Bills of Quantities: nemesis or nirvana?

Purpose - Traditional Lump Sum (TLS) methods have been the primary procurement method within Australia. Yet, their use is beginning to wane in states such as: Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria where Design and Construct, Construction Management and hybrids thereof have become the norm. Consid...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Structural survey 2009-05, Vol.27 (2), p.99-108
Hauptverfasser: Davis, Peter R, Love, Peter E.D, Baccarini, David
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 108
container_issue 2
container_start_page 99
container_title Structural survey
container_volume 27
creator Davis, Peter R
Love, Peter E.D
Baccarini, David
description Purpose - Traditional Lump Sum (TLS) methods have been the primary procurement method within Australia. Yet, their use is beginning to wane in states such as: Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria where Design and Construct, Construction Management and hybrids thereof have become the norm. Considering the demands of clients, the increasing propensity to use non-traditional methods, the quality of drawings that are being produced, and the role of software applications such as Computer-Aided Design in directly generating quantities, this paper seeks to examine the role Bills of Quantities (BoQs) serve and how effective they are as a pre-contract and post-contract tool.Design methodology approach - Only limited empirical research has addressed the role and effectiveness of BoQs, particularly in Australia. With this in mind, the research adopted an exploratory approach to gain insights from industry practitioners about BoQs. A questionnaire survey was developed from the literature and used to solicit the opinions of practitioners about their role and effectiveness as a pre-contract and post-contract tool.Findings - The distributed questionnaire survey resulted in 86 responses from industry practitioners - quantity surveyors, building contractors, and project managers. The findings fundamentally reveal that the use of Bill of Quantities prepared in accordance with the standard method of measurement is on the decline and only useful as a tool for post-contract control.Originality value - The research has revealed that there is a need for industry to embrace alternative forms of measuring quantities in building projects. Abridged bills and builders' quantities are being increasingly demanded in Australia. Thus, it is suggested that this demand could drive the need for alternative forms of pricing in building projects and lead to the increasing use of non-traditional methods of measurement.
doi_str_mv 10.1108/02630800910956434
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_216602557</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>34967159</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-fa8dad09a3e54d669415ecac91647f1056cc090db62d34db967e4ae856e80b1c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE1LAzEQhoMoWKs_wFvxIB5cnWw-NvEiWqwKRREqll5CmmRh63a3Jrui_96UFQ_Wg6eBmeeZGV6EDjGcYQziHFJOQABIDJJxSugW6uGMiYQLSrdRbz1PIjDdRXshLACAC0l76OS6KMswqPPBU6urpmgKFy4GlVu6UMS2H1SFf9eVvtxHO7kugzv4rn30PLqZDO-S8ePt_fBqnBhCaJPkWlhtQWriGLWcS4qZM9pIzGmWY2DcGJBg5zy1hNq55Jmj2gnGnYA5NqSPjru9K1-_tS40alkE48pSV65ugyI0KpjJCB79Ahd166v4m0ox55AylkUId5DxdQje5Wrli6X2nwqDWgenNoKLTtI5RWjcx4-g_aviGcmYoi-pepjy2Ww8mqj1I9DxMTSvS_uvE6d_KxuoWtmcfAG9iIjX</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>216602557</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Bills of Quantities: nemesis or nirvana?</title><source>Emerald</source><creator>Davis, Peter R ; Love, Peter E.D ; Baccarini, David</creator><creatorcontrib>Davis, Peter R ; Love, Peter E.D ; Baccarini, David</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose - Traditional Lump Sum (TLS) methods have been the primary procurement method within Australia. Yet, their use is beginning to wane in states such as: Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria where Design and Construct, Construction Management and hybrids thereof have become the norm. Considering the demands of clients, the increasing propensity to use non-traditional methods, the quality of drawings that are being produced, and the role of software applications such as Computer-Aided Design in directly generating quantities, this paper seeks to examine the role Bills of Quantities (BoQs) serve and how effective they are as a pre-contract and post-contract tool.Design methodology approach - Only limited empirical research has addressed the role and effectiveness of BoQs, particularly in Australia. With this in mind, the research adopted an exploratory approach to gain insights from industry practitioners about BoQs. A questionnaire survey was developed from the literature and used to solicit the opinions of practitioners about their role and effectiveness as a pre-contract and post-contract tool.Findings - The distributed questionnaire survey resulted in 86 responses from industry practitioners - quantity surveyors, building contractors, and project managers. The findings fundamentally reveal that the use of Bill of Quantities prepared in accordance with the standard method of measurement is on the decline and only useful as a tool for post-contract control.Originality value - The research has revealed that there is a need for industry to embrace alternative forms of measuring quantities in building projects. Abridged bills and builders' quantities are being increasingly demanded in Australia. Thus, it is suggested that this demand could drive the need for alternative forms of pricing in building projects and lead to the increasing use of non-traditional methods of measurement.