Document Detail

Title: SD-11 - Determining the Impact of Various Construction Contract Types and Clauses on Project Performance, Vo
Publication Date: 4/4/1986
Product Type: Source Document
Status: Archived Reference
Pages: 227
This publication has been archived, but is available for download for informational purposes only.

Ibbs et al., Univ. of Illinois
Order Now  

Abstract

This research report is comprised of two volumes, of which this is the second. The study questionnaire (Appendix A) and the computer-analyzed data (Appendix B) are contained within, and will be important sources of more detailed information for especially interested readers.

Appendix A is straightforward and is discussed extensively in Chapter 3 of Volume I. Appendix B is more involved, containing the results of various statistical analyses as outlined in Chapter 3. Briefly, the order of presentation can be understood as follows. The data related on pages B-1 to B-144 are p-criteria test results used throughout the research, especially for Chapters 4-8. Note that the results for each such p-test carry over onto two pages. The heading at the top of a page shows the tested criteria (e.g., clarification necessary) and the subcategory (all respondents, owners, or fixed price contracts, for instance) being presented.

The clauses are ranked according to the proportion of “yes” responses. Those clauses whose proportion is statistically different from the category/subcategory average (at the 95% confidence level) have an entry under the rightmost column; namely, 0.025 to indicate two and one-half percent confidence level. Moreover, those clauses so listed on the first of the two pages can be considered severe offenders or problematic. Note that clauses occasionally are singled out on the other end of the scale, too. For example, clauses 91, 23, 28, 45, and 78 on page B-2, which means that they had above average performance for this particular test.

The exact order of category criteria between pages B-1 and B-60 is:

Clarification necessary
Improvement needed
Subject of dispute
Subject of major dispute
Much utilization impact
Utilized many times

Within each of these categories, there is a subcategory sorting the order of which is:

All respondents
Fixed price contracts
Cost reimbursable contracts
Contractors responses
Owners responses

Between pages B-61 and B-84, the following category combinations are tested:

Clause necessary and should be improved
Clause not included and not necessary
Clause utilized many times and should be improved

This information was originally planned to be used in Chapter 7, Owner’s and Contractor’s Analysis, so the subcategory sorts were limited to all respondents, owners, and contractors. Unfortunately, lack of time prevented further narrative analysis and interpretation of this data. It is still included in this appendix for the benefit of interested parties even though the main body of the report does not refer to this data.

Pages B-85 through B-144 present more p-criteria test results that were used in Chapter 8, Risk Allocation. The relevant categories here are:

Strict clause enforcement
Informal clause enforcement
Risk allocated only to contractor
Risk allocated only to owners
Risk allocated to both parties
No limit on risk exposure

All five subcategory sorts were performed against each of these categories.

The data contained on pages B-145 through B-148 are z-tests useful to Chapter 6, Contract Type Analysis.

Finally the material on pages B-149 to B-196 is backup information for Chapter 8, Risk Allocation. The meaning and use of the different sets, B1, ... B6, C1, C2, and A4 is discussed there.

This explanation should be clear to the reader, but if any questions or further inquiries are sought, the research team should be contacted.