Month: October 2025

When you see a Building Information Model (BIM), it’s easy to think of it as just a fancy 3D picture of a building. But the real power isn’t in the picture; it’s in the information.

A foundational concept of BIM is that it is not the 3D model.

The 3D model you see is just one visual report that the computer generates by reading a smart database. This database is the single source of truth. The 3D view, 2D floor plans, sections, and cost schedules are all just different interpretations of that same central data.

In this database, the computer doesn’t just see shapes—it understands what a Wall (like #30), a Window (like #70), and a Storey (like #15) actually are.

But how does this work? Let’s look “under the hood” using the open data standard called IFC (Industry Foundation Classes).

1. Every Object Has a “Digital ID Tag” (The GUID)

Every single object in an IFC file—from the IfcProject (#10) down to the smallest IfcWall (#30)—is assigned a Globally Unique ID (GUID). Think of it as a permanent “digital ID number” for that specific wall.

You can see it in the code snippet: #30= IFCWALL('3FV9p1T4X3fBqgE$sU7soV',...);

Why is this so important? Even if you change the wall’s length, material, or location in a new version of the file, its GlobalId ('3FV9p1T4X3fBqgE$sU7soV') must stay the same. This is how change-detection software knows it’s the same wall that was modified, not a new wall that was added.

This permanent ID is what makes traceability possible. It’s the unique “name” that the “digital footprint” (the OwnerHistory, which we’ll see next) is attached to.

2. Every Object Has a “Spatial Address”

You can’t just have a wall floating in digital space. Every physical element in an IFC model must “live” somewhere. The model uses a clear hierarchy, like a set of nesting dolls or folders on your computer, to give every object an “address.”

This relationship is managed by an object called IfcRelContainedInSpatialStructure (like #100).

The typical hierarchy looks like this:

• IfcProject (#10) (The entire project)
  • IfcSite (#11) (The physical site/land)
    • IfcBuilding (#13) (The building itself)
      • IfcBuildingStorey (#15) (e.g., “Ground Floor”)
        • IfcWall (#30), IfcWindow (#70), IfcSlab (The actual elements)

Because of this, the computer knows that the IfcWall (#30) isn’t just “a wall”—it’s the wall with Tag-W01 on the “Ground Floor” (#15) in the “Main Building” (#13) on the “Main Site” (#11).

3. Every Object Has a “Digital Footprint”

Nearly every object in an IFC file also has an OwnerHistory. This is the model’s “audit trail” or “digital footprint.” This is what the GlobalId makes traceable. It’s a small log book (like #5) attached to every element that tracks key information.

This IfcOwnerHistory object (#5) answers the crucial questions:

• IfcWall (#30) (The Object)
  • OwnerHistory (The “Log Book” Attribute, pointing to #5)
    • Who: The user and organization (defined in #2 and #3).
    • What: The software used (defined in #4).
    • When: The timestamp of when it was created or modified.
    • How: The action taken (e.g., “ADDED”, “MODIFIED”).

4. How Objects Connect: The Wall & Window Example

This is the most clever part. In the real world, a window is in a wall. But in an IFC file, they are three separate, independent objects:

1. IfcWall (#30)
2. IfcOpeningElement (#50): The “hole” or “void” in the wall.
3. IfcWindow (#70): The window frame, glass, and hardware.

They are then connected by specific “relationship” objects.

This hierarchy shows the logic:

• IfcWall (#30) (The “Host” Element)
  • is linked by IfcRelVoidsElement (#101) (Relationship: “Has a Hole”)
    • to the IfcOpeningElement (#50) (The “Void” Object)
      • which is linked by IfcRelFillsElement (#102) (Relationship: “Is Filled By”)
        • to the IfcWindow (#70) (The “Filling” Element)

Because of this, a computer can understand the full story: “The Wall (#30) has an Opening (#50), and that Opening (#50) is filled by this specific Window (#70).”

But Wait… That’s Not How I Model!

This is a common point of confusion: if you use a tool like Revit or ArchiCAD, you don’t model a separate “hole.” You just click the “Window” tool and place a window into a wall.

This is the key difference between a user-friendly modeling tool and a transparent data-exchange file.

• In Revit/ArchiCAD (Native Model): You use a “Host-Hosted” relationship. The Wall is the “Host,” and the Window is its “Guest.” The window object is programmed to automatically cut its own hole for speed and convenience. It’s fast for the designer, but the relationship is hidden inside the software’s code.
• In IFC (Open Data File): When you export, the software translates this. It sees your window, reads its width and height, and automatically generates the IfcOpeningElement (#50) (the hole) for you. It then creates the two relationship objects (#101, #102) to link all three items separately.

Why? For interoperability. This is the core reason. A cost-estimating tool (for 5D) or a scheduling tool (for 4D) doesn’t understand ArchiCAD’s or Revit’s special, internal “hosting” code. That code is a proprietary “black box.”

Instead, that 5D tool needs to ask simple questions, and the IFC structure provides simple, open answers:

• 5D Tool asks: “How many windows do I need to buy?”
  • IFC answers: “I have 50 IfcWindow objects (like #70). Here is a list.”
• 5D Tool asks: “What is the structural cost for the openings?”
  • IFC answers: “I have 50 IfcOpeningElement objects (like #50). Here are their dimensions for your lintel and formwork calculations.”