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0263-080X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2398-4708</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1758-6844</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2398-4716</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1108/02630800910956434</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Bradford: Emerald Group Publishing Limited</publisher><subject>Australia ; Construction ; Construction industry ; Contractors ; Contracts ; Design ; Documentation ; Interest rates ; Methods ; Purchasing ; Studies ; Workloads</subject><ispartof>Structural survey, 2009-05, Vol.27 (2), p.99-108</ispartof><rights>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</rights><rights>Copyright Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2009</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-fa8dad09a3e54d669415ecac91647f1056cc090db62d34db967e4ae856e80b1c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-fa8dad09a3e54d669415ecac91647f1056cc090db62d34db967e4ae856e80b1c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/02630800910956434/full/pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gemerald$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/02630800910956434/full/html$$EHTML$$P50$$Gemerald$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,967,11635,27924,27925,52686,52689</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Davis, Peter R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Love, Peter E.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baccarini, David</creatorcontrib><title>Bills of Quantities: nemesis or nirvana?</title><title>Structural survey</title><description>Purpose - Traditional Lump Sum (TLS) methods have been the primary procurement method within Australia. Yet, their use is beginning to wane in states such as: Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria where Design and Construct, Construction Management and hybrids thereof have become the norm. Considering the demands of clients, the increasing propensity to use non-traditional methods, the quality of drawings that are being produced, and the role of software applications such as Computer-Aided Design in directly generating quantities, this paper seeks to examine the role Bills of Quantities (BoQs) serve and how effective they are as a pre-contract and post-contract tool.Design methodology approach - Only limited empirical research has addressed the role and effectiveness of BoQs, particularly in Australia. With this in mind, the research adopted an exploratory approach to gain insights from industry practitioners about BoQs. A questionnaire survey was developed from the literature and used to solicit the opinions of practitioners about their role and effectiveness as a pre-contract and post-contract tool.Findings - The distributed questionnaire survey resulted in 86 responses from industry practitioners - quantity surveyors, building contractors, and project managers. The findings fundamentally reveal that the use of Bill of Quantities prepared in accordance with the standard method of measurement is on the decline and only useful as a tool for post-contract control.Originality value - The research has revealed that there is a need for industry to embrace alternative forms of measuring quantities in building projects. Abridged bills and builders' quantities are being increasingly demanded in Australia. Thus, it is suggested that this demand could drive the need for alternative forms of pricing in building projects and lead to the increasing use of non-traditional methods of measurement.</description><subject>Australia</subject><subject>Construction</subject><subject>Construction industry</subject><subject>Contractors</subject><subject>Contracts</subject><subject>Design</subject><subject>Documentation</subject><subject>Interest rates</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Purchasing</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Workloads</subject><issn>0263-080X</issn><issn>2398-4708</issn><issn>1758-6844</issn><issn>2398-4716</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkE1LAzEQhoMoWKs_wFvxIB5cnWw-NvEiWqwKRREqll5CmmRh63a3Jrui_96UFQ_Wg6eBmeeZGV6EDjGcYQziHFJOQABIDJJxSugW6uGMiYQLSrdRbz1PIjDdRXshLACAC0l76OS6KMswqPPBU6urpmgKFy4GlVu6UMS2H1SFf9eVvtxHO7kugzv4rn30PLqZDO-S8ePt_fBqnBhCaJPkWlhtQWriGLWcS4qZM9pIzGmWY2DcGJBg5zy1hNq55Jmj2gnGnYA5NqSPjru9K1-_tS40alkE48pSV65ugyI0KpjJCB79Ahd166v4m0ox55AylkUId5DxdQje5Wrli6X2nwqDWgenNoKLTtI5RWjcx4-g_aviGcmYoi-pepjy2Ww8mqj1I9DxMTSvS_uvE6d_KxuoWtmcfAG9iIjX</recordid><startdate>20090529</startdate><enddate>20090529</enddate><creator>Davis, Peter R</creator><creator>Love, Peter E.D</creator><creator>Baccarini, David</creator><general>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090529</creationdate><title>Bills of Quantities: nemesis or nirvana?</title><author>Davis, Peter R ; Love, Peter E.D ; Baccarini, David</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-fa8dad09a3e54d669415ecac91647f1056cc090db62d34db967e4ae856e80b1c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Australia</topic><topic>Construction</topic><topic>Construction industry</topic><topic>Contractors</topic><topic>Contracts</topic><topic>Design</topic><topic>Documentation</topic><topic>Interest rates</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Purchasing</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Workloads</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Davis, Peter R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Love, Peter E.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baccