1952.]

It is customary to think of engineering as a part of a trilogy, pure science, applied science and engineering. It needs emphasis that this trilogy is only one of a triad of trilogies into which engineering fits. This first is pure science, applied science and engineering; the second is economic theory, finance and engineering; and the third is social relations, industrial relations and engineering. Many engineering problems are as closely allied to social problems as they are to pure science.

The greatest stumbling block to effective management in construction is the inertia and historic divisions among planners, designers and constructors. While technical competence in design and innovation remains the foundation of engineering practice, the social, economic and organizational factors that are pervasive in influencing the success and failure of construction projects must also be dealt with effectively by design and construction organizations. Of course, engineers are not expected to know every detail of management techniques, but they must be knowledgeable enough to anticipate the problems of management so that they can work harmoniously with professionals in related fields to overcome the inertia and historic divisions.

Paradoxically, engineers who are creative in engineering design are often innovative in planning and management since both types of activities involve problem solving. In fact, they can reinforce each other if both are included in the education process, provided that creativity and innovation instead of routine practice are emphasized. A project manager who is well educated in the fundamental principles of engineering design and management can usefully apply such principles once he or she has acquired basic understanding of a new application area. A project manager who has been trained by rote learning for a specific type of project may merely gain one year of experience repeated twenty times even if he or she has been in the field for twenty years. A broadly educated project manager can reasonably hope to become a leader in the profession; a narrowly trained project manager is often relegated to the role of his or her first job level permanently.

The owners have much at stake in selecting a competent project manager and in providing her or him with the authority to assume responsibility at various stages of the project regardless of the types of contractual agreements for implementing the project. Of course, the project manager must also possess the leadership quality and the ability to handle effectively intricate interpersonal relationships within an organization. The ultimate test of the education and experience of a project manager for construction lies in her or his ability to apply fundamental principles to solving problems in the new and unfamiliar situations which have become the hallmarks of the changing environment in the construction industry.

1.10 References

1. Au, T. and C. Hendrickson, "Education in Engineering Planning and Management," Proceedings of the ASCE Conference on Civil Engineering Education, Columbus, Ohio, 1985.
2. Barrie, D.S. (editor), Directions in Managing Construction, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1981.
3. Bonny, J.B. and J.P. Frein, Handbook of Construction Management and Organization, 2nd Edition, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York, 1980.
4. Lang, J.E. and D.Q. Mills, The Construction Industry, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, 1979.
5. Walker, N., E.N. Walker and T.K. Rohdenburg, Legal Pitfalls in Architecture, Engineering and Building Construction, 2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1979.

2. Organizing for Project Management

2.1 What is Project Management?

The management of construction projects requires knowledge of modern management as well as an understanding of the design and construction process. Construction projects have a specific set of objectives and constraints such as a required time frame for completion. While the relevant technology, institutional arrangements or processes will differ, the management of such projects has much in common with the management of similar types of projects in other specialty or technology domains such as aerospace, pharmaceutical and energy developments.

Generally, project management is distinguished from the general management of corporations by the mission-oriented nature of a project. A project organization will generally be terminated when the mission is accomplished. According to the Project Management Institute, the discipline of project management can be defined as follows:[See R. M. Wideman, "The PMBOK Report -- PMI Body of Knowledge Standard," Project Management Journal, Vol. 17, No. 3, August l986, pp. l5-24.]

Project management is the art of directing and coordinating human and material resources throughout the life of a project by using modern management techniques to achieve predetermined objectives of scope, cost, time, quality and participation satisfaction.

The basic ingredients for a project management framework [See L. C. Stuckenbruck, "Project Management Framework," Project Management Journal, Vol. 17, No. 3, August 1986, pp. 25-30.] may be represented schematically in Figure 2-0. A working knowledge of general management and familiarity with the special knowledge domain related to the project are indispensable. Supporting disciplines such as computer science and decision science may also play an important role. In fact, modern management practices and various special knowledge domains have absorbed various techniques or tools which were once identified only with the supporting disciplines. For example, computer-based information systems and decision support systems are now common-place tools for general management. Similarly, many operations research techniques such as linear programming and network analysis are now widely used in many knowledge or application domains. Hence, the representation in Figure 2-0 reflects only the sources from which the project management framework evolves.

Basic Ingredients in Project Management
  

Specifically, project management in construction encompasses a set of objectives which may be accomplished by implementing a series of operations subject to resource constraints. There are potential conflicts between the stated objectives with regard to scope, cost, time and quality, and the constraints imposed on human material and financial resources. These conflicts should be resolved at the onset of a project by making the necessary tradeoffs or creating new alternatives. Subsequently, the functions of project management for construction generally include the following:

1. Specification of project objectives and plans including delineation of scope, budgeting, scheduling, setting performance requirements, and selecting project participants.
2. Maximization of efficient resource utilization through procurement of labor, materials and equipment according to the prescribed schedule and plan.
3. Implementation of various operations through proper coordination and control of planning, design, estimating, contracting and construction in the entire process.
4. Development of effective communications and mechanisms for resolving conflicts among the various participants.

2.2 Trends in Modern Management

In recent years, major developments in management reflect the acceptance to various degrees of the following elements: (1) the management process approach, (2) the management science and decision support approach, and (3) the behavioral science approach for human resource development. These three approaches complement each other in current practice, and provide a useful groundwork for project management.

