Nils Gransberg, Ph.D.

Doctoral Dissertation

This research project provides novel tools and applications of techniques to better understand and utilize Construction Manager-at-Risk (CMR) project delivery in the context of public university capital projects by evaluating CMR project delivery in comparison to Design-Bid-Build (DBB) project delivery to understand and quantify the value of owner-driven scope growth in achieving critical success factors. Machine learning algorithms were used to support construction… Show more

Doctoral Dissertation

This research project provides novel tools and applications of techniques to better understand and utilize Construction Manager-at-Risk (CMR) project delivery in the context of public university capital projects by evaluating CMR project delivery in comparison to Design-Bid-Build (DBB) project delivery to understand and quantify the value of owner-driven scope growth in achieving critical success factors. Machine learning algorithms were used to support construction research and analysis, modeling cost and schedule growth using a sample of 37 CMR and 74 DBB projects, and accurately imputing missing data values in a sample of 67 CMR and 99 DBB projects. In-depth analysis of design and preconstruction services contracts illustrates the importance of synchronizing contractual language governing the duties, responsibilities, and obligations of collaboration and cooperation between the designer and general contractor. Analysis of project performance metrics demonstrated that traditional cost and schedule growth metrics may not accurately describe CMR projects in this market segment and a novel metric to evaluate design fee efficiency in developing scope changes was developed to assess the quality of project team integration. Results were validated by data envelopment which included a survey of public university capital projects staff, a content analysis of 44 CMR procurement documents not previously included in the research, and case studies of three database projects which appeared to have performed poorly but were considered as successful projects to their owners and end users. Finally, a method of quantifying the value for money from using CMR over DBB is proposed that accounts for collaborative behavior and improved relationships within the project team. Four best practices synthesized from the research project are proposed as techniques to allow public university owners to maximize the potential benefits of CMR project delivery. Show less

Abstract
When capital improvement project final costs exceed initial estimates, the overrun is assumed to be an indication of poor performance. However, when a project owner adds scope at any point after the initial estimate, the value of the project is enhanced, even though the numbers are interpreted in a negative light. This paper explores the idea that construction manager-at-risk (CMR) delivery provides a level of contractual flexibility that is not available in traditional… Show more

Abstract
When capital improvement project final costs exceed initial estimates, the overrun is assumed to be an indication of poor performance. However, when a project owner adds scope at any point after the initial estimate, the value of the project is enhanced, even though the numbers are interpreted in a negative light. This paper explores the idea that construction manager-at-risk (CMR) delivery provides a level of contractual flexibility that is not available in traditional design-bid-build (DBB) contracts and, consequently, lends itself to projects in which additional funding may become available after contract award and facilitates the efficient use of such funds in a manner not available in DBB-delivered projects. This study reviewed the cost performance of 166 CMR and DBB projects completed by 23 American public universities valued at over $3 billion from 2018 to 2019. The study found that cost growth in university CMR projects was greater than in similar DBB projects, contradicting the conclusions of most of the literature on CMR. The analysis of a second sample of 86 projects, which individually compared DBB projects with similar CMR projects, found that CMR project design fee efficiency was double that of DBB. The first contribution of this study is the provision of an objective metric for differentiating between owner-driven scope cost growth and cost growth due to other reasons; the second contribution is the finding that the contractual flexibility inherent to CMR project delivery adds value for money by allowing a university to expeditiously obligate new sources of funding, such as donations. Show less

Abstract
The primary benefits of construction manager-at-risk (CMAR) project delivery are associated with increasing the ultimate constructability of a project by bringing the construction contractor to the project during the design phase. This paper reports the results of a content analysis of 24 published CMAR case studies worth $5.4 billion in both the commercial and public infrastructure sectors and derives four lessons learned. The major finding was that owners must synchronize the… Show more

Abstract
The primary benefits of construction manager-at-risk (CMAR) project delivery are associated with increasing the ultimate constructability of a project by bringing the construction contractor to the project during the design phase. This paper reports the results of a content analysis of 24 published CMAR case studies worth $5.4 billion in both the commercial and public infrastructure sectors and derives four lessons learned. The major finding was that owners must synchronize the clauses of design contracts with those of the preconstruction in order to promote the level of collaboration necessary to realize enhanced constructability. This study also found that engaging CMAR contractors as early as is practical, clearly defining the deliverables they will produce during preconstruction, and limiting the cost component of best value selections to only CMAR fees facilitates project success. This paper’s major contribution is in comparing commercial and infrastructure CMAR projects and finding common lessons learned. Show less

Conference Paper Presented at the 2022 TRB Annual Meeting in Washington, D.C.

Abstract
The use of Construction Manager/General Contractor (CMGC) project delivery method has grown substantially since it was originally authorized for use by Special Experimental Program-14 in 2000. The Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) was an early adopter and other DOTs turned to it for implementation guidance as they developed their own CMGC programs. UDOT program includes the employment of an… Show more

Conference Paper Presented at the 2022 TRB Annual Meeting in Washington, D.C.

Abstract
The use of Construction Manager/General Contractor (CMGC) project delivery method has grown substantially since it was originally authorized for use by Special Experimental Program-14 in 2000. The Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) was an early adopter and other DOTs turned to it for implementation guidance as they developed their own CMGC programs. UDOT program includes the employment of an Independent Cost Estimate (ICE) consultant and “blind bidding” to furnish and objective comparison of the CMGC contractor’s estimated construction cost with the current engineer’s estimate during construction price negotiations. Conversely, another early adopter, the Arizona DOT, does not use an ICE, leaving all aspects of project pricing open to negotiation. NCHRP Synthesis 402 published in 2010 reviewed both programs as well as other existing DOT and local agency CMGC programs and concluded that involving an ICE was merely an agency preference and found no evidence of difference in project performances. Since that study the number of DOTs that have implemented CMGC has grown from a handful to over 25. This paper will to revisit perception of the value added to the CMGC process by involving the ICE consultant. It uses an updated content analysis of CMGC solicitations from 25 state DOTS, comparing it with the findings of the NCHRP synthesis. The paper finds that no quantitative performance difference has been identified between projects with an ICE and projects without; however, the number of DOTs that use an ICE greatly outnumbers those that don’t, leading the paper to conclude that there is a perceived value added by the presence of an ICE and recommending quantitative research to confirm that perception. Show less