By separating the objects, IFC makes the data transparent and “readable” for any software, not just the one that created it. It ensures that the simple, universal logic of “This opening is filled by this window” is preserved for everyone.

A Peek at the Code

Here is a simplified snippet of an IFC file. You can see the hierarchies in action, with comments /* ... */ explaining each part.

ISO-10303-21;
HEADER;
/* ... File header information ... */
FILE_NAME('AEColution-Project-Sample.ifc','2025-10-29T11:15:00',('Suranga Jayasena'),('AEColution'),'ArchiCAD 28','IFC-Engine 1.0','S. Jayasena');
FILE_SCHEMA(('IFC4'));
ENDSEC;

DATA;

/* PART 1: The "Owner History" (Who & What) */
/* This defines the 'who' and 'what' that will be stamped on all objects */
#1= IFCORGANIZATION('AEColution','AEColution',...);
#2= IFCPERSON('SJ','Jayasena','Suranga',...);
#3= IFCPERSONANDORGANIZATION(#2,#1,$);
#4= IFCAPPLICATION(#1,'28.0','ArchiCAD 28','ArchiCAD');
/* This "Log Book" (#5) will be stamped on our objects */
#5= IFCOWNERHISTORY(#3,#4,$,.ADDED.,1761745500,$,$,1761745500);

/* PART 2: The "Spatial Hierarchy" (Where) */
#10= IFCPROJECT('3aV$c50LP4xP$870JqGv9E',#5,'AEColution Project',...);
#11= IFCSITE('1bA$c50LP4xP$870JqGv9F',#5,'Main Site',...);
#12= IFCRELAGGREGATES('3jF$c50LP4xP$870JqGv9I',#5,$,$,#10,(#11));
#13= IFCBUILDING('2cV$c50LP4xP$870JqGv9G',#5,'Main Building',...);
#14= IFCRELAGGREGATES('2kG$c50LP4xP$870JqGv9J',#5,$,$,#11,(#13));
#15= IFCBUILDINGSTOREY('0dV$c50LP4xP$870JqGv9H',#5,'Ground Floor',...);
#16= IFCRELAGGGREGATES('1lH$c50LP4xP$870JqGv9K',#5,$,$,#13,(#15));

/* PART 3: The "Physical Elements" (What) */
/* The Wall, note its GlobalId '3FV9p1T4X3fBqgE$sU7soV' and owner history #5 */
#30= IFCWALL('3FV9p1T4X3fBqgE$sU7soV',#5,'Basic Wall',$,'W-1',...);
/* The Opening, with its own GlobalId '2eA4g1T4X3fBqgE$sU7soW' */
#50= IFCOPENINGELEMENT('2eA4g1T4X3fBqgE$sU7soW',#5,'Window Opening',...);
/* The Window, with its own GlobalId '1fB3j1T4X3fBqgE$sU7soX' */
#70= IFCWINDOW('1fB3j1T4X3fBqgE$sU7soX',#5,'Standard Window',$,'WIN-1',...);

/* PART 4: The "Relationships" (How they connect) */

/* 1. Spatial: Puts Wall (#30) and Window (#70) in Storey (#15) */
#100= IFCRELCONTAINEDINSPATIALSTRUCTURE('3gC2k1T4X3fBqgE$sU7soY',#5,$,$,(#30,#70),#15);

/* 2. Assembly (Void): Connects Wall (#30) to Opening (#50) */
#101= IFCRELVOIDSELEMENT('2hD1l1T4X3fBqgE$sU7soZ',#5,$,$,#30,#50);

/* 3. Assembly (Fill): Connects Opening (#50) to Window (#70) */
#102= IFCRELFILLSELEMENT('1iE0m1T4X3fBqgE$sU7s10',#5,$,$,#50,#70);

ENDSEC;
END-ISO-10303-21;

So, the next time you look at a BIM model, remember: you’re not just seeing a 3D object. You’re seeing a node in a rich, intelligent database, connected by a web of relationships that tell the complete story of your project.

Writing a research proposal can feel like a big challenge, especially when you are not a native English speaker. But a good proposal is not about using complicated words; it is about having a clear and logical plan.

This guide will show you a simple, 6-part structure. If you follow these steps, you will be able to write a strong and convincing research proposal.

The 8 Key Parts of Your Proposal

First, let’s look at the big picture. Your proposal will have six main sections:

1. Title Page
2. Introduction
3. Background
4. Research Problem
5. Aim and Objectives
6. Research Methodology
7. Conclusion
8. Reference List

Now, let’s look at each part in detail.

1. Title Page

The title page is a formal requirement. It must clearly present the essential administrative information:

• The Proposed Title of your project
• Your Name and contact details
• Your Supervisor’s Name
• The Institution and Department you belong to

Always check with your department for any specific formatting or information requirements for this page.

2. The Introduction

Keep your introduction short and clear. One paragraph is perfect. Your goal is to tell the reader two things:

• What is your research about?
• Why is it interesting or important?

This section should quickly get your reader interested in your topic. A good tip is to write your introduction after you have finished the other five sections. It is much easier to introduce your project when you already have all the details clear in your mind.