The management process approach emphasizes the systematic study of management by identifying management functions in an organization and then examining each in detail. There is general agreement regarding the functions of planning, organizing and controlling. A major tenet is that by analyzing management along functional lines, a framework can be constructed into which all new management activities can be placed. Thus, the manager's job is regarded as coordinating a process of interrelated functions, which are neither totally random nor rigidly predetermined, but are dynamic as the process evolves. Another tenet is that management principles can be derived from an intellectual analysis of management functions. By dividing the manager's job into functional components, principles based upon each function can be extracted. Hence, management functions can be organized into a hierarchical structure designed to improve operational efficiency, such as the example of the organization for a manufacturing company shown in Figure 2-0. The basic management functions are performed by all managers, regardless of enterprise, activity or hierarchical levels. Finally, the development of a management philosophy results in helping the manager to establish relationships between human and material resources. The outcome of following an established philosophy of operation helps the manager win the support of the subordinates in achieving organizational objectives.

Illustrative Hierarchical Structure of Management Functions
  

The management science and decision support approach contributes to the development of a body of quantitative methods designed to aid managers in making complex decisions related to operations and production. In decision support systems, emphasis is placed on providing managers with relevant information. In management science, a great deal of attention is given to defining objectives and constraints, and to constructing mathematical analysis models in solving complex problems of inventory, materials and production control, among others. A topic of major interest in management science is the maximization of profit, or in the absence of a workable model for the operation of the entire system, the suboptimization of the operations of its components. The optimization or suboptimization is often achieved by the use of operations research techniques, such as linear programming, quadratic programming, graph theory, queueing theory and Monte Carlo simulation. In addition to the increasing use of computers accompanied by the development of sophisticated mathematical models and information systems, management science and decision support systems have played an important role by looking more carefully at problem inputs and relationships and by promoting goal formulation and measurement of performance. Artificial intelligence has also begun to be applied to provide decision support systems for solving ill-structured problems in management.

The behavioral science approach for human resource development is important because management entails getting things done through the actions of people. An effective manager must understand the importance of human factors such as needs, drives, motivation, leadership, personality, behavior, and work groups. Within this context, some place more emphasis on interpersonal behavior which focuses on the individual and his/her motivations as a socio-psychological being; others emphasize more group behavior in recognition of the organized enterprise as a social organism, subject to all the attitudes, habits, pressures and conflicts of the cultural environment of people. The major contributions made by the behavioral scientists to the field of management include: (1) the formulation of concepts and explanations about individual and group behavior in the organization, (2) the empirical testing of these concepts methodically in many different experimental and field settings, and (3) the establishment of actual managerial policies and decisions for operation based on the conceptual and methodical frameworks.

2.3 Strategic Planning and Project Programming

The programming of capital projects is shaped by the strategic plan of an organization, which is influenced by market demands and resources constraints. The programming process associated with planning and feasibility studies sets the priorities and timing for initiating various projects to meet the overall objectives of the organizations. However, once this decision is made to initiate a project, market pressure may dictate early and timely completion of the facility.

Among various types of construction, the influence of market pressure on the timing of initiating a facility is most obvious in industrial construction.(See, for example, O'Connor, J.T., and Vickory, C.G., Control of Construction Project Scope, A Report to the Construction Industry Institute, The University of Texas at Austin, December 1985.) Demand for an industrial product may be short-lived, and if a company does not hit the market first, there may not be demand for its product later. With intensive competition for national and international markets, the trend of industrial construction moves toward shorter project life cycles, particularly in technology intensive industries.

In order to gain time, some owners are willing to forego thorough planning and feasibility study so as to proceed on a project with inadequate definition of the project scope. Invariably, subsequent changes in project scope will increase construction costs; however, profits derived from earlier facility operation often justify the increase in construction costs. Generally, if the owner can derive reasonable profits from the operation of a completed facility, the project is considered a success even if construction costs far exceed the estimate based on an inadequate scope definition. This attitude may be attributed in large part to the uncertainties inherent in construction projects. It is difficult to argue that profits might be even higher if construction costs could be reduced without increasing the project duration. However, some projects, notably some nuclear power plants, are clearly unsuccessful and abandoned before completion, and their demise must be attributed at least in part to inadequate planning and poor feasibility studies.

The owner or facility sponsor holds the key to influence the construction costs of a project because any decision made at the beginning stage of a project life cycle has far greater influence than those made at later stages, as shown schematically in Figure 2-0. Therefore, an owner should obtain the expertise of professionals to provide adequate planning and feasibility studies. Many owners do not maintain an in-house engineering and construction management capability, and they should consider the establishment of an ongoing relationship with outside consultants in order to respond quickly to requests. Even among those owners who maintain engineering and construction divisions, many treat these divisions as reimbursable, independent organizations. Such an arrangement should not discourage their legitimate use as false economies in reimbursable costs from such divisions can indeed be very costly to the overall organization.

Ability to Influence Construction Cost Over Time
  

Finally, the initiation and execution of capital projects places demands on the resources of the owner and the professionals and contractors to be engaged by the owner. For very large projects, it may bid up the price of engineering services as well as the costs of materials and equipment and the contract prices of all types. Consequently, such factors should be taken into consideration in determining the timing of a project.

Example 2-1: Setting priorities for projects

A department store planned to expand its operation by acquiring 20 acres of land in the southeast of a metropolitan area which consists of well established suburbs for middle income families. An architectural/engineering (A/E) firm was engaged to design a shopping center on the 20-acre plot with the department store as its flagship plus a large number of storefronts for tenants. One year later, the department store owner purchased 2,000 acres of farm land in the northwest outskirts of the same metropolitan area and designated 20 acres of this land for a shopping center. The A/E firm was again engaged to design a shopping center at this new location.

