Framework of Success Criteria for DesignÕBuild Projects

Albert P. C. Chan1; David Scott2; and Edmond W. M. Lam3

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 11/07/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract: Success has always been the ultimate goal of every activity, and a construction project is no exception. Due to the ambiguous
definition of project success and the different perceptions of participants toward this concept, it may be difficult to tell whether a project
is successful as there is a lack of consensus. Time, cost, and quality have long been the success criteria used to evaluate the performance
of a construction project. However, such a list has been criticized as not being comprehensive. Even studies of the project success of a
particular construction method, such as the design/build procurement system, are lacking in most previous research considering construc-
tion projects in general. This paper sets out to establish criteria for project success for a design/build project in construction, first by
identifying relevant measures of project success for a construction project in past studies, with particular emphasis on design/build
projects, and then by establishing a comprehensive assessment framework for project success for design/build projects. The significant
impacts on the construction field of study, in terms of educational value and practical use, are also presented. With little research in the
project success of design/build projects, the writers suggest a research focus for the study.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲0742-597X共2002兲18:3共120兲
CE Database keywords: Design/build; Project management; Construction industry.

Introduction a design/build project as the topic is normally discussed for con-

struction projects in general. Such project participants may not be
A construction project is viewed as a complex sequence of activi- confident because of the lack of a thorough knowledge basis.
ties to deliver clearly defined objectives 共Cheung et al. 2000兲. To determine the project success of design/build projects, the
Successfully accomplishing a project requires the effective man- writers first make a comprehensive review of the criteria of
agement of various types of constraints among participants. In- project success for a construction project in general. The defini-
deed, measuring project success is a complex task since success is tions of criteria and project success will be presented, and then
intangible and can hardly be agreed upon. the generic success criteria will be modified to develop an assess-
The general concept of project success remains ambiguously ment framework for design/build projects. Finally, the signifi-
defined because of varying perceptions. Such a phenomenon also cance of the study, in terms of educational value and practical use,
exists in the construction industry where different parties are in- will be highlighted.
volved, including the client, the architect, the contractor, and vari-
ous surveyors and engineers. Each project participant will have
his or her own view of success. The architect may consider the Methodology
aesthetics aspect as the project success criterion, while the con-
tractor may rank profitability the highest. Project success is an abstract concept, and determining whether a
Traditionally, a project is considered successful if the building project is a success or a failure is far more complex. However, the
is delivered at the right time, price, and quality. It should also concept of project success can be evaluated through performance
provide the client with a high level of satisfaction. Still, a com- measures that can be developed from research literature where
prehensive list of criteria contributing to project success is lack- various success criteria can be identified.
ing. A construction project is procured through different forms of The research method used for this paper was to make a com-
management structures. With the increasing adoption nowadays prehensive review of the literature over the past 10 years. The
of the design/build procurement system, practitioners may find it selection of literature was based mainly on the research findings
necessary to investigate the criteria for successfully implementing of Chua 共1997兲, both United Kingdom and United States based,
including the following sources:
1
Associate Professor, Dept. of Building and Real Estate, Hong Kong • Construction Management and Economics,
Polytechnic Univ., Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong. • Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,
2
Head of Dept., Dept. of Building and Real Estate, Hong Kong Poly- • Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management,
technic Univ., Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong. • Journal of Management in Engineering,
3
PhD Candidate, Dept. of Building and Real Estate, Hong Kong Poly- • Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers,
technic Univ., Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong. • International Journal of Project Management,
Note. Discussion open until December 1, 2002. Separate discussions • Journal of Construction Procurement.
must be submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date by
Of the seven identified journals, it was observed that the ma-
one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Managing
Editor. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and pos- jority of papers in Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engi-
sible publication on April 24, 2001; approved on December 4, 2001. This neers are organized in case-study format and only the ideas rel-
paper is part of the Journal of Management in Engineering, Vol. 18, No. evant to project success are noted. One other, Project
3, July 1, 2002. ©ASCE, ISSN 0742-597X/2002/3-120–128/$8.00⫹$.50 Management Journal, was also selected as it was found that some
per page. previous researchers made regular reference to the papers in the

120 / JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY 2002

J. Manage. Eng., 2002, 18(3): 120-128

 As a result, a change has occurred in the assessment criteria of
project success over the last decade.

Changing Measures of Project Performance

This section gives the trend of the different views of previous

researchers on project performance. Indeed, a comprehensive re-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 11/07/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 1. Relationship among goals, performance measures, and view of the literature reveals that many scholars have shown great
project success interest in the topic of project performance over the past 10 years.

