Revolutionising cost structure for integrated project delivery: a BIM-based solution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The amalgamation of integrated project delivery (IPD) and building information modelling (BIM) is highly recommended for successful project delivery. However, IPD lacks an accurate cost estimation methodology at the “front-end” of projects, when little project information is available. This study aims to tackle this issue, through presenting analytical aspects, theoretical grounds and practical steps/procedures for integrating target value design (TVD), activity-based costing (ABC) and Monte Carlo simulation into the IPD cost structure, within a BIM-enabled platform. Design/methodology/approach A critical review was conducted to study the status of cost estimation within IPD, as well as exploring methods and tools that can enhance the cost estimation process for IPD. Thereafter, a framework is developed to present the proposed methodology of cost estimation for IPD throughout its entire stages. A case project is used to validate the practicality of the developed solution through comparing the profit-at-risk percentage for each party, using both traditional cost estimation and the proposed solution. Findings After applying the proposed IPD's cost estimation framework, on a real-life case project, the findings demonstrated significant deviations in the profit-at-risk value for various work packages of the project (approximately 100% of the finishing package and 22% of openings package). By providing a precise allocation of overhead costs, the solution can be used in real-life projects to change the entire IPD cost structure and ensure a fair sharing of risk–rewards among the involved parties in IPD projects. Practical implications Using the proposed methodology of cost estimation for IPD can enhance the relationship among IPD's core team members; all revealed financial deficiencies will be considered (i.e. compensation structure, profit pooling), hence enhancing the IPD performance. Originality/value This paper presents a comprehensive solution for integrating BIM and IPD in terms of cost estimation, offering three main contributions: (1) an innovate approach to utilise five-dimensional (5D) BIM capabilities with Monte Carlo simulation, hence providing reliable cost estimating during the conceptual TVD stage; (2) mathematical models that are developed through integrating ABC into the detailed 5D BIM to determine the three IPD's cost structure limbs; and (3) a novel mechanism of managing cost saving (rewards) through distinguishing between saved resources from organisation level, to daily task level, to increase trust among parties.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".