The A/E firm was kept completely in the dark while the assemblage of the 2,000 acres of land in the northwest quietly took place. When the plans and specifications for the southeast shopping center were completed, the owner informed the A/E firm that it would not proceed with the construction of the southeast shopping center for the time being. Instead, the owner urged the A/E firm to produce a new set of similar plans and specifications for the northwest shopping center as soon as possible, even at the sacrifice of cost saving measures. When the plans and specifications for the northwest shopping center were ready, the owner immediately authorized its construction. However, it took another three years before the southeast shopping center was finally built.

The reason behind the change of plan was that the owner discovered the availability of the farm land in the northwest which could be developed into residential real estate properties for upper middle income families. The immediate construction of the northwest shopping center would make the land development parcels more attractive to home buyers. Thus, the owner was able to recoup enough cash flow in three years to construct the southeast shopping center in addition to financing the construction of the northeast shopping center, as well as the land development in its vicinity.

While the owner did not want the construction cost of the northwest shopping center to run wild, it apparently was satisfied with the cost estimate based on the detailed plans of the southeast shopping center. Thus, the owner had a general idea of what the construction cost of the northwest shopping center would be, and did not wish to wait for a more refined cost estimate until the detailed plans for that center were ready. To the owner, the timeliness of completing the construction of the northwest shopping center was far more important than reducing the construction cost in fulfilling its investment objectives.

Example 2-2: Resource Constraints for Mega Projects

A major problem with mega projects is the severe strain placed on the environment, particularly on the resources in the immediate area of a construction project. "Mega" or "macro" projects involve construction of very large facilities such as the Alaska pipeline constructed in the 1970's or the Panama Canal constructed in the 1900's. The limitations in some or all of the basic elements required for the successful completion of a mega project include:

• engineering design professionals to provide sufficient manpower to complete the design within a reasonable time limit.
• construction supervisors with capacity and experience to direct large projects.
• the number of construction workers with proper skills to do the work.
• the market to supply materials in sufficient quantities and of required quality on time.
• the ability of the local infrastructure to support the large number of workers over an extended period of time, including housing, transportation and other services.

2.4 Effects of Project Risks on Organization

The uncertainty in undertaking a construction project comes from many sources and often involves many participants in the project. Since each participant tries to minimize its own risk, the conflicts among various participants can be detrimental to the project. Only the owner has the power to moderate such conflicts as it alone holds the key to risk assignment through proper contractual relations with other participants. Failure to recognize this responsibility by the owner often leads to undesirable results. In recent years, the concept of "risk sharing/risk assignment" contracts has gained acceptance by the federal government.(See, for example, Federal Form 23-A and EPA's Appendix C-2 clauses.) Since this type of contract acknowledges the responsibilities of the owners, the contract prices are expected to be lower than those in which all risks are assigned to contractors.

In approaching the problem of uncertainty, it is important to recognize that incentives must be provided if any of the participants is expected to take a greater risk. The willingness of a participant to accept risks often reflects the professional competence of that participant as well as its propensity to risk. However, society's perception of the potential liabilities of the participant can affect the attitude of risk-taking for all participants. When a claim is made against one of the participants, it is difficult for the public to know whether a fraud has been committed, or simply that an accident has occurred.

Risks in construction projects may be classified in a number of ways. (See E. D'Appolonia, "Coping with Uncertainty in Geotechnical Engineering and Construction," Special Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, Vol. 4, 1979, pp. 1-18.) One form of classification is as follows:

1. Socioeconomic factors
   • Environmental protection
   • Public safety regulation
   • Economic instability
2. Organizational relationships
   • Contractual relations
   • Attitudes of participants
   • Communication
3. Technological problems
   • Design assumptions
   • Site conditions
   • Construction procedures
   • Construction occupational safety

The environmental protection movement has contributed to the uncertainty for construction because of the inability to know what will be required and how long it will take to obtain approval from the regulatory agencies. The requirements of continued re-evaluation of problems and the lack of definitive criteria which are practical have also resulted in added costs. Public safety regulations have similar effects, which have been most noticeable in the energy field involving nuclear power plants and coal mining. The situation has created constantly shifting guidelines for engineers, constructors and owners as projects move through the stages of planning to construction. These moving targets add a significant new dimension of uncertainty which can make it virtually impossible to schedule and complete work at budgeted cost. Economic conditions of the past decade have further reinforced the climate of uncertainty with high inflation and interest rates. The deregulation of financial institutions has also generated unanticipated problems related to the financing of construction.

Uncertainty stemming from regulatory agencies, environmental issues and financial aspects of construction should be at least mitigated or ideally eliminated. Owners are keenly interested in achieving some form of breakthrough that will lower the costs of projects and mitigate or eliminate lengthy delays. Such breakthroughs are seldom planned. Generally, they happen when the right conditions exist, such as when innovation is permitted or when a basis for incentive or reward exists. However, there is a long way to go before a true partnership of all parties involved can be forged.

During periods of economic expansion, major capital expenditures are made by industries and bid up the cost of construction. In order to control costs, some owners attempt to use fixed price contracts so that the risks of unforeseen contingencies related to an overheated economy are passed on to contractors. However, contractors will raise their prices to compensate for the additional risks.

The risks related to organizational relationships may appear to be unnecessary but are quite real. Strained relationships may develop between various organizations involved in the design/construct process. When problems occur, discussions often center on responsibilities rather than project needs at a time when the focus should be on solving the problems. Cooperation and communication between the parties are discouraged for fear of the effects of impending litigation. This barrier to communication results from the ill-conceived notion that uncertainties resulting from technological problems can be eliminated by appropriate contract terms. The net result has been an increase in the costs of constructed facilities.