Trend 1: Project Success—Meeting Objectives

journal, indicating that the journal should also be included for
project success research. As a result, altogether 8 journals were All projects stem from the needs or objectives of a client. It is
sought for criteria for project success. obvious that if these objectives are achieved, the project is
To maintain the efficiency and effectiveness of the literature claimed to be successful. Whether the objectives are met can be
searching process, an on-line search was undertaken for the past evaluated through the project performance in terms of cost,
10 years. Search engines identified are CatchWord, Ebsco, and schedule, and quality 共Maloney 1990兲. However, project success
Science Direct, and keywords include project success, criteria, should be something much more important than simply meeting
performance measures, construction and design/build. Some pa- cost, schedule and performance specifications. Apart from the
pers for the past 10 years may not have been put on line, espe- more tangible means, Freeman and Beale 共1992兲 and Riggs et al.
cially those of Project Management Journal, and so manual 共1992兲 suggest that the less tangible project success criteria
search was done to catch any missing articles. should also be recognized from the respective viewpoints of dif-
The literature survey incorporating a variety of past research ferent project participants.
on the topic of project success enriched the content of the paper.
The focus of survey can be consolidated at the expense of endless
Trend 2: Project Success—Global Approach
searching for information elsewhere.
In spite of the intangibilities of project performance, several clas-
sifications of the performance measures have evolved to achieve a
Defining Criteria and Project Success global approach. Chan 共1996兲 establishes a conceptual framework
for measuring construction project success that considers the
The definition of success often changes from project to project project success criteria from both objective and subjective points
共Parfitt and Sanvido 1993兲. Traditionally, success is defined as the of view. Another classification by Stevens 共1996兲 considers the
degree to which project goals and expectations are met. It should ‘‘hard’’ and ‘‘soft’’ sides of project success criteria, with time and
be viewed from different perspectives of individuals and the goals cost being ‘‘hard’’ and satisfaction being ‘‘soft.’’
related to a variety of elements, including technical, financial,
education, social, and professional issues 共Parfitt and Sanvido
Trend 3: Project Success—Beyond Project
1993; Lim and Mohamed 1999兲. The criteria are the set of prin-
ciples or standards by which judgment is made 共Lim and Mo- Time, cost, and quality are still the prime project objectives
hamed 1999兲. 共Brown and Adams 2000兲. They are considered as the iron tri-
Project success is the goal, and the objectives of budget, angle 共Atkinson 1999兲 and the eternal triangle 共Newcombe 2000兲.
schedule, and quality are the three normally accepted criteria to Apart from considering the goal attainment of project success,
achieve the goal. Each project has a set of goals to accomplish, more emphasis is also placed on the assessment of the positive
and they serve as a standard to measure performance. Indeed, effects brought about by the project to judge success.
criteria are needed to compare the goal level against the perfor- Shenhar et al. 共1997兲 assess the success of a project along four
mance level, and project success is to attain project goals and distinct dimensions: project efficiency, impact on the customer,
participant satisfaction. Fig. 1 shows the relationship among direct and business success, and preparing for the future. While
goals, performance measures, and project success. Shenhar et al. perceive that project success criteria change with
While success is measured in terms of goal attainment, there is time, Atkinson 共1999兲 proposes a new way to consider success
ambiguity in determining whether a project is a success or failure. criteria that are assessed in both the delivery and post-delivery

Fig. 2. Criteria for project success

JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY 2002 / 121

J. Manage. Eng., 2002, 18(3): 120-128

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 11/07/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

122 / JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY 2002

Table 1. Summary of Project Success Criteria over Last Decade 共1990–2000兲

Objective measures Subjective measures

Satisfaction Expectation/
of client/ aspiration
customer, of client,
Project contractor, contractor, Dispute Absence
Budget/ Meeting obectives/ project project resolution of Educational, Environ-
Time financial Health technical goal manager/ manager/ satisfaction/ conflicts/ social, and mental
and performance/ and performance attainment Productivity/ team team conflict legal Professional professional sustain-
Previous studies cost profitability safety Quality specifications 共technical兲 Completion Functionality efficiency satisfaction satisfaction management claims image Aesthetics aspects ability

Maloney 共1990兲 冑 冑 冑
Norris 共1990兲 冑
Freeman
and Beale 共1992兲 冑 冑 冑 冑 冑 冑
Riggs et al. 共1992兲 冑 冑 冑
Tayler 共1992兲 冑 冑 冑 冑 冑
Parfitt and
Sanvido 共1993兲 冑 冑 冑 冑 冑 冑 冑 冑 冑 冑 冑
Albanese 共1994兲 冑
Bushait and
Almohawis 共1994兲 冑 冑 冑
Naoum 共1994兲 冑 冑 冑
Kumaraswamy
and Thorpe 共1995兲 冑 冑 冑 冑 冑 冑
Larson 共1995兲 冑 冑
Chan 共1996兲 冑 冑 冑 冑
Shenhar et al. 共1997兲 冑 冑 冑
Liu and Walker 共1998兲 冑 冑 冑 冑
Al-Meshekeh
and Langford 共1999兲 冑 冑
Chua et al. 共1999兲 冑 冑
Atkinson 共1999兲 冑 冑
Lim and Mohamed 共1999兲 冑 冑 冑 冑 冑
Brown and Adams 共2000兲 冑 冑
Cheung et al. 共2000兲 冑 冑 冑
Note: Previous studies are ranked in the increasing order of year of publication followed by the alphabetical order of the writers.

