Journals / Journal of Construction Engineering, Management & Innovation (Online) / 2020 / Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 4

Selecting the appropriate project delivery method for real estate projects using fuzzy AHP

Pages
249–263
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In addition to the theoretical contribution, a hierarchical model and a Fuzzy AHP based approach to select the appropriate PDM for the real estate projects in Turkey are provided as a practical contribution.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The real estate industry holds a remarkably significant share in the Turkish economy.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Choosing the appropriate Project Delivery Method (PDM) is significantly crucial, considering that it provides various benefits, including economic contribution and time-saving.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In addition to the theoretical contribution, a hierarchical model and a Fuzzy AHP based approach to select the appropriate PDM for the real estate projects in Turkey are provided as a practical contribution.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

The real estate industry holds a remarkably significant share in the Turkish economy. Due to the nature of the dynamic characteristics of the real estate industry, project achievement is not an easy task. Choosing the appropriate Project Delivery Method (PDM) is significantly crucial, considering that it provides various benefits, including economic contribution and time-saving. This study aims to determine the main factors affecting PDM selection with the most suitable analysis method for real estate projects in Turkey. The PDM types used in the real estate sector and the factors affecting the appropriate PDM selection process are identified based on literature review and interviews with professionals related to the Turkish real estate industry. The model generated is utilized as a tool in choosing the appropriate PDM in real estate projects by using Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). In terms of the theoretical contribution to the literature, this study identifies five main factors categorized as i) time-related issues, ii) cost, funding and cash flow related issues, iii) scope related issues, iv) owner organization, risk, and relationship related issues, and vi) project characteristic issues with 13 sub-factors. In addition to the theoretical contribution, a hierarchical model and a Fuzzy AHP based approach to select the appropriate PDM for the real estate projects in Turkey are provided as a practical contribution.

🔖

Cite This Article

COMU, S., KURAL, Z., YÜCEL, B. (2020). Selecting the appropriate project delivery method for real estate projects using fuzzy AHP. Journal of Construction Engineering, Management & Innovation (Online), Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 4, 249–263. https://ajindex.com/articles/210454

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. GYODER Indicator, Turkey Real Estate Sector 2020 Q1 Report, The Assosiation of Real Estate and Real Estate Investment Companies. Issue:20, 18 May 2020
  2. Goodson L, Thomas S, Phillimore J, Pemberton S. Mass migration and real estate in European cities. London, UK. Urban Land Institute, April 2017
  3. A Close Look to Comparable Markets, Restate Turkey: A Close Look to Comparable Markets, The Assosiation of Real Estate and Real Estate Investment Companies, 2019
  4. Oyetunji AA, Anderson SD (2006) Relative effectiveness of project delivery and contract strategies. Journal of Construction Engineering and management, 132(1): 3-13
  5. El-Sayegh SM. Significant factors affecting the selection of the approporiate project delivery method. 5th Latin American and Caribbean Conference for Engineering and Technology, 2007 May, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
  6. Mahdi IM, Alreshaid K (2005) Decision support system for selecting the proper project delivery method using analytical hierarchy process (AHP). International Journal of Project Management, 23(7): 564-72
  7. Carpenter N, Bausman DC (2016) Project delivery method performance for public school construction: Design-bid-build versus CM at risk. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(10): 05016009
  8. Ibbs CW, Kwak YH, Ng T, Odabasi AM (2003) Project delivery systems and project change: Quantitative analysis. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 129(4): 382-387
  9. Mollaoglu-Korkmaz S, Swarup L, Riley D (2013) Delivering sustainable, high-performance buildings: Influence of project delivery methods on integration and project outcomes. Journal of Management in Engineering, 29(1): 71-78
  10. Al Khalil MI (2002) Selecting the appropriate project delivery method using AHP. International journal of Project management, 20(6): 469-474
  11. Rojas EM, Kell I (2008) Comparative analysis of project delivery systems cost performance in Pacific Northwest public schools. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(6): 387-397
  12. Bilbo D, Bigelow B, Escamilla E, Lockwood C (2015) Comparison of construction manager at risk and integrated project delivery performance on healthcare projects: A comparative case study. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 11(1): 40-53
  13. Choi J, Yun S, Leite F, Mulva SP (2019) Team integration and owner satisfaction: Comparing integrated project delivery with construction management at