The risks related to technological problems are familiar to the design/construct professions which have some degree of control over this category. However, because of rapid advances in new technologies which present new problems to designers and constructors, technological risk has become greater in many instances. Certain design assumptions which have served the professions well in the past may become obsolete in dealing with new types of facilities which may have greater complexity or scale or both. Site conditions, particularly subsurface conditions which always present some degree of uncertainty, can create an even greater degree of uncertainty for facilities with heretofore unknown characteristics during operation. Because construction procedures may not have been fully anticipated, the design may have to be modified after construction has begun. An example of facilities which have encountered such uncertainty is the nuclear power plant, and many owners, designers and contractors have suffered for undertaking such projects.

If each of the problems cited above can cause uncertainty, the combination of such problems is often regarded by all parties as being out of control and inherently risky. Thus, the issue of liability has taken on major proportions and has influenced the practices of engineers and constructors, who in turn have influenced the actions of the owners.

Many owners have begun to understand the problems of risks and are seeking to address some of these problems. For example, some owners are turning to those organizations that offer complete capabilities in planning, design, and construction, and tend to avoid breaking the project into major components to be undertaken individually by specialty participants. Proper coordination throughout the project duration and good organizational communication can avoid delays and costs resulting from fragmentation of services, even though the components from various services are eventually integrated.

Attitudes of cooperation can be readily applied to the private sector, but only in special circumstances can they be applied to the public sector. The ability to deal with complex issues is often precluded in the competitive bidding which is usually required in the public sector. The situation becomes more difficult with the proliferation of regulatory requirements and resulting delays in design and construction while awaiting approvals from government officials who do not participate in the risks of the project.

2.5 Organization of Project Participants

The top management of the owner sets the overall policy and selects the appropriate organization to take charge of a proposed project. Its policy will dictate how the project life cycle is divided among organizations and which professionals should be engaged. Decisions by the top management of the owner will also influence the organization to be adopted for project management. In general, there are many ways to decompose a project into stages. The most typical ways are:

• Sequential processing whereby the project is divided into separate stages and each stage is carried out successively in sequence.
• Parallel processing whereby the project is divided into independent parts such that all stages are carried out simultaneously.
• Staggered processing whereby the stages may be overlapping, such as the use of phased design-construct procedures for fast track operation.

• How many organizations are involved?
• What are the relationships among the organizations?
• When are the various organizations brought into the project?

There are two basic approaches to organize for project implementation, even though many variations may exist as a result of different contractual relationships adopted by the owner and builder. These basic approaches are divided along the following lines:

1. Separation of organizations. Numerous organizations serve as consultants or contractors to the owner, with different organizations handling design and construction functions. Typical examples which involve different degrees of separation are:
   • Traditional sequence of design and construction
   • Professional construction management
2. Integration of organizations. A single or joint venture consisting of a number of organizations with a single command undertakes both design and construction functions. Two extremes may be cited as examples:
   • Owner-builder operation in which all work will be handled in house by force account.
   • Turnkey operation in which all work is contracted to a vendor which is responsible for delivering the completed project

Since construction projects may be managed by a spectrum of participants in a variety of combinations, the organization for the management of such projects may vary from case to case. On one extreme, each project may be staffed by existing personnel in the functional divisions of the organization on an ad-hoc basis as shown in Figure 2-0 until the project is completed. This arrangement is referred to as the matrix organization as each project manager must negotiate all resources for the project from the existing organizational framework. On the other hand, the organization may consist of a small central functional staff for the exclusive purpose of supporting various projects, each of which has its functional divisions as shown in Figure 2-0. This decentralized set-up is referred to as the project oriented organization as each project manager has autonomy in managing the project. There are many variations of management style between these two extremes, depending on the objectives of the organization and the nature of the construction project. For example, a large chemical company with in-house staff for planning, design and construction of facilities for new product lines will naturally adopt the matrix organization. On the other hand, a construction company whose existence depends entirely on the management of certain types of construction projects may find the project-oriented organization particularly attractive. While organizations may differ, the same basic principles of management structure are applicable to most situations.

Example of a Matrix Organization
  

Example of a Project-Oriented Organization
  

To illustrate various types of organizations for project management, we shall consider two examples, the first one representing an owner organization while the second one representing the organization of a construction management consultant under the direct supervision of the owner.

Example 2-3: . Matrix Organization of an Engineering Division

The Engineering Division of an Electric Power and Light Company has functional departments as shown in Figure 2-0. When small scale projects such as the addition of a transmission tower or a sub-station are authorized, a matrix organization is used to carry out such projects. For example, in the design of a transmission tower, the professional skill of a structural engineer is most important. Consequently, the leader of the project team will be selected from the Structural Engineering Department while the remaining team members are selected from all departments as dictated by the manpower requirements. On the other hand, in the design of a new sub-station, the professional skill of an electrical engineer is most important. Hence, the leader of the project team will be selected from the Electrical Engineering Department.

The Matrix Organization in an Engineering Division
  

Example 2-4: . Example of Construction Management Consultant Organization

When the same Electric Power and Light Company in the previous example decided to build a new nuclear power plant, it engaged a construction management consultant to take charge of the design and construction completely. However, the company also assigned a project team to coordinate with the construction management consultant as shown in Figure 2-0.

Coordination between Owner and Consultant
  

Since the company eventually will operate the power plant upon its completion, it is highly important for its staff to monitor the design and construction of the plant. Such coordination allows the owner not only to assure the quality of construction but also to be familiar with the design to facilitate future operation and maintenance. Note the close direct relationships of various departments of the owner and the consultant. Since the project will last for many years before its completion, the staff members assigned to the project team are not expected to rejoin the Engineering Department but will probably be involved in the future operation of the new plant. Thus, the project team can act independently toward its designated mission.