J. Manage. Eng., 2002, 18(3): 120-128

 Table 2. Cited Papers of Design/Build 共D/B兲 Project Success 共1990–2000兲
Year Author共s兲 Title Review on project success
1994 Ndekugri, I., and Turner, A. Building procurement by design/build approach Establish criteria for D/B project success
1996 Songer, A. D., and Molenaar, K. R. Selection factors and success criteria for design/ Define success criteria for D/B projects
build in the U.S. and U. K.
1997 Songer, A. D., and Molenaar, D. K. Project characteristics for successful public-sector Address public sector criteria of success
design/build for D/B projects
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 11/07/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

2000 Chan, A. P. C. Evaluation of enhanced design and build system— Assess project success criteria of hospital
a case study of a hospital project project

stages. Lim and Mohamed 共1999兲 further classify project success Assessing Success of a DesignÕBuild Project
into two categories: the macro and micro viewpoints. While the
micro view deals with project achievements, the macro view con- Design/build 共D/B兲 has been defined as the purchase of a building
siders the psychological effects of the project on project partici- or civil engineering work from a single contractor who is respon-
pants. The scale of project success measures indeed extends far sible for both design and construction 共Akintoye and Fitzgerald
away from the project, and to other projects as well. 1995兲. In fact, D/B has become a popular mode of procuring
The criteria for a construction project in general can be clas- construction work, especially in the public sector 共Songer and
sified under two main categories, one being hard, objective, tan- Molenaar 1997兲. A review of literature 共Table 2兲 in the last decade
gible, and measurable, and the other soft, subjective, intangible, indicates that researchers are gradually showing concern about
and less measurable. As for the former, the criteria of time, cost, the topic of success criteria for design/build projects.
and quality were widely recognized, but others, such as profitabil- It is observed that previous studies use D/B project success
ity, technical performance, completion, functionality, health and criteria to explain the reasons for selecting the design/build pro-
safety, productivity, and environmental sustainability, are also im- curement method. Ndekugri and Turner 共1994兲 stated that if the
portant aspects for evaluation. As for the latter, attainments of client’s criteria are met, then the performance of the design/build
such goals as satisfaction, absence of conflicts, professional project can be considered a success. Results from Songer and
image, aesthetics, and educational, social, and professional as- Molenaar 共1996兲 indicate that the primary success criteria for
pects are considered indications of project success. The integra- design/build projects are on budget and on schedule and conforms
tion of criteria for project success by previous researchers can be to the user’s expectations, which are all consistent with the suc-
pictorially represented as Fig. 2 and summarized in Table 1. cess criteria for a construction project in general. Moreover, Chan
Adopting a new procurement approach implies a change in the 共2000兲 judged the performance of an enhanced design/build
status quo. While previous research discussed the success criteria project based on the criteria of time, cost, quality, and functional
for a construction project in general, more emphasis should be and safety requirements. Table 3 summarizes the criteria for the
placed on the success criteria for a particular procurement method project success of a design/build project.
that is not traditional in order to break with the old way of doing Although the main reason for using the design/build procure-
things. Design/and/build procurement has been used extensively ment method is that it is of shorter duration than other procure-
both in Hong Kong and worldwide 共Kwong 1996兲. Such a non- ment methods, one of the few studies by Songer and Molenaar
traditional procurement method is likely to lead to better con- 共1996兲 concluded that the criteria for judging the success of D/B
struction performance than traditional ones 共Walker 1996兲, and its projects are the same as those for construction projects in generic
success criteria should be evaluated for better project perfor- sense. While the success criteria may be similar, the writers be-
mance. lieve that the list of criteria should not be so restricted, and there-

Table 3. Success Criteria of Design/Build Projects

Previous studies
Ndekugri and Songer and Molenaar
Types D/B project success criteria Chan 共2000兲 Turner 共1994兲 共1996, 1997兲
Objective Time, cost, quality 冑 冑 冑
Safety 冑
Subjective Meeting specifications/employer’s requirements 冑
Conformance to expectation of project team members 冑
Satisfaction of project team members 冑 冑
Functionality 冑
Aesthetics 冑
Reduction in dispute 冑 冑
JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY 2002 / 123

J. Manage. Eng., 2002, 18(3): 120-128

 subjective 共Chan 1996兲. While the new framework itself takes all
success criteria into consideration, different perspectives may
have different success priority.
Objective Measures
These are also described as hard, and tangible and include time,
cost, health and safety, and profitability.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 11/07/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Time
Time is defined as the degree to which the general conditions
promote the completion of a project within the allocated duration
共Bubshait and Almohawis 1994兲. It can be measured by time
overrun 共Naoum 1994兲, construction time 共Chan 1996兲, and speed
of construction 共Al-Meshekeh and Langford 1999兲. Table 4 illus-
trates the definitions of each measurement of time.
Songer and Molenaar 共1997兲 consider ‘‘on schedule’’ one suc-
cess criterion for design/build projects. It is consistent with the
measurement of time overrun.