3. The Background

Think of this section as a critical literature review that tells a story. Your job is to guide your reader on a journey by building a logical path. You will use two main things:

• Knowledge: This must come from scientific literature (like academic journals and books).
• Facts: These should also come from scientific literature whenever possible.

Sometimes, you might need a fact that is not available in scientific papers (for example, a statement from a government official). In these special cases, you can use a fact from a reliable non-scientific source, like a major newspaper or an official website.

However, you must be very clear with your reader. When you use a non-scientific source, you must say so. For example, you could write: “In an interview with the Sunday Newspaper, the Prime Minister reportedly said that there is no plan for…”

By carefully arranging this knowledge and these facts, you are not just listing information. You are building an argument. As the reader follows this path, they should start to see a problem. By the end of this section, the reader should be thinking, “Based on this evidence, it seems there is an important problem that needs a solution.”

4. The Research Problem

This section should be a short, single paragraph that concisely summarizes the problem you have already built up in the background. It directly states the issue and then explains why it is a research problem. A problem becomes a research problem only when an effective solution cannot be found because important knowledge is missing. If the problem is there for other reasons (like lack of money or political issues), it is just a problem, not a research problem. Your task here is to state the problem and then identify the specific knowledge gap—the missing information that currently prevents a solution.

5. Aim and Objectives

Now that you have identified the knowledge gap, you can explain your plan to acquire the knowledge to fix it. Both your aim and objectives are about finding or creating new knowledge.

• Your Aim is your main, big-picture goal. Your aim is to bridge the knowledge gap by establishing the new knowledge that is currently missing. It points to your final destination.
• Your Objectives are the small, clear steps you will take to achieve your aim. They are the specific pieces of knowledge you need to find along the way. For your objectives to be effective, they should be:
  • Specific: Say exactly what knowledge you will find.
  • Measurable (or Testable): You must be able to demonstrate if the objective has been achieved or not.
  • Achievable: You, the researcher, must have the skills and resources to complete them.
  • Relevant: Each objective must be a necessary step towards reaching your overall aim.

6. The Research Methodology (Your Plan of Action)

The methodology section explains how you will achieve each of your objectives. This is your detailed plan. Let’s look at two ways to think about this.

A Simple Way to Plan Your Methodology

The basic idea is to explain your plan to find the answers for your objectives. For each objective, you need to decide:

• Can I find the answer by reading existing books and articles (literature)?
• Or, do I need to collect new information (data) and analyze it?

Your methodology will describe the steps you will take to do this work. This is a good starting point for your thinking.

A Better, More Detailed Way (The Preferred Option)

For a stronger proposal, it is better to be more specific. This method has three clear steps.

Step 1: Preliminary Literature Review for Each Objective

At the proposal stage, you cannot read all the relevant literature in detail. The goal of this preliminary review is to be efficient. For each of your objectives, you should search the scientific literature and carefully read the abstracts of the most relevant papers. This will give you a good idea of the likely status of current knowledge. Based on this search, you can make an educated guess about which objectives are probably already answered in the literature.

Step 2: Create Specific Research Questions

Based on your preliminary review, you will have a list of objectives that likely cannot be answered from existing literature. These are the areas where the knowledge gap appears to be. From these objectives, you can now write your preliminary Specific Research Questions. It is good practice to indicate that this is the likely scenario based on your initial search. These are the exact questions your new research will focus on answering.

Step 3: Propose Your Methodology

Now, your methodology section will be very focused. It will be a detailed plan to answer only your Specific Research Questions. This is where your basic understanding of research philosophy is important. For each question, you need to decide on your approach based on what you need to find out.

• Will you use a quantitative approach? This approach uses numbers and statistics to measure, test, and find patterns. It is suitable if your research question is about “how many,” “how often,” or “what is the relationship between…”
• Will you use a qualitative approach? This approach uses words, meanings, and experiences to understand a topic in depth. It is suitable if your research question is about “why,” “how,” or “what are the experiences of…”

Your choice of approach must logically connect to your research questions. In your proposal, you will then briefly explain your plan:

• How you will collect data: For example, “a questionnaire will be used to collect numerical data from 200 students,” or “semi-structured interviews will be conducted with 15 teachers.”
• How you will analyze that data (in general): For example, “the data will be analyzed using statistical software,” or “the interview transcripts will be analyzed using thematic analysis to find common patterns.”

Feasibility and Practicalities: Finally, you must demonstrate that your project is feasible. Describe any foreseeable obstacles or limitations in terms of time scale or resources required, and how you plan to overcome them. If required by your department, you may also need to include a detailed Timeline and Budget.

7. The Conclusion

This method is very strong because it shows the reader you have a clear and logical plan for finding the new knowledge.

Finally, write a short and strong conclusion. Do not just stop writing. Briefly summarize the most important points. Remind the reader why your research is valuable and worth doing.

8. Reference List

Your proposal must include proper citations and a comprehensive Reference List for every source you’ve used. This list should start on a new page and follow the required citation style (e.g., APA, Harvard, IEEE) of your institution.

A Final Tip: Writing Your Title

After you understand your whole project, it’s time to write your title. A good title is short (less than 15 words) and clear. It should focus on two things:

• What is your topic?
• Where or Who is your study about (the context or population)?

For example: “Student Engagement” (the what) in “University Science Lectures” (the where/who).