2.6 Traditional Designer-Constructor Sequence

For ordinary projects of moderate size and complexity, the owner often employs a designer (an architectural/engineering firm) which prepares the detailed plans and specifications for the constructor (a general contractor). The designer also acts on behalf of the owner to oversee the project implementation during construction. The general contractor is responsible for the construction itself even though the work may actually be undertaken by a number of specialty subcontractors.

The owner usually negotiates the fee for service with the architectural/engineering (A/E) firm. In addition to the responsibilities of designing the facility, the A/E firm also exercises to some degree supervision of the construction as stipulated by the owner. Traditionally, the A/E firm regards itself as design professionals representing the owner who should not communicate with potential contractors to avoid collusion or conflict of interest. Field inspectors working for an A/E firm usually follow through the implementation of a project after the design is completed and seldom have extensive input in the design itself. Because of the litigation climate in the last two decades, most A/E firms only provide observers rather than inspectors in the field. Even the shop drawings of fabrication or construction schemes submitted by the contractors for approval are reviewed with a disclaimer of responsibility by the A/E firms.

The owner may select a general constructor either through competitive bidding or through negotiation. Public agencies are required to use the competitive bidding mode, while private organizations may choose either mode of operation. In using competitive bidding, the owner is forced to use the designer-constructor sequence since detailed plans and specifications must be ready before inviting bidders to submit their bids. If the owner chooses to use a negotiated contract, it is free to use phased construction if it so desires.

The general contractor may choose to perform all or part of the construction work, or act only as a manager by subcontracting all the construction to subcontractors. The general contractor may also select the subcontractors through competitive bidding or negotiated contracts. The general contractor may ask a number of subcontractors to quote prices for the subcontracts before submitting its bid to the owner. However, the subcontractors often cannot force the winning general contractor to use them on the project. This situation may lead to practices known as bid shopping and bid peddling. Bid shopping refers to the situation when the general contractor approaches subcontractors other than those whose quoted prices were used in the winning contract in order to seek lower priced subcontracts. Bid peddling refers to the actions of subcontractors who offer lower priced subcontracts to the winning general subcontractors in order to dislodge the subcontractors who originally quoted prices to the general contractor prior to its bid submittal. In both cases, the quality of construction may be sacrificed, and some state statutes forbid these practices for public projects.

Although the designer-constructor sequence is still widely used because of the public perception of fairness in competitive bidding, many private owners recognize the disadvantages of using this approach when the project is large and complex and when market pressures require a shorter project duration than that which can be accomplished by using this traditional method.

2.7 Professional Construction Management

Professional construction management refers to a project management team consisting of a professional construction manager and other participants who will carry out the tasks of project planning, design and construction in an integrated manner. Contractual relationships among members of the team are intended to minimize adversarial relationships and contribute to greater response within the management group. A professional construction manager is a firm specialized in the practice of professional construction management which includes:

• Work with owner and the A/E firms from the beginning and make recommendations on design improvements, construction technology, schedules and construction economy.
• Propose design and construction alternatives if appropriate, and analyze the effects of the alternatives on the project cost and schedule.
• Monitor subsequent development of the project in order that these targets are not exceeded without the knowledge of the owner.
• Coordinate procurement of material and equipment and the work of all construction contractors, and monthly payments to contractors, changes, claims and inspection for conforming design requirements.
• Perform other project related services as required by owners.

Professional construction management is usually used when a project is very large or complex. The organizational features that are characteristics of mega-projects can be summarized as follows:(These features and the following example are described in F.P. Moolin, Jr. and F.A. McCoy, "Managing the Alaska Pipeline Project," Civil Engineering, November 1981, pp. 51-54.)

• The overall organizational approach for the project will change as the project advances. The "functional" organization may change to a "matrix" which may change to a "project" organization (not necessarily in this order).
• Within the overall organization, there will probably be functional, project, and matrix suborganizations all at the same time. This feature greatly complicates the theory and the practice of management, yet is essential for overall cost effectiveness.
• Successful giant, complex organizations usually have a strong matrix-type suborganization at the level where basic cost and schedule control responsibility is assigned. This suborganization is referred to as a "cost center" or as a "project" and is headed by a project manager. The cost center matrix may have participants assigned from many different functional groups. In turn, these functional groups may have technical reporting responsibilities to several different and higher tiers in the organization. The key to a cost effective effort is the development of this project suborganization into a single team under the leadership of a strong project manager.
• The extent to which decision-making will be centralized or decentralized is crucial to the organization of the mega-project.

Example 2-5: Managing of the Alaska Pipeline Project

The Alaska Pipeline Project was the largest, most expensive private construction project in the 1970's, which encompassed 800 miles, thousands of employees, and 10 billion dollars.

At the planning stage, the owner (a consortium) employed a Construction Management Contractor (CMC) to direct the pipeline portion, but retained centralized decision making to assure single direction and to integrate the effort of the CMC with the pump stations and the terminals performed by another contractor. The CMC also centralized its decision making in directing over 400 subcontractors and thousands of vendors. Because there were 19 different construction camps and hundreds of different construction sites, this centralization caused delays in decision making.

At about the 15% point of physical completion, the owner decided to reorganize the decision making process and change the role of the CMC. The new organization was a combination of owner and CMC personnel assigned within an integrated organization. The objective was to develop a single project team responsible for controlling all subcontractors. Instead of having nine tiers of organization from the General Manager of the CMC to the subcontractors, the new organization had only four tiers from the Senior Project Manager of the owner to subcontractors. Besides unified direction and coordination, this reduction in tiers of organization greatly improved communications and the ability to make and implement decisions. The new organization also allowed decentralization of decision making by treating five sections of the pipeline at different geographic locations as separate projects, with a section manager responsible for all functions of the section as a profit center.

