50 likes | 139 Views
CII Annual Conference 2005: Research Presentation. Commodity vs Value-Added Services: Lost in Translation. presented by. Commodity vs Value-Added Contractor Services Research Team. Commodity vs Value-Added Contractor Services Research Team (RT 205). Jose A. Buitrago CSA Group
E N D
CII Annual Conference 2005: Research Presentation Commodity vs Value-Added Services:Lost in Translation presented by Commodity vs Value-Added Contractor Services Research Team
Commodity vs Value-Added Contractor Services Research Team (RT 205) Jose A. Buitrago CSA Group Jim Early BE&K, Co-Chair Tom Garrett Honeywell International Barry Hall Lockwood Greene Jim Hershauer Arizona State University Mark Loper AZCO Dan Martin WorleyParsons Group Robert McManus Southern Company Robert Nartonis M.A. Mortensen Kevin O’Leary HATCH Stan Schaffer Anheuser-Busch, Co-Chair Don Sutphin Baker Concrete Graeme Telford GlaxoSmithKline Travis Twardowski Rohm and Haas Jack Wacker Arizona State University Robert Wasmund DuPont Ken Walsh San Diego State University
Research Team Project Objectives • Develop precise definitions of terms. • Develop understanding of owner and contractor marketing and procurement strategies in capital project delivery process. • Develop and test conceptual models for use by owners and contractors. • Develop implementation materials to support deployment of the models.
Findings • Common definitions are critical in order to overcome communications barriers. • Owners looking for net value-added services. • More investment in front-end loading increases net value-added to owners. • Perceptions drive responses and net value-added.
Recommendations • Owners and Contractors • Ensure you understand each other (definitions). • Owners • Use bid selection tool understood by both parties. • Identify commodity vs netvalue-added services. • Contractors • Provide net value-added proposals. • Understand when providing commodity vs net value-add. • Use available tools to differentiate services.