Cost
Cost is defined as the degree to which the general conditions
promote the completion of a project within the estimated budget
共Bubashait and Almohawis 1994兲. It can be measured by cost
overrun 共Naoum 1994兲 and unit cost 共Chan 1996兲, as Table 5
shows.
Fig. 3. Assessment framework for project success of design/build Songer and Molenaar 共1997兲 consider ‘‘on budget’’ as one suc-
projects cess criterion for design/build projects. It is consistent with the
measurement of cost overrun.
Time and cost are measured in the pre-construction and con-
fore a more comprehensive list incorporating those success crite- struction stages because for design/build projects, price and time
ria in general will form the assessment framework for this certainty are essential to success, which should be evaluated early
research. Fig. 3 shows the proposed framework for assessing D/B at the pretendering phase. They should also be closely monitored
projects. during construction to avoid subsequent delays.
This framework adopts the view of Schenhar et al. 共1997兲 that The criteria of time and cost are always viewed from three
project success criteria change with time. While Atkinson 共1999兲 perspectives—those of the owner, designer, and contractor—as
considers project success criteria in the delivery and postdelivery important considerations where certainty of project delivery time
stages, this framework analyzes project success from the three and project cost are the most desirable success outcomes of the
conceptual phases of a construction project, namely the precon- design/build project delivery system 共Chan et al. 2000兲. In fact,
struction, the construction, and the postconstruction phases, and the client perceives the criterion of time as providing better value
the words in brackets dictate the sequence of project success for money by the D/B project delivery method 共Ndekugri and
evaluation with reference to the construction of the project. More- Turner 1994兲. However, if the D/B project is a lump-sum con-
over, the list of success criteria for design/build projects in previ- tract, these criteria may not be concerns of the owner because
ous studies is incorporated and categorized as objective and sub- they have already been determined in advance 共Chan 2000兲. Re-
jective measures. sults from the Construction Industry Institute 共1997兲 indicated
that D/B can be used without the cost and schedule growth of the
construction management and the traditional design/bid/build de-
Criteria for Measuring Performance of DesignÕBuild livery systems, and so the owner may be interested to know the
Project factors that make the D/B project successful 共Construction Indus-
try Institute 共1997兲. If the owner is a public-sector client, the D/B
Measures to reflect the objectives determined by the project team project can be accountable to the general public in terms of time
members are always needed and can be classified as objective or and cost.

Table 4. Types of Time Measurement

Year Author共s兲 Measurement Definition
1994 Naoum Time overrun Increase or decrease in percentage in estimated program 共in
days/weeks兲
1996 Chan Construction time Number of days from start on site to practical completion of
project
1999 Al-Meshekeh and Langford Speed of construction Gross floor area 共in square meters兲 divided by the construction
time 共in days兲

124 / JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY 2002

J. Manage. Eng., 2002, 18(3): 120-128

 Table 5. Types of Cost Measurement
Year Author共s兲 Measurement Definition
1994 Naoum Cost overrun Increase or decrease in budget 共in dollars兲
1996 Chan Unit cost Cost of building 共in dollars兲 divided by gross floor area 共in square meters兲

Health and Safety subjective measures involve different perceptions by participants,