At about 98% point of physical completion, all remaining activities were to be consolidated to identify single bottom-line responsibility, to reduce duplication in management staff, and to unify coordination of remaining work. Thus, the project was first handled by separate organizations but later was run by an integrated organization with decentralized profit centers. Finally, the organization in effect became small and was ready to be phased out of operation.

2.8 Owner-Builder Operation

In this approach an owner must have a steady flow of on-going projects in order to maintain a large work force for in-house operation. However, the owner may choose to subcontract a substantial portion of the project to outside consultants and contractors for both design and construction, even though it retains centralized decision making to integrate all efforts in project implementation.

Example 2-6: : U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Organization

The District Engineer's Office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers may be viewed as a typical example of an owner-builder approach as shown in Figure 2-0.

Organization of a District of Corps of Engineers
  

In the District Engineer's Office of the U.S. Corps of Engineers, there usually exist an Engineering Division and an Operations Division, and, in a large district, a Construction Division. Under each division, there are several branches. Since the authorization of a project is usually initiated by the U.S. Congress, the planning and design functions are separated in order to facilitate operations. Since the authorization of the feasibility study of a project may precede the authorization of the design by many years, each stage can best be handled by a different branch in the Engineering Division. If construction is ultimately authorized, the work may be handled by the Construction Division or by outside contractors. The Operations Division handles the operation of locks and other facilities which require routine attention and maintenance.

When a project is authorized, a project manager is selected from the most appropriate branch to head the project, together with a group of staff drawn from various branches to form the project team. When the project is completed, all members of the team including the project manager will return to their regular posts in various branches and divisions until the next project assignment. Thus, a matrix organization is used in managing each project.

2.9 Turnkey Operation

Some owners wish to delegate all responsibilities of design and construction to outside consultants in a turnkey project arrangement. A contractor agrees to provide the completed facility on the basis of performance specifications set forth by the owner. The contractor may even assume the responsibility of operating the project if the owner so desires. In order for a turnkey operation to succeed, the owner must be able to provide a set of unambiguous performance specifications to the contractor and must have complete confidence in the capability of the contractor to carry out the mission.

This approach is the direct opposite of the owner-builder approach in which the owner wishes to retain the maximum amount of control for the design-construction process.

Example 2-7: : An Example of a Turnkey Organization

A 150-Mw power plant was proposed in 1985 by the Texas-New Mexico Power Company of Fort Worth, Texas, which would make use of the turnkey operation.("Private Money Finances Texas Utility's Power Plant" Engineering News Record: July 25, 1985, p. 13.) Upon approval by the Texas Utility Commission, a consortium consisting of H.B. Zachry Co., Westinghouse Electric Co., and Combustion Engineering, Inc. would design, build and finance the power plant for completion in 1990 for an estimated construction cost of $200 million in 1990 dollars. The consortium would assume total liability during construction, including debt service costs, and thereby eliminate the risks of cost escalation to rate payers, stockholders and the utility company management.

2.10 Leadership and Motivation for the Project Team

The project manager, in the broadest sense of the term, is the most important person for the success or failure of a project. The project manager is responsible for planning, organizing and controlling the project. In turn, the project manager receives authority from the management of the organization to mobilize the necessary resources to complete a project.

The project manager must be able to exert interpersonal influence in order to lead the project team. The project manager often gains the support of his/her team through a combination of the following:

• Formal authority resulting from an official capacity which is empowered to issue orders.
• Reward and/or penalty power resulting from his/her capacity to dispense directly or indirectly valued organization rewards or penalties.
• Expert power when the project manager is perceived as possessing special knowledge or expertise for the job.
• Attractive power because the project manager has a personality or other characteristics to convince others.

In a matrix organization, the members of the functional departments may be accustomed to a single reporting line in a hierarchical structure, but the project manager coordinates the activities of the team members drawn from functional departments. The functional structure within the matrix organization is responsible for priorities, coordination, administration and final decisions pertaining to project implementation. Thus, there are potential conflicts between functional divisions and project teams. The project manager must be given the responsibility and authority to resolve various conflicts such that the established project policy and quality standards will not be jeopardized. When contending issues of a more fundamental nature are developed, they must be brought to the attention of a high level in the management and be resolved expeditiously.

In general, the project manager's authority must be clearly documented as well as defined, particularly in a matrix organization where the functional division managers often retain certain authority over the personnel temporarily assigned to a project. The following principles should be observed:

• The interface between the project manager and the functional division managers should be kept as simple as possible.
• The project manager must gain control over those elements of the project which may overlap with functional division managers.
• The project manager should encourage problem solving rather than role playing of team members drawn from various functional divisions.

2.11 Interpersonal Behavior in Project Organizations

While a successful project manager must be a good leader, other members of the project team must also learn to work together, whether they are assembled from different divisions of the same organization or even from different organizations. Some problems of interaction may arise initially when the team members are unfamiliar with their own roles in the project team, particularly for a large and complex project. These problems must be resolved quickly in order to develop an effective, functioning team.

Many of the major issues in construction projects require effective interventions by individuals, groups and organizations. The fundamental challenge is to enhance communication among individuals, groups and organizations so that obstacles in the way of improving interpersonal relations may be removed. Some behavior science concepts are helpful in overcoming communication difficulties that block cooperation and coordination. In very large projects, professional behavior scientists may be necessary in diagnosing the problems and advising the personnel working on the project. The power of the organization should be used judiciously in resolving conflicts.

The major symptoms of interpersonal behavior problems can be detected by experienced observers, and they are often the sources of serious communication difficulties among participants in a project. For example, members of a project team may avoid each other and withdraw from active interactions about differences that need to be dealt with. They may attempt to criticize and blame other individuals or groups when things go wrong. They may resent suggestions for improvement, and become defensive to minimize culpability rather than take the initiative to maximize achievements. All these actions are detrimental to the project organization.