The Essential Final Step

Before you submit, it is essential to edit and proofread your research proposal carefully for errors in language, grammar, and clarity. A clean, well-structured proposal significantly improves your chances of approval and/or better grade.

By following this structure, you can organize your ideas logically and write a research proposal that is clear, convincing, and easy for anyone to understand. Good luck!

The landscape of construction procurement has evolved significantly over time, driven by the increasing complexity and scale of construction projects. Traditional methods, such as the Conventional Method and Design & Build, while having their merits, presented certain limitations that drove the development of more management-focused strategies. Management Oriented Procurement Methods emerged as a response to these limitations, particularly for projects characterized by high complexity, the need for early contractor involvement, a requirement for flexibility, and the necessity of specialized management skills for successful delivery. These methods recognize the growing complexities of construction activities and the increasing importance of dedicated construction management expertise to navigate these complexities effectively.

At the core of these methods lies an emphasis on Construction Management as a unique professional specialization. This perspective moves beyond the traditional role of a general contractor, which often involves directly undertaking a significant portion of the construction work. Instead, it focuses on the importance of a dedicated professional or team with specific skills in the planning, coordination, and control of all aspects of a construction project, from its initial conceptualization to final completion. This includes crucial functions such as careful cost management, adherence to project timelines, rigorous quality control, and effective administration of contracts. By recognizing Construction Management as a specialized discipline, these procurement methods facilitate the selection of the most suitable contractors for specific work packages based on their specific expertise, which can lead to enhanced quality and efficiency across all facets of the project. Furthermore, this approach enables the early integration of construction knowledge into the design phase, allowing for informed decisions that enhance buildability and cost-effectiveness, while also ensuring focused management during the construction phase, leading to improved coordination and accelerated project delivery.

This series of short articles will cover four key Management Oriented Procurement Methods:

• Management Contracting
• Construction Management
• Construction Management at Risk (CMAR), and
• Design and Manage (including its single and multi-point responsibility variants)

Readers are encouraged to read all articles linked above before moving further in here for deeper understanding.

Each of these methods presents a unique framework for engaging with the construction process, characterized by specific contractual relationships between the client, the management entity, and the various package contractors involved. Furthermore, they differ in how risk and responsibility for both design and construction management are allocated among the project stakeholders. Understanding the differences in these contractual structures and risk allocations is crucial for clients and project professionals in selecting the most appropriate procurement method to align with the specific objectives and constraints of their construction projects.

Management Oriented Procurement Methods represent a significant evolution in the construction industry, offering alternatives to traditional approaches like conventional procurement and Design & Build. Each method caters to different project needs and client capabilities, emphasizing the crucial role of specialized construction management.

Summary of Key Differences and Suitability of Each Method:

• Management Contracting: Features a single contract between the client and a Management Contractor (MC). The MC manages works carried out by package contractors under a cost-plus fee arrangement. This method is particularly suitable for complex projects where early contractor input is valuable, but the client wishes to retain control over the design.
• Construction Management: Involves the client entering into direct contracts with multiple trade contractors. A Construction Manager (CM) acts as the client’s agent, coordinating the works. This approach is best suited for experienced clients who desire a high degree of control and potential cost savings, and who are capable of handling the administrative burden of managing multiple contracts.
• Construction Management at Risk (CMAR): The client engages a CM early in the project. At an identified stage, the CM agrees to a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP). The CM then contracts with subcontractors. CMAR offers a balance of cost certainty and early collaboration, making it suitable for larger projects with budget constraints.
• Design and Manage with Single-Point Responsibility: A single contractor is responsible for both design and management. The client reimburses the contractor for subcontractor costs and has a say in their selection. This variant blends the single-point responsibility of D&B with client influence over the supply chain.
• Design and Manage with Multi-Point Responsibility: The client directly contracts with package contractors. A Design and Manage Contractor acts as a consultant, responsible for design and overall management strategy. This model provides the client with significant control over contracts but requires strong project management capabilities.

Feature	Management Contracting	Construction Management	Construction Management at Risk (CMAR)	Design and Manage (Single-Point)	Design and Manage (Multi-Point)
Contractual Relationship with Package Contractors	Management Contractor (Principal)	Client (Direct Contracts)	Construction Manager (after GMP)	Design & Manage Contractor	Client (Direct Contracts)
Role of Management Entity	Main Contractor	Agent/ Consultant	Consultant (Pre-GMP), Contractor (Post-GMP)	Single Point Responsibility for Design & Management	Consultant for Design & Overall Management
Client’s Level of Involvement	Moderate	High	Moderate	Moderate	High
Key Advantages	Early contractor input, flexibility, client design control	High client control, potential cost savings, flexibility	Cost certainty (GMP), early contractor involvement, risk transfer	Single point responsibility, client influence on subcontractors	High client control, single point design & mgmt responsibility
Key Disadvantages	Price uncertainty, need for direct warranties	High admin burden, price uncertainty, coordination challenges	Financial risk for CM, potential for reduced scope/quality	Lack of initial contract sum, potential resource duplication	High admin burden, coordination risk, reliance on client expertise
General Suitability	Complex projects, early contractor input, design control	Experienced clients, high control, potential cost savings	Larger projects, budget constraints, early collaboration	Complex/fast-track projects, client wants subcontractor input	Experienced clients wanting design/mgmt oversight & contract control

The selection of the most suitable Management Oriented Procurement Method hinges on a careful consideration of several key factors. The complexity and size of the project often dictate the need for specialized management and early contractor involvement. The client’s in-house expertise and available resources play a crucial role, especially for methods like Construction Management that demand significant client involvement in contract management. The desired level of control over design and construction is another critical factor, with some methods offering more client oversight than others. The client’s risk appetite and how risk is allocated among the project participants should also be carefully evaluated. The importance of cost and time certainty will also influence the choice, with CMAR offering a greater degree of financial predictability through the GMP. Finally, the need for early contractor involvement to enhance buildability and efficiency is a common driver for selecting these management-oriented approaches. Ultimately, the optimal procurement method is not a one-size-fits-all solution but rather a strategic choice that aligns with the specific objectives, constraints, and priorities of each individual construction project and the capabilities of the client organization.

Management Contracting represents a procurement strategy where the client appoints a specialized Management Contractor (MC) early in the design phase to oversee the construction works. Unlike a traditional main contractor, the MC does not directly undertake the physical construction work. The overall structure of this method has resemblance to the Conventional Procurement system structure, where the client engages independent design consultants to develop the project design. However, the key distinction lies in the replacement of the conventional main contractor with the MC, whose primary role is to procure and manage various package contractors, often referred to as Package Contractors or subcontractors, to execute the actual construction activities.

The contractual framework in Management Contracting involves the client entering into a single agreement with the MC, who then establishes separate contracts with each of the package contractors. Normally, the client does not have direct contractual relationships with these package contractors. This structure allows the client to make use of the expertise of a construction specialist early in the project lifecycle without losing control over the design process. The MC’s fundamental role is to act as a manager and coordinator for the various works packages that constitute the overall construction project.

Features of Management Contracting

Several key characteristics define the Management Contracting approach. A significant aspect is the early appointment of the Management Contractor, typically during the initial design phases. This early engagement allows the client to benefit from the MC’s construction expertise, which can significantly influence the design for improved buildability and overall cost-effectiveness. The MC’s input at this stage can also facilitate a more efficient package-based procurement strategy. The construction works are divided into manageable packages, and these packages are then awarded to specialist package contractors through a competitive tendering process, aiming to achieve the best possible value for each component of the project. The MC plays a crucial role in defining these work packages in collaboration with the client’s design team.

The financial arrangement between the client and the MC is usually based on a cost-plus contract. Under this model, the MC is compensated with a fee for their management services and expected profit, and the client reimburses the MC for the actual costs incurred by the package contractors. This arrangement provides a degree of transparency to the client regarding the costs of the individual works packages. Given this cost-plus structure, the client often has a say in the selection of package contractors. This involvement allows the client to ensure they are comfortable with the chosen specialist firms and can influence the quality and the cost of the individual work packages. The Management Contractor assumes responsibility for achieving the time and quality targets of the overall project, akin to a main contractor in a conventional method. The MC is tasked with managing and supervising the package contractors to ensure their work adheres to the contract requirements. To encourage experienced contractors to undertake the MC role at a reasonable fee, management contracts frequently incorporate a limitation of liability for the Management Contractor. This acknowledges that certain project risks might be disproportionately large compared to the MC’s management fee. Legally, the Management Contractor acts as a principal in their contractual relationships with the package contractors, meaning they have direct obligations and potential liabilities towards them. The client maintains a contractual relationship solely with the MC.

This combination of early involvement, a package-based approach to procurement, and a cost-plus fee structure is intended to harness the specialized skills of various subcontractors while offering a level of financial transparency to the client. The client’s participation in the selection of subcontractors provides a measure of control over the project’s execution, but the overall success of the Management Contracting method is significantly dependent on the MC’s ability to effectively manage and coordinate the diverse works packages.

Advantages of Management Contracting

Management Contracting offers several notable advantages. The early contractor input is a significant benefit, allowing the client to capitalize on the MC’s construction expertise during the design phase, leading to more buildable and cost-effective designs, as well as improved risk management. The method also provides flexibility in the design process, allowing for changes to be made even during the construction phase with relative ease, although such changes may have cost implications. Furthermore, the potential for faster project completion exists because the early involvement of the MC can enable the tendering and commencement of certain works packages before the entire design is finalised, shortening the overall project duration. The client also retains a degree of control through their design team and their involvement in the selection of package contractors. The potential for high-quality delivery is enhanced by the ability to award works packages to specialist subcontractors with specific expertise. From an administrative perspective, the client benefits from simplified contract administration by managing only a single contract with the MC. Finally, the price competition at the package level through competitive tendering aims to ensure that the client receives good value for money for each component of the project. In essence, Management Contracting can be particularly advantageous for complex projects where the client values early construction expertise but wishes to maintain control over the design and benefit from the specialized skills of various subcontractors.