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 11/07/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Health and safety are defined as the degree to which the general a Likert scale is normally adopted to show the level of signifi-
conditions promote the completion of a project without major cance.
accidents of injuries 共Bubshait and Almohawis 1994兲. In fact,
accidents are caused by a combination of unsafe acts and unsafe Quality
conditions, and the measure of safety can be represented by the Quality is defined as the degree to which the general conditions
following injury/accident rate per 1,000 workers 共Labor Depart- promote meeting of the project’s established requirements of ma-
ment 2000兲: injury/accident rate per 1,000 workers⫽number of terials and workmanship 共Bubshait and Almohawis 1994兲. It is
injuries or accidents/employment size⫻1,000. also expressed in terms of technical specification, function, and
Chan 共2000兲 also considers ‘‘safety’’ as one success criterion appearance and is defined as the totality of features required by a
for design/build projects. In fact, measurement of this criterion product or service to satisfy a given need 共Hatush and Skitmore
takes effect in the construction phase when work packages are 1997兲. Table 6 shows some of the measures of quality used by
actually taking place and the result can be representative. It is previous researchers.
considered particularly important for the D/B contractor who is While Chan 共2000兲 considers ‘‘quality’’ as one success crite-
responsible for the overall construction processes where accidents rion for design/build projects, Songer and Molenaar 共1997兲 con-
are likely to take place. Therefore, the contractor would be re- sider ‘‘high quality of workmanship’’ as one success measure, that
strained from starting construction operations until a health and is consistent with overall quality measurement. Molenaar et al.
safety plan has been developed to the client’s satisfaction 共Mosey 共1999兲 consider three criteria for measuring quality in design/
1998兲. build projects: conformity with expectations, administrative bur-
den, and overall owner satisfaction, which are essentially the
Profitability composite measures of quality for a construction project in gen-
Profitability measures the financial success of the project. Nowa- eral.
days, competition is increasing and firms are aware that the Quality is to be assessed in both the preconstruction and con-
project must be properly managed to be profitable 共Parfitt and struction phases as it forms the ‘‘iron triangle’’ with time and cost
Sanvido 1993兲. Norris 共1990兲 measured profit as the increment by that is fundamental to the overall success of the project.
which revenues exceed costs; that is, profitability is measured as
the total net revenue 共in dollars兲 over total costs 共in dollars兲. Technical Performance
Profitability is measured in the postconstruction phase when In design/build projects, a clear brief is the most important pre-
the final account is settled and both the paying and the paid par- requisite for success 共Ndekugri and Turner 1994兲, and the project
ties can be sure of the financial result. It is one other important scope should be clearly defined 共Molenaar and Songer 1998兲 so
criterion, especially for the D/B contractor and the design team, that success can be achieved. Indeed, clear specifications and a
whose primary objective to tender for a project is to make money. consistent understanding of the intent of the specifications by all
In case the payment method of the D/B project is based on the parties leads to a project of higher quality.
efforts of the construction team in the form of a fee, the contractor Songer and Molenaar 共1997兲 consider ‘‘meeting specifica-
may rank this criterion highest 共Rowings et al. 2000兲. Profitability tions’’ as one success criterion for design/build projects that is
is also important to a private-sector client as the D/B project consistent with the measurement of technical performance. Tech-
delivery system enables a faster completion rate than a traditional nical performance is to be measured in both the preconstruction
project. Therefore, the sooner the project is ready to rent, the and construction phases when the technical requirements are laid
faster the rate of return. The public sector clients are, neverthe- down, and in the case of variation works, a clear instruction is
less, less sensitive to this criterion so long as the D/B project is required for work implementation.
completed within budget 共Chan et al. 2000兲.
Functionality
This criterion correlates with expectations of project participant
Subjective Measures
and can best be measured by the degree of conformance to all
These are also termed as soft, intangible, and less measurable technical performance specifications. Both financial and technical
measures, and quality, technical performance, satisfaction, pro- aspects implemented to technical specifications should be consid-
ductivity, and environmental sustainability are to be assessed. As ered, achieving the ‘‘fitness for purpose’’ objective.

Table 6. Measures of Quality

Year Author共s兲 Measurement
1990 Saarinen and Hobel Integration of three elements: defects, on-time delivery, and budget compliance—budget
and schedule included in designing requirements for quality performance
1992 Sanvido et al. Degree of conformance to predetermined standard of performance
1996 Stevens Performance of cost, schedule and safety

JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY 2002 / 125

J. Manage. Eng., 2002, 18(3): 120-128

 While Songer and Molenaar 共1997兲 consider ‘‘conformance to environment in terms of sound and air may exert a subjective
expectation of project team members’’ as one success criterion for image upon participants who will make ‘‘good,’’ ‘‘acceptable,’’ or
design/build projects, Chan 共2000兲 considers ‘‘functionality’’ as ‘‘unacceptable’’ comments that should be measured by a rating
one success measure that is made in the postconstruction phase scale.
when the project is finished and delivered to service. Environmental sustainability is measured in the postconstruc-
Quality, technical performance, and functionality are closely tion stage since it takes time for effects to take place and is rather
related and are considered important to the owner, designer, and long-lasting. The owner, the design team, and the contractor
contractor to justify the objectives of a D/B project. The quality should be able to measure the effects on the surrounding environ-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 11/07/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

issue is of particular interest to both the designer and the owner ment that justify the appointment of an independent environmen-
since the contractor takes up the task whose expertise in terms of tal consultant to prepare precontract designs and tender documen-
design and workmanship is critical to the success of the D/B tation to monitor the works on site 共Mosey 1998兲.
project 共Chan et al. 2000兲. As the design team no longer has the In fact, sound criteria are necessary to lead to an effective
clear authority to supervise the quality aspect of the project, the assessment model that enables the contained knowledge to be
owner may be uncertain whether the contractor team can achieve organized to evaluate the success of design/build projects. Such a
the required standard 共Lam 2000兲. study is significant to the construction industry.