While these symptoms can occur to individuals at any organization, they are compounded if the project team consists of individuals who are put together from different organizations. Invariably, different organizations have different cultures or modes of operation. Individuals from different groups may not have a common loyalty and may prefer to expand their energy in the directions most advantageous to themselves instead of the project team. Therefore, no one should take it for granted that a project team will work together harmoniously just because its members are placed physically together in one location. On the contrary, it must be assumed that good communication can be achieved only through the deliberate effort of the top management of each organization contributing to the joint venture.

2.12 Perceptions of Owners and Contractors

Although owners and contractors may have different perceptions on project management for construction, they have a common interest in creating an environment leading to successful projects in which performance quality, completion time and final costs are within prescribed limits and tolerances. It is interesting therefore to note the opinions of some leading contractors and owners who were interviewed in 1984.(See J.E. Diekmann and K.B. Thrush, Project Control in Design Engineering, A Report to the Construction Industry Institute, The University of Texas at Austin, Texas, May 1986.)

From the responses of six contractors, the key factors cited for successful projects are:

• well defined scope
• extensive early planning
• good leadership, management and first line supervision
• positive client relationship with client involvement
• proper project team chemistry
• quick response to changes
• engineering managers concerned with the total project, not just the engineering elements.

• ill-defined scope
• poor management
• poor planning
• breakdown in communication between engineering and construction
• unrealistic scope, schedules and budgets
• many changes at various stages of progress
• lack of good project control

The responses of eight owners indicated that they did not always understand the concerns of the contractors although they generally agreed with some of the key factors for successful and unsuccessful projects cited by the contractors. The significant findings of the interviews with owners are summarized as follows:

• All owners have the same perception of their own role, but they differ significantly in assuming that role in practice.
• The owners also differ dramatically in the amount of early planning and in providing information in bid packages.
• There is a trend toward breaking a project into several smaller projects as the projects become larger and more complex.
• Most owners recognize the importance of schedule, but they adopt different requirements in controlling the schedule.
• All agree that people are the key to project success.

From the results of these interviews, it is obvious that owners must be more aware and involved in the process in order to generate favorable conditions for successful projects. Design professionals and construction contractors must provide better communication with each other and with the owner in project implementation.

2.13 References

1. Barrie, Donald S. and Boyd C. Paulson, Jr., Professional Construction Management, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 2nd Ed., 1984.
2. Halpin, Daniel W. and Ronald W. Woodhead, Construction Management, John Wiley and Sons, 1980.
3. Hodgetts, R.M., Management: Theory, Process and Practice, W.B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia, PA, 1979.
4. Kerzner, H. Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling and Controlling. 2nd. Ed., Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1984.
5. Levitt, R.E., R.D. Logcher and N.H. Quaddumi, "Impact of Owner-Engineer Risk Sharing on Design Conservatism," ASCE Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering, Vol. 110, 1984, pp. 157-167.
6. Moolin, F.P., Jr., and F.A. McCoy: "Managing the Alaska Pipeline Project," Civil Engineering, November 1981, pp. 51-54.
7. Murray, L., E. Gallardo, S. Aggarwal and R. Waywitka, "Marketing Construction Management Services," ASCE Journal of Construction Division, Vol. 107, 1981, pp. 665-677.

3. The Design and Construction Process

3.1 Design and Construction as an Integrated System

In the planning of facilities, it is important to recognize the close relationship between design and construction. These processes can best be viewed as an integrated system. Broadly speaking, design is a process of creating the description of a new facility, usually represented by detailed plans and specifications; construction planning is a process of identifying activities and resources required to make the design a physical reality. Hence, construction is the implementation of a design envisioned by architects and engineers. In both design and construction, numerous operational tasks must be performed with a variety of precedence and other relationships among the different tasks.

Several characteristics are unique to the planning of constructed facilities and should be kept in mind even at the very early stage of the project life cycle. These include the following:

• Nearly every facility is custom designed and constructed, and often requires a long time to complete.
• Both the design and construction of a facility must satisfy the conditions peculiar to a specific site.
• Because each project is site specific, its execution is influenced by natural, social and other locational conditions such as weather, labor supply, local building codes, etc.
• Since the service life of a facility is long, the anticipation of future requirements is inherently difficult.
• Because of technological complexity and market demands, changes of design plans during construction are not uncommon.

In an integrated system, the planning for both design and construction can proceed almost simultaneously, examining various alternatives which are desirable from both viewpoints and thus eliminating the necessity of extensive revisions under the guise of value engineering. Furthermore, the review of designs with regard to their constructibility can be carried out as the project progresses from planning to design. For example, if the sequence of assembly of a structure and the critical loadings on the partially assembled structure during construction are carefully considered as a part of the overall structural design, the impacts of the design on construction falsework and on assembly details can be anticipated. However, if the design professionals are expected to assume such responsibilities, they must be rewarded for sharing the risks as well as for undertaking these additional tasks. Similarly, when construction contractors are expected to take over the responsibilities of engineers, such as devising a very elaborate scheme to erect an unconventional structure, they too must be rewarded accordingly. As long as the owner does not assume the responsibility for resolving this risk-reward dilemma, the concept of a truly integrated system for design and construction cannot be realized.

It is interesting to note that European owners are generally more open to new technologies and to share risks with designers and contractors. In particular, they are more willing to accept responsibilities for the unforeseen subsurface conditions in geotechnical engineering. Consequently, the designers and contractors are also more willing to introduce new techniques in order to reduce the time and cost of construction. In European practice, owners typically present contractors with a conceptual design, and contractors prepare detailed designs, which are checked by the owner's engineers. Those detailed designs may be alternate designs, and specialty contractors may also prepare detailed alternate designs.

