1. Home
  2. RiP
  3. View Record
http://www.trb.org/GetInvolvedwithTRB/JoinSupportTRB.aspx

Quantifying the Costs and Benefits of Partnering on Projects Delivered Using Traditional and Alternative Contracting Methods

Partnering highway construction contracts is popular throughout the country and has been in use by state departments of transportation (DOTs) for over 20 years. Many, if not most, DOT construction contracts contain general provisions regarding the partnering process. The Ohio and Texas DOTs conducted research studies on the effectiveness of partnering in the mid-1990's; findings indicated that there were quantifiable benefits for employing partnering on traditional design-bid-build contracts. Since that time the nature of the procurement environment has undergone significant changes due to the adoption of alternative contracting methods (ACM) such as best-value award (BVA), construction manager/general contractor (CMGC), design-build (DB), public-private partnerships (P3), alternative technical concepts (ATC) and others that were not prevalent during the time periods covered by the Ohio and Texas studies. The Federal Highway Administration's Every Day Counts (EDC) initiative has significantly increased interest in ACMs by reducing the state share for federal-aid projects delivered using ADMs. The result of the above is a clear need to invest in contractual relationships to avoid delays and extra costs due to contract disputes as DOTs seek to accelerate the delivery of highway projects to rapidly renew the deteriorated infrastructure. Partnering is a tool proven to provide a means to improve the contractor-owner relationships by providing a framework for communication and problem solving with the goal of win/win outcomes. The partnering process aims to foster a team environment where challenges are addressed as a group and disputes are resolved early, hoping to create a positive impact on project cost, time, and quality performance. Therefore, the objective of this research is to revisit the conclusions reached by the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) and Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) two decades ago on partnering DBB projects and expand that result to account for the contract relational changes inherent with ACMs. The research will quantify the costs and benefits of the partnering process on a national level. It will also identify successful partnering efforts, and develop effective practice guidance and training materials.

  • Record URL:
  • Supplemental Notes:
    • AASHTO Highway Subcommittee on Construction. Contract to a Performing Organization has not yet been awarded. Research on Project 20-07, Task 362 was not initiated. The scope and funds, with additional NCHRP funding, were incorporated into this NCHRP Project 19-10 Quantifying the Costs and Benefits of Partnering on Projects Delivered Using Traditional and Alternative Contracting Methods.

Language

  • English

Project

  • Status: Proposed
  • Funding: $400000.00
  • Contract Numbers:

    Project 19-10

    Project 20-07, Task

  • Sponsor Organizations:

    Federal Highway Administration

    1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
    Washington, DC  United States  20590

    American Association of State Highway & Transportation Officials (AASHTO)

    444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 225
    Washington, DC  United States  20001

    National Cooperative Highway Research Program

    Transportation Research Board
    500 Fifth Street, NW
    Washington, DC  United States  20001
  • Project Managers:

    Parker, Stephan

  • Start Date: 20141116
  • Expected Completion Date: 0
  • Actual Completion Date: 0
  • Source Data: RiP Project 37541

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 01543520
  • Record Type: Research project
  • Source Agency: Transportation Research Board
  • Contract Numbers: Project 19-10, Project 20-07, Task
  • Files: TRB, RiP
  • Created Date: Nov 17 2014 1:01AM