Productivity
Productivity is universally accepted as one success criterion as it Importance of Study to Construction Industry
is the main key to the cost-effectiveness of projects 共Taylor 1992兲.
It refers to the amount of resource input to complete a given task Measurement is an essential step in any control process 共Chang
and it is usually assessed on a ranked basis 共Chan 1996兲. and Ibbs 1998兲. Indeed, ‘‘What gets measured gets done’’ 共Led-
Productivity is considered in the construction phase when better 1994兲, and the design/build learning curve will be enhanced
most work activities on site proceed, giving an indication of suc- by the right project.
cess. It is another measure, especially for the contractor, to orga-
nize the available resources efficiently in order to meet the cost
and time targets of the D/B project. Global Trend
There is ample evidence that an increasing number of clients are
Satisfaction adopting the design/build procurement method 共Songer and Mo-
Satisfaction describes the level of ‘‘happiness’’ of people affected lenaar 1997兲. Since 1986, the Architectural Services Department
by a project. Such people include key project participants, namely of Hong Kong has taken the lead to promote the use of D/B
the client, architect, contractor, various subcontractors, surveyors projects 共Kwong 1996兲. Moreover, the U.S. Department of Com-
and engineers, end-users, and third parties. merce predicts that design/build will account for half of all non-
Liu and Walker 共1998兲 consider satisfaction an attribute of residential construction in the United States by 2001 共Songer and
success. Moreover, Torbica and Stroh 共2001兲 believe that if end- Molenaar 1996兲. With the merits that the D/B procurement
users are satisfied, the project can be considered successfully method brings about, research in success criteria can surely boost
completed in the long run. With the project participants and even its use in a wider manner.
outsiders, criteria such as completion, aesthetics, professional
range, and educational and social aspects may be considered to
evaluate project success. Therefore, this criterion should be as- Importance to Construction Industry
sessed from the preconstruction phase, through construction, to Getting success in design/build projects enables an assurance of
the postconstruction phase. getting the projects completed at the right time and within budget.
Satisfaction of project team members 共Songer and Molenaar Practitioners can be told what design/build projects require in
1996; 1997兲, aesthetics 共Ndekugri and Turner 1994兲, and reduc- terms of project team members and project needs and act accord-
tion in disputes 共Ndekugri and Turner 1994; Songer and Molenaar ingly as much as possible in order to keep close track of success.
1996, 1997兲 are all considered success criteria for design/build Such a study can provide professionals in the industry with a
projects. sound and valid literature basis toward the success of design/build
Satisfaction should be established from the three perspectives projects. As clients have been demanding ‘‘better value for
to consider the design/build project successful. While it is essen- money,’’ studies by Walker 共1996兲 show clearly that the design/
tial for the designer to develop a meaningful collaboration with build procurement system has better time performance and cost
the contractor to meet the owner’s requirements to achieve owner benefits, which are essentially what the end-users are concerned
satisfaction, they themselves need to be satisfied to maintain the about. This research can also be a key to assessing the perfor-
cohesiveness and teamwork for the project 共Akintoye 1994兲. The mance level of design/build projects, and the project participants
end-users can also be satisfied if the principle of customer focus is can learn about the important factors for setting up an effective
applied 共Testi et al. 1996兲. management system to run design/build projects with excellent
performance.
Environmental Sustainability
Impacts of a construction project on the environment are notori-
Interests from Academic Field
ously negative. One common example is the generation of con-
struction waste, which can be measured by the difference between The investigation of project success has attracted the interest of
the amount of the total delivery of materials to the site and the many researchers and practitioners 共Chua et al. 1999兲. Research
amount of work completed 共Skoyles 1987兲. Therefore, the mea- on the success criteria for design/build projects not only benefits
sure of impacts of a construction project on the environment is the general public as a whole, but also the construction industry
objective. However, measuring the effects of a project on the and the educational field, enabling an exchange of culture and