Example 3-1: Proposed Responsibility for Shop Drawings

The willingness to assume responsibilities does not come easily from any party in the current litigious climate of the construction industry in the United States. On the other hand, if owner, architect, engineer, contractor and other groups that represent parts of the industry do not jointly fix the responsibilities of various tasks to appropriate parties, the standards of practice will eventually be set by court decisions. In an attempt to provide a guide to the entire spectrum of participants in a construction project, the American Society of Civil Engineers issued a preliminary edition of a Manual of Professional Practice for Quality in the Constructed Project in early 1988. After an 18-month period for trial use and comment, a final version is expected to be published as recommended standards for industry-wide adoption. Hopefully, this manual will help bring a turn around of the fragmentation of activities in the design and construction process.

Shop drawings represent the assembly details for erecting a structure which should reflect the intent and rationale of the original structural design. They are prepared by the construction contractor and reviewed by the design professional. However, since the responsibility for preparing shop drawings was traditionally assigned to construction contractors, design professionals took the view that the review process was advisory and assumed no responsibility for their accuracy. This justification was ruled unacceptable by a court in connection with the walkway failure at the Hyatt Hotel in Kansas City in 1985. In preparing the ASCE Manual of Professional Practice for Quality in the Constructed Project, the responsibilities for preparation of shop drawings proved to be the most difficult to develop.(See "ASCE Unveils Quality Manual", ENR, November 5, 1987, p. 14) The reason for this situation is not difficult to fathom since the responsibilities for the task are diffused, and all parties must agree to the new responsibilities assigned to each in the recommended risk-reward relations shown in Table 3-1.

Traditionally, the owner is not involved in the preparation and review of shop drawings, and perhaps is even unaware of any potential problems. In the recommended practice, the owner is required to take responsibility for providing adequate time and funding, including approval of scheduling, in order to allow the design professionals and construction contractors to perform satisfactorily.

Recommended Responsibility for Shop Drawings
  

~!^!~Responsible Party

~!^!~~!^!~Design~!^!~Construction

Task~!^!~Owner~!^!~Professional~!^!~Contractor

Provide adequate time and funding for shop~!^!~Prime

drawing preparation and review

Specify that drawings be prepared~!^!~Review~!^!~Prime

by professional engineer

Do structural design~!^!~~!^!~Prime

Provide loading requirements~!^!~~!^!~Prime

Specify shop drawing requirements~!^!~Review~!^!~Prime

Provide for structural design of~!^!~~!^!~~!^!~Prime

connections by engineer

Approve scheduling~!^!~Prime~!^!~Advise~!^!~Advise

Provide shop drawings~!^!~~!^!~~!^!~Prime

and submit on schedule

Make timely reviews~!^!~~!^!~Prime

Accept responsibility for~!^!~~!^!~~!^!~Prime

construction bracing, shoring, constructibility

tolerances, fit and detail dimensions.

Example 3-2: Model Metro Project in Milan, Italy(See V. Fairweather, "Milan's Model Metro", Civil Engineering, December 1987, pp. 40-43.)

Under Italian law, unforeseen subsurface conditions are the owner's responsibility, not the contractor's. This is a striking difference from U.S. construction practice where changed conditions clauses and claims and the adequacy of prebid site investigations are points of contention. In effect, the Italian law means that the owner assumes those risks. But under the same law, a contractor may elect to assume the risks in order to lower the bid price and thereby beat the competition.

According to the Technical Director of Rodio, the Milan-based contractor which is heavily involved in the grouting job for tunneling in the Model Metro project in Milan, Italy, there are two typical contractual arrangements for specialized subcontractor firms such as theirs. One is to work on a unit price basis with no responsibility for the design. The other is what he calls the "nominated subcontractor" or turnkey method: prequalified subcontractors offer their own designs and guarantee the price, quality, quantities, and, if they wish, the risks of unforeseen conditions.

At the beginning of the Milan metro project, the Rodio contract ratio was 50/50 unit price and turnkey. The firm convinced the metro owners that they would save money with the turnkey approach, and the ratio became 80% turnkey. What's more, in the work packages where Rodio worked with other grouting specialists, those subcontractors paid Rodio a fee to assume all risks for unforeseen conditions.

Under these circumstances, it was critical that the firm should know the subsurface conditions as precisely as possible, which was a major reason why the firm developed a computerized electronic sensing program to predict stratigraphy and thus control grout mixes, pressures and, most important, quantities.

3.2 Innovation and Technological Feasibility

The planning for a construction project begins with the generation of concepts for a facility which will meet market demands and owner needs. Innovative concepts in design are highly valued not for their own sake but for their contributions to reducing costs and to the improvement of aesthetics, comfort or convenience as embodied in a well-designed facility. However, the constructor as well as the design professionals must have an appreciation and full understanding of the technological complexities often associated with innovative designs in order to provide a safe and sound facility. Since these concepts are often preliminary or tentative, screening studies are carried out to determine the overall technological viability and economic attractiveness without pursuing these concepts in great detail. Because of the ambiguity of the objectives and the uncertainty of external events, screening studies call for uninhibited innovation in creating new concepts and judicious judgment in selecting the appropriate ones for further consideration.

One of the most important aspects of design innovation is the necessity of communication in the design/construction partnership. In the case of bridge design, it can be illustrated by the following quotation from Lin and Gerwick concerning bridge construction: (See T.Y. Lin and B.G. Gerwick, Jr. "Design of Long Span Concrete Bridges with Special References to Prestressing, Precasting, Structural Behavior and Economics," ACI Publication SP-23, First International Symposium, 1969, pp. 693-704)