Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorRichard de Neufville.en_US
dc.contributor.authorWilliams, Brian T. (Brian Thomas)en_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Integrated Design and Management Program.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-10-15T20:23:04Z
dc.date.available2018-10-15T20:23:04Z
dc.date.copyright2018en_US
dc.date.issued2018en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/118509
dc.descriptionThesis: S.M. in Engineering and Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, System Design and Management Program, 2018.en_US
dc.descriptionCataloged from PDF version of thesis.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (pages 101-109).en_US
dc.description.abstractInflexibility, failure to adapt technology, and overly regulatory processes frustrate construction industry productivity and reduce the likelihood that large infrastructure projects will be delivered on-schedule and on-budget. Divergence from entrenched project delivery methods can provide flexibility to project managers and offers advantages for improving quality, collaboration, costs, and timeliness. The objective of this research is to provide the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) recommendations for their Project Management Business Process (PMBP). This study reviews the current state of project management in USACE, conducts a structured systems architecture analysis of the PMBP, evaluates USACE project statistics, assesses alternative project delivery methods through a literature review, and provides case studies to consider the implementation impediments of alternative methods for public and private projects. USACE serves as the nation's largest public engineering agency with responsibilities in military construction, civil works, water navigation, environmental restoration, and disaster response. This research concludes with recommendations for selecting alternative project delivery methods best-fit to meet the distinct needs of each USACE business program. Explicitly, the application of Integrated Project Delivery is best suited for highly specialized, technical projects for military construction and interagency support, but also presents contractual challenges notyet adapted for USACE. Public Private Partnerships show promise for possible future implementation in civil works projects, but require further refinement through the USACE Pilot Program. Lastly, Construction Management at Risk is the most mature alternative method for USACE, and can provide Project Managers with additional options in fast-tracking and early contractor involvement. Essentially, the flexibility of PMBP project delivery should match the vast diversity of USACE's missions.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Brian T. Williams.en_US
dc.format.extent123 pagesen_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsMIT theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed, downloaded, or printed from this source but further reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582en_US
dc.subjectEngineering and Management Program.en_US
dc.subjectIntegrated Design and Management Program.en_US
dc.titleDeveloping flexibility through alternative project delivery methods for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers project management business processen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeS.M. in Engineering and Managementen_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Engineering and Management Programen_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Integrated Design and Management Program.en_US
dc.identifier.oclc1054711948en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record