Disadvantages of Management Contracting

Despite its advantages, Management Contracting also presents certain disadvantages. One key concern is price uncertainty, as the final overall project cost may not be fully known until all the works packages have been tendered and awarded, which can occur relatively late in the project. Clients might also feel the need for direct warranties from the individual package contractors, even though they have a contract with the MC, to protect themselves against possible non-performance or insolvency of the MC. Another issue is the risk of proving loss and damages, e.g., if the MC needs to replace a package contractor due to non-performance, under the cost-plus arrangement, the financial loss is ultimately borne by the client. Compared to a Design & Build approach, Management Contracting typically requires increased client involvement, particularly in decisions regarding subcontractor selection and monitoring the overall progress. The coordination of multiple package contractors, even under the MC’s management, can also lead to potential for conflicts regarding scheduling, interfaces, and responsibilities. The success of the project is also heavily reliant on the competence of the MC in managing the various works packages and ensuring effective overall coordination. Therefore, while offering transparency, the cost-plus nature of Management Contracting introduces a degree of financial uncertainty, and the client needs to be prepared for a more involved role and must ensure the MC possesses the necessary expertise for effective project management.

Construction Management (CM) represents another management-oriented procurement route where the client appoints a Construction Manager to oversee and coordinate the construction project. However, a key distinction from Management Contracting is that in CM, the client enters into direct and separate contracts with multiple trade contractors for the various aspects of the construction work.

Similar to the traditional separated procurement route, the project design in CM is carried out by design consultants directly appointed by the client. However, instead of engaging a single main contractor to execute the entire construction, the client establishes individual contracts with various trade contractors, such as those specializing in structural work, masonry work, mechanical and electrical services, and interior finishes. The Construction Manager acts as a consultant or agent to the client, providing professional management services aimed at coordinating the activities of these numerous trade contractors and the client’s design team. Notably, the CM does not have a direct contractual relationship with the trade or package contractors. In essence, the client takes on a more direct role in the contractual framework of the project, directly managing relationships with multiple entities, while the Construction Manager provides the necessary expertise and coordination to facilitate a smooth project progression.

Features of Construction Management

Several characteristics define the Construction Management approach. The client establishes multiple direct contracts with each of the package contractors involved in the project. The Construction Manager operates as the client’s agent, acting solely as a manager and coordinator without a direct contractual link to the trade contractors. Consequently, the client takes the responsibility for managing and administering these multiple direct contracts, a task that can be quite demanding. CM offers significant flexibility in terms of design, procurement strategy, and the phasing of construction, allowing the client to adapt to changing circumstances as the project evolves. Similar to Management Contracting, the early appointment of a CM can facilitate an early start potential, enabling some trade packages to be tendered and commenced before the entire design is finalized, reducing the overall project duration. The CM can also contribute their buildability knowledge and programming advice during the design and project planning stages, working along with the client’s design team. A key differentiator is the absence of a contractual link between the CM and the package contractors; the CM’s role is purely advisory and coordinative. This procurement route usually affords the client a high degree of control over the project, as they maintain direct relationships with all the key stakeholders involved.

Advantages of Construction Management

Construction Management presents several advantages. Clients gain greater control over the project by having direct contractual relationships with all the trade contractors, which can influence the project’s execution, quality, and potentially cost. There is a possibility for cost savings as the client might be able to eliminate the overhead and profit margins associated with a traditional main contractor by contracting directly with trade specialists. CM offers considerable flexibility to accommodate design changes and adjustments throughout the construction process without necessarily incurring a premium from a main contractor. The early contractor input provided by the CM during the design phase is valuable in terms of buildability, cost implications, and project programming. The potential for a reduced project duration exists by overlapping the design and construction phases through the early commencement of some trade packages. The roles, responsibilities, and risks for all parties involved are generally clearly defined under a CM arrangement. Clients also have direct remedies with the package contractors due to the direct contractual links, providing a clear path for addressing any issues or non-performance. Finally, the client enjoys transparency in costs, having complete visibility over the amounts payable to each of the package contractors. Overall, Construction Management can be particularly advantageous for clients who desire a high level of control, seek potential cost savings, and require flexibility, provided they possess the capacity and willingness to manage multiple contracts effectively.

Disadvantages of Construction Management

However, Construction Management also has several disadvantages. The client faces a significantly increased administrative burden due to the need to manage multiple separate contracts with the various trade contractors, including procurement, payments, and coordination. Similar to Management Contracting, price uncertainty can be an issue, as the total project cost is not fully known until all trade packages have been let, which can occur relatively late in the project. With multiple trade contractors working directly for the client, there is a higher risk of conflicts arising between them regarding scheduling, coordination, and responsibilities, and the client may need to play a role in resolving these disputes. This procurement route demands a client who is knowledgeable about construction processes, contract management, and project coordination, as they are taking on a more active role than in other methods. While direct contracting might save on a main contractor’s margin, the client may need to engage more consultants or a highly experienced Construction Manager, potentially leading to higher overall professional fees. Changes to later trade packages can negatively affect packages that are already in progress, potentially leading to increased costs and delays if not managed carefully. Finally, there is no single point of responsibility for construction, as the responsibility for the overall construction delivery is distributed across multiple package contractors, which can make it more challenging to hold one party accountable for the entire project’s success. In summary, while offering significant control and potential benefits, Construction Management can be demanding for clients who lack experience or resources in managing multiple construction contracts and requires careful coordination to mitigate the risks associated with a fragmented responsibility structure.

Construction Management at Risk (CMAR) is a project delivery method that blends elements of both Construction Management and traditional contracting approaches. Similar to standard Construction Management, the client engages a Construction Manager early in the design phase to provide preconstruction services and act as a consultant. These services generally include cost estimating, value engineering, and constructability reviews, allowing the CM’s expertise to inform the design process from its early stages.

