Click for next page ( 76

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 75
CHAPTER 5 Tier 2--Weighted-Matrix Delivery Decision Approach Introduction The Tier 2--Weighted-Matrix Delivery Decision Approach provides a means for airports to further examine project delivery methods for an individual project when an obvious choice was not found in the Tier 1 approach. The Tier 2 approach involves prioritizing project objec- tives and selecting the delivery method that best aligns with these objectives. The Tier 2 approach is founded upon successful delivery decision tools developed by academics and professionals over the past 20 years (Construction Industry Institute 2003, Loulakis 2000, Skitmore and Marsden 1988). Airports should complete a Tier 1 approach before conducting a Tier 2 approach. The Tier 1 approach provides airports with two key pieces of information. First, the Tier 1 approach requires airports to define their project goals in terms of cost, schedule, quality, maintainability, sustain- ability, and other options. These project goals are critical to the Tier 2 approach. Second, the Tier 1 approach provides a shortlist of available project delivery options. Only those project deliv- ery methods that are feasible and have the best potential for successful application will pass through the Tier 1 filtering process. The filtering process involves examination of go/no-go issues and consideration of 19 pertinent issues involved in the project delivery decision. Knowledge of these pertinent issues is helpful in the Tier 2 approach. Forms for the Tier 2 approach are provided in Appendix E, which is available on the TRB web- site. To find Appendix E, go to and search for "ACRP Report 21". The Tier 2 approach has three primary objectives: Present a structured framework to assist airports in prioritizing their unique project goals and delivery selection issues, Assist airports in aligning their unique goals and issues with the most appropriate project delivery method, and Further document the project delivery decision in the Project Delivery Decision Report estab- lished in Tier 1. The Tier 2 approach provides a framework for airports to use in prioritizing their project goals and selecting a project delivery method that best aligns with these goals. Priorities for project goals and critical selection issues are unique to each project. Likewise, project delivery methods vary in their ability to achieve these goals and their suitability with regard to various issues. The Tier 2 approach will align these two facets of the delivery decision. The Tier 2 approach is composed of five distinct steps listed below and shown in Figure 5-1. Step 1. Define Selection Factors Step 2. Weight Selection Factors 75

OCR for page 75
76 A Guidebook for Selecting Airport Capital Project Delivery Methods Step 1. Define Selection Factors Step 2. Weight Selection Factors Time: _______________ Step 3. Score Project Delivery Methods Cost: _______________ Quality: _______________ Step 4. Choose Most Appropriate Step 5. Document ...: _______________ Project Delivery Method Results ...: _______________ ... Project Delivery Method DB PROJECT DELIVERY Specify DECISION REPORT DBB CMR Procurement (______________)* Tier 1 Selection Factor Weighted Weighted Weighted Project Description Score Score Score Factor Weight Score Score Score Project Goals Factor 1 Delivery Methods (e.g., Project Considered Goals) Advantages and Factor 2 Disadvantages (e.g., Airport experience) Delivery Method Decision Factor 3 (e.g., Market Tier 2 issues) Weighted-Matrix Factors 4 to 7 Decision Chart ... Total Score *Refer to the section titled "Definition of Delivery Methods" in Chapter 2 for procurement options. The DB procurement options considered in Tier 2 are primarily Best-Value Procurement with Fixed Price and DB Qualifications-Based Procurement with Negotiated Price. DB Low Bid is an option, but it is not recommended in this guidebook for the majority of DB projects. Figure 5-1. Tier 2 approach overview. Step 3. Score Project Delivery Methods Step 4. Choose Most Appropriate Project Delivery Method Step 5. Document Results Step 1 of the Tier 2 process begins by defining a concise set of selection factors. These selec- tion factors consist of the project goals and any of the pertinent issues examined in the Tier 1 approach that were deemed critical (see Chapter 4 for the Tier 1 approach). The Tier 1 approach asks airports to establish their project goals at the beginning of the process. The first step in Tier 2 is for airports to develop a concise set of selection factors by combining their project goals with the most relevant of the 19 pertinent issues examined in Tier 1. These selection factors will be used throughout the Tier 2 approach. In Step 2, airports rank and then weight selection factors. Some selection factors may overlap with others, in which case they can be combined. Other selection factors may stand alone for analy- sis. Completion of Step 2 results in a list of up to seven selection factors for further analysis. Step 3 of the Tier 2 approach requires airports to score each delivery method in terms of the selection factors. A further examination of the advantages and disadvantages for each delivery method will form the basis for these scores. Since the scores will be subjective, airports will need to be diligent in documenting the rationale for the scores. Step 4 involves a determination of the most appropriate delivery method through the com- pletion of the weighted-decision matrix. Airports will make the determination by multiplying the selection factor weights by the project delivery scores and then summing the values for each delivery method. The highest score will indicate the best choice. However, since the scores will be subjective, airports are encouraged to review the totals to determine whether the values are logical and defensible. The objective of Step 5 is to supplement the Project Delivery Decision Report developed in Tier 1. The Tier 1 report will provide a project description, project goals, delivery methods con- sidered, advantages and disadvantages, delivery method decision, and any relevant appendices. The Tier 2 documentation will add the weighted-decision matrix to the Tier 1 documentation to sup-