126 / JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY 2002

J. Manage. Eng., 2002, 18(3): 120-128

 practice in a worldwide manner. By establishing the assessment Bubshait, A. A., and Almohawis, S. A. 共1994兲. ‘‘Evaluating the general
framework of the criteria for project success, critical success fac- conditions of a construction contract.’’ Int. J. Proj. Manage., 12共3兲,
tors can be determined and their casual relationship can be for- 133–135.
mulated. Research also paves the way for further investigation of Chan, A. P. C. 共1996兲. ‘‘Determinants of project success in the construc-
tion industry of Hong Kong.’’ PhD thesis, Univ. of South Australia.
unique success criteria for design/build projects. Moreover, aca-
Chan, A. P. C. 共2000兲. ‘‘Evaluation of enhanced design and build
demic programs regarding construction management can be en-
system—A case study of a hospital project.’’ Constr. Manage.
riched, and students can be trained in the skills for managing Econom., 18共8兲, 863– 871.
design/build projects in an efficient and effective way. Chan, A. P. C., Tam, C. M., and Ho, D. C. K. 共2000兲. ‘‘Research
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 11/07/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Construction project success is repeatable 共Jaselskis 1991兲. If monograph—Evaluation of integrated procurement systems in Hong
the criteria are well managed, the level of success will be higher, Kong.’’ Dept. of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytech-
and an assessment framework integrating different perceptions of nic Univ., Hong Kong.
project success is required for measuring the performance of Chang, A. S., and Ibbs, C. W. 共1998兲. ‘‘Development of consultant per-
design/build projects. formance measures for design projects.’’ Proj. Manage. J., 29共2兲, 39–
54.
Chau, K. W. 共1997兲. ‘‘The ranking of construction management jour-
nals.’’ Constr. Manage. Econom., 15共4兲, 387–398.
Conclusion
Cheung, S. O., Tam, C. M., Ndekugri, I., and Harris, F. C. 共2000兲. ‘‘Fac-
tors affecting client’s project dispute resolution satisfaction in Hong
The topic of project success has been discussed for a long period
Kong.’’ Constr. Manage. Econom., 18共3兲, 281–294.
of time, but an agreement can hardly be reached. A comprehen- Chua, D. K. H., Kog, Y. C., and Loh, P. K. 共1999兲. ‘‘Critical success
sive literature review indicates that the criteria for project success factors for different project objectives.’’ J. Constr. Eng. Manage.,
can be divided into objective and subjective categories, with time, 125共3兲, 142–150.
cost, quality, and satisfaction the most significant measures. Construction Industry Institute. 共1997兲. ‘‘Project delivery systems: CM at
While most discussion considers the project success for a con- risk, design-build, design-bid-build.’’ Design-Build Research Team,
struction project in general, little emphasis is placed on a particu- Austin, Tex.
lar organization structure. Freeman, M., and Beale, P. 共1992兲. ‘‘Measuring project success.’’ Proj.
The use of the design/build procurement system is on the in- Manage. J., 23共1兲, 8 –17.
crease as its benefits are gradually being understood by practitio- Hatush, Z., and Skitmore, M. 共1997兲. ‘‘Criteria for contractor selection.’’
ners. A new assessment framework incorporating the success cri- Constr. Manage. Econom., 15共1兲, 19–38.
Jaselskis, E. J. 共1991兲. ‘‘Optimal allocation of project management re-
teria of a construction project in general is necessary for
sources for achieving success.’’ J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 117共2兲,
evaluating the project success of design/build projects. Such a
321–340.
framework is presented in this study, with a design/build project Kumaraswamy, M. M., and Thorpe, A. 共1996兲. ‘‘Systematizing construc-
evaluated in the preconstruction, construction, and postconstruc- tion project evaluations.’’ J. Manage. Eng., 12共1兲, 34 –39.
tion phases. Different sets of criteria are considered in different Kwong, H. S. 共1996兲. ‘‘The strategic role of design and build in the
phases. Moreover, design/build project success measurement may procurement process.’’ Keynote Address, Design and Build Sympo-
not just be confined to the project itself, but to the project partici- sium, 30, Hong Kong, 1– 4.
pants, end-users, and even outsiders as well. This framework en- Labour Department. 共2000兲. ‘‘Accident statistics bulletin.’’ Issue No. 3,
hances past studies on project success and sets a benchmark for Oct., Occupational Safety and Health Branch, Labour Department,
later researchers, especially in further investigating the unique The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
criteria and critical success factors for design/build projects. It Lam, W. H. 共2000兲. ‘‘Achieving best value in construction procurement:
enriches the knowledge of both the scholars and professionals in An architect’s perspective.’’ Hong Kong Inst. Archit. J., 26共4兲, 34 –38.
Larson, E. 共1995兲. ‘‘Project partnering: Results of study of 280 construc-
the industry about the success criteria for design/build projects in
tion projects.’’ J. Manage. Eng., 11共2兲, 30–35.
pursuit of better management and project performance. Ledbetter, W. B. 共1994兲. ‘‘Quality performance on successful project.’’ J.
Constr. Eng. Manage., 120共1兲, 34 – 46.
Lim, C. S., and Mohamed, M. Z. 共1999兲. ‘‘Criteria of project success: An
Acknowledgment exploratory re-examination.’’ Int. J. Proj. Manage., 17共4兲, 243–248.
Liu, A. M. M., and Walker, A. 共1998兲. ‘‘Evaluation of project outcomes.’’
The writers gratefully acknowledge the Hong Kong Polytechnic Constr. Manage. Econom., 16共2兲, 209–219.
University for providing funding to support this research effort. Maloney, W. F. 共1990兲. ‘‘Framework for analysis of performance.’’ J.
Constr. Eng. Manage., 116共3兲, 399– 415.
Akintoye, A. 共1994兲. ‘‘Design and build: A survey of construction con- Molenaar, K. R., and Songer, A. D. 共1998兲. ‘‘Model for public sector
tractors’ views.’’ Constr. Manage. Econom., 12共2兲, 155–163. design-build project selection.’’ J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 124共6兲,
Akintoye, A., and Fitzgerald, E. 共1995兲. ‘‘Design and build: A survey of 467– 479.
architects’ views.’’ Eng., Constr. Archit. Manage., 2共1兲, 27– 44. Molenaar, K. R., Songer, A. D., and Barash, M. 共1999兲. ‘‘Public-sector
Albanese, R. 共1994兲. ‘‘Team-building process: Key to better project re- design/build evolution and performance.’’ J. Manage. Eng., 15共2兲,
sults.’’ J. Manage. Eng., 10共6兲, 36 – 44. 54 – 62.
Al-Meshekeh, H. S., and Langford, D. A. 共1999兲. ‘‘Conflict management Mosey, D. 共1998兲. Design and build in action, Chandos Publishing, Lim-
and construction project effectiveness: A review of the literature and ited, Oxford, U. K.
development of a theoretical framework.’’ J. Constr. Procure., 5共1兲, Naoum, S. G. 共1994兲. ‘‘Critical analysis of time and cost of management
58 –75. and traditional contracts.’’ J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 120共4兲, 687–705.
Atkinson, R. 共1999兲. ‘‘Project management: Cost, time, and quality, two Ndekugri, I., and Turner, A. 共1994兲. ‘‘Building procurement by design
best guesses and a phenomenon, it’s time to accept other success and build approach.’’ J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 120共2兲, 243–256.
criteria.’’ Int. J. Proj. Manage., 17共6兲, 337–342. Newcombe, R. 共2000兲. ‘‘The anatomy of two projects: A comparative
Brown, A., and Adams, J. 共2000兲. ‘‘Measuring the effect of project man- analysis approach.’’ Int. J. Proj. Manage., 18共3兲, 189–199.
agement on construction outputs: a new approach.’’ Int. J. Proj. Man- Norris, W. E. 共1990兲. ‘‘Margin of profit: Teamwork.’’ J. Manage. Eng.,
age., 18共5兲, 327–335. 6共1兲, 20–28.

JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY 2002 / 127

J. Manage. Eng., 2002, 18(3): 120-128

 Parfitt, M. K., and Sanvido, V. E. 共1993兲. ‘‘Checklist of critical success cess criteria for design-build in the US and UK.’’ J. Constr. Procure.,
factors for building projects.’’ J. Manage. Eng., 9共3兲, 243–249. 2共2兲, 69– 82.
Riggs, J. L., Goodman, M., Finley, R., and Miller, T. 共1992兲. ‘‘A decision Songer, A. D., and Molenaar, K. R. 共1997兲. ‘‘Project characteristics for
support system for predicting project success.’’ Proj. Manage. J., successful public-sector design-build.’’ J. Constr. Eng. Manage.,
22共3兲, 37– 43. 123共1兲, 34 – 40.
Rowings, J. E., Jr., Federle, M. O., and Rusk, J. 共2000兲. ‘‘Design/build Stevens, J. D. 共1996兲. ‘‘Blueprint for measuring project quality.’’ J. Man-
methods for electrical contracting industry.’’ J. Constr. Eng. Manage., age. Eng., 12共2兲, 34 –39.
126共1兲, 15–21. Tayler, C. J. 共1992兲. ‘‘Ethyl Benzene project: the client’s perspective.’’
Saarinen, A. W., Jr., and Hobel, M. A. 共1990兲. ‘‘Setting and meeting
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 11/07/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Int. J. Proj. Manage., 10共3兲, 175–178.

requirements for quality.’’ J. Manage. Eng., 6共2兲, 177–185. Testi, J., Sidwell, A. C., and Lenard, D. J. 共1996兲. ‘‘Benchmarking engi-
Sanvido, V., Grobler, F., Parfitt, K., Guvenis, M., and Coyle, M. 共1992兲. neering and construction—Winning teams.’’ Research Rep. 5, 2nd
‘‘Critical success factors for construction projects.’’ J. Constr. Eng. Ed., Construction Industry Institute, Australia.
Manage., 118共1兲, 94 –111. Torbica, Z. M., and Stroh, R. C. 共2001兲. ‘‘Customer satisfaction in home
Shenhar, A. J., Levy, O., and Dvir, D. 共1997兲. ‘‘Mapping the dimensions building.’’ J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 127共1兲, 82– 86.
of project success.’’ Proj. Manage. J., 28共2兲, 5–13. Walker, D. H. T. 共1996兲. ‘‘The contribution of the construction manage-
Skoyles, E. R. 共1987兲. ‘‘Waste prevention on site,’’ Mitchell, London. ment team to good construction time performance—An Australian
Songer, A. D., and Molenaar, K. R. 共1996兲. ‘‘Selection factors and suc- experience.’’ J. Constr. Procure., 2共2兲, 4 –18.

128 / JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY 2002

J. Manage. Eng., 2002, 18(3): 120-128