The key distinguishing feature of CMAR is that at an identified point in the design process, usually when the design has progressed sufficiently to allow for a reasonably accurate price prediction, the Construction Manager agrees with the client to complete the project under a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP). This GMP represents the maximum amount the client will pay for the entire construction project, encompassing the costs of subcontractors, materials, and the CM’s fee for the construction phase.

Once the GMP is established, the Construction Manager then enters into direct contracts with various package contractors, or subcontractors, to perform the actual construction work, a practice similar to that in Management Contracting. The client’s contractual arrangement with the CM is usually a Cost Plus fee structure, but with the condition that the total cost will not exceed the agreed-upon GMP. A fundamental aspect of CMAR is that the Construction Manager assumes the financial risk for any costs that goes beyond the GMP, provided these overruns are not a result of changes in the project scope initiated by the client. This “at-risk” element is central to the CMAR approach, as it incentivizes the CM to manage costs effectively and efficiently throughout the construction phase.

Features of CMAR

Several characteristics define the CMAR method. Early CM involvement is first, with the CM participating in the design phase and offering preconstruction services. The Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) is the next, providing a cap on the total construction cost, i.e., the client’s contract with the CM is typically a Cost-Plus contract with a GMP, ensuring they pay the actual costs plus a fee, but not exceeding the agreed limit. The CM contracts with subcontractors to execute the work once the GMP is set. A significant aspect is the risk transfer to the CM, who bears the financial responsibility for cost overruns beyond the GMP. CMAR promotes collaboration among the owner, architect, and CM from the project’s inception. The early involvement of the CM facilitates value engineering and constructability input during design. Construction Manager in CMAR often implement a prequalification process for subcontractors, focusing on qualifications and experience.

Advantages of CMAR

CMAR offers several key advantages. The cost certainty through the GMP is a significant benefit for clients, providing a maximum budget for the construction phase. The early contractor involvement allows for valuable insights into buildability and cost during the design phase, potentially preventing costly changes later. The risk mitigation for the client is substantial, as the CM assumes the financial burden for cost overruns beyond the GMP. The collaborative approach fosters better communication and teamwork among all project stakeholders. There is a potential for faster schedules due to the early involvement of the CM and the possibility of overlapping design and construction activities. The use of higher quality subcontractors, selected based on qualifications, can lead to better workmanship. Finally, the early collaboration can lead to reduced change orders during construction.

Disadvantages of CMAR

Despite its benefits, CMAR also has some disadvantages. The financial risk for the CM is significant, as they are liable for costs exceeding the GMP. This risk might incentivize the CM to potentially keep a higher profit margin to offset the risks and/or pursue a reduced scope or quality to ensure they stay within the GMP. The complexity of contracts in CMAR can be higher than in traditional methods. Negotiating the GMP can be challenging, requiring a well-defined scope of work. The client remains at risk for exclusions in the contract documents and for any changes in project scope after the GMP is set. There is a potential for conflicts of interest as the CM is involved in both advisory and construction roles. There is also less opportunity for competitive bidding at the main contractor level, as the CM is selected based on qualifications rather than solely price.

The “Design and Manage” procurement route is presented as an evolution or modification of the traditional Design and Build (D&B) method. D&B is characterized by a single entity undertaking responsibility for both the design and construction phases of a project, typically under a single contract. Design and Manage builds upon this integrated approach by placing a specific emphasis on the management of the construction works and introducing variations in how these works are contracted and managed, predominantly concerning the level of client involvement and the allocation of responsibility. It can be viewed as an attempt to address certain perceived limitations of standard D&B, such as potentially limited client control over design details or the selection of subcontractors.

Design and Manage with Single-Point Responsibility

Design and Manage with Single-Point Responsibility is a variant that retains the core principle of D&B by having a single contractor responsible for the overall delivery of the project, encompassing both the design and the management of the construction works. Under this arrangement, a single “design and manage contractor” assumes this comprehensive responsibility. However, the actual construction work is executed by a number of package contractors (i.e., subcontractors) who are contracted to this design and manage contractor.

Features of D&M with Single-Point Responsibility

A key characteristic of this variant is that the payments made to these package contractors by the design and manage contractor are often reimbursed by the client based on a cost-plus contract arrangement. This cost-plus element introduces a degree of financial transparency regarding the subcontractor costs for the client. Given that the client ultimately reimburses these costs, it is considered reasonable for the client to have a say in the selection of these package contractors. This client involvement in subcontractor selection is a significant feature that distinguishes this variant from a standard D&B approach, where the contractor typically has full autonomy over subcontractor selection. Furthermore, certain design work itself may be structured as separate packages, particularly if the client wishes to have specific input into the selection of design consultants for particular aspects of the project. This provides an additional layer of flexibility and potential client influence within the single-point responsibility framework.

This approach to Design and Manage seeks to combine the efficiency and single-point accountability of D&B with the transparency and client influence over subcontractor selection often associated with Management Contracting. It presents a hybrid model that could be appealing to clients who desire a single point of contact for the entire project but also wish to have a voice in the selection of key subcontractors.

Key characteristics include the single-point responsibility of the design and manage contractor for both design and construction management. The client operates under a cost-plus reimbursement model for subcontractors, directly reimbursing the design and manage contractor for these costs. A notable feature is the client’s influence on subcontractor selection, allowing them to have a say in who is chosen for the works packages. The design and manage contractor might have potential limitations on their liability for the project. There is also flexibility in design packaging, with some design elements potentially being separate packages where the client can influence consultant selection. This method shares similarities with the role of a Management Contractor, particularly in the early involvement and use of package contractors. It is often considered suitable for complex or fast-track projects where a single point of contact is advantageous. The structure can also foster a collaborative relationship between the design and manage contractor and the client.

Advantages of D&M with Single-Point Responsibility

Advantages of this approach include the simplified client management due to a single point of contact and responsibility. The client’s influence on subcontractors allows them to choose preferred firms. The transparency in subcontractor costs provided by the cost-plus model can be beneficial. The integrated nature can lead to potential for reduced delays through better communication and coordination. It offers flexibility for complex and fast-track projects and can promote a collaborative environment.

Disadvantages of D&M with Single-Point Responsibility

Disadvantages include the lack of an established contract sum initially, similar to Management Contracting. There is a potential for duplication of resources between the main contractor and subcontractors. The risk of liability limitations for the main contractor needs to be carefully considered by the client. The project’s success relies heavily on the expertise of the design and manage contractor in both design and management. Finally, there is still a potential for conflicts to arise between the main contractor and the various subcontractors.

Design and Manage with Multi-Point Responsibility

Another variation of the Design and Manage procurement route involves a structure where the package contractors are directly contracted to the client. In this model, the Design and Manage Contractor assumes a role more akin to a consultant to the client, taking on full responsibility for the design of the project and the overall management of the construction work. However, unlike the single-point responsibility variant, the package contractors, while managed by the Design and Manage Contractor, are directly responsible and contractually obligated to the client.

Due to the multi-point responsibility arising from the client’s direct contracts with the package contractors, paradoxically, this Design and Manage method falls under Separated Procurement System designs but also exhibits features of Integrated Procurement System designs. This mix of features stems from the integration of design and overall construction management under a single Design and Manage Contractor, while the execution of the construction work is managed through separate contracts held by the client. Evolution of this arrangement from regular D&B is similar to the evolution of Construction Management from the Conventional Method, where the client also holds direct contracts with trade contractors but employs a CM for coordination.

Features of D&M with Multi-Point Responsibility

Key characteristics of this variant include the multi-point responsibility where the client directly contracts with package contractors. The Design and Manage Contractor acts as a consultant with design responsibility, overseeing both design and overall management. The package contractors are directly responsible to the client for their work. This model presents a hybrid procurement system, blending features of separated and integrated approaches. It bears a strong parallel to Construction Management, where the client also leads the contracts.

Advantages of D&M with Multi-Point Responsibility

Advantages of this approach include the client’s control over contractors through direct contractual relationships. There is a single point of responsibility for design and management strategy with the Design and Manage Contractor overseeing these aspects. The client enjoys transparency in contractor costs by directly managing payments. There is also a potential for cost savings through direct contracting and management.

Disadvantages of D&M with Multi-Point Responsibility

Disadvantages include the high administrative burden for the client in managing multiple contracts. There is a risk of coordination issues as the client is responsible for coordinating multiple contractors. The approach relies on client expertise in managing construction contracts. Finally, there is a potential for conflicts between different contractors and the Design and Manage contractor.

This video tutorial addresses a common methodological challenge in qualitative research: the efficient and systematic analysis of textual data when specialized software is unavailable. Quite often, I find research student I work with are looking for qualitative analytical techniques without having to access dedicated Qualitative Data Analysis Software (QDAS). This 30-minute guide offers a practical solution by demonstrating a clear and accessible method for conducting thematic analysis utilizing widely available Microsoft Office Suite applications: MS Word and Excel.

Thematic analysis, a foundational method in qualitative methods, involves identifying, organizing, and interpreting patterns of meaning (themes) across a dataset. This video provides a step-by-step approach to this process, adapted for implement within a standard word processing programme and a spreadsheet application. This approach can be beneficial for researchers with limited resources or those seeking a transparent and auditable research workflow.

Guidance for Engaging with this Tutorial:

To maximize the utility of this guide, viewers are encouraged to follow along with their own qualitative data or a sample dataset. The tutorial will cover the following key stages:

• Data Preparation in MS Word: Learn techniques for organizing and annotating your textual data within a Word document to facilitate systematic coding.
• Utilizing the “Extract Comments to New Document” Macro: This step uses a custom MS Word macro, developed by Lene Fredborg (available for download here) to efficiently extract coded segments and their corresponding labels into a new document. It is recommended that you navigate to this link and install the macro prior to commencing the data analysis steps demonstrated in the video.
• Theme Development and Organization in MS Excel: Discover how to import the extracted codes into Excel for further organization and categorization. This section will cover techniques for sorting and filtering to bring back thematic blocks of coded data to MS Word to facilitate the inductive development of qualitative interpretations.

By the end of this tutorial, you will gain a practical understanding of how to conduct a rigorous thematic analysis using familiar software, thereby enhancing your capacity for in-depth qualitative data interpretation.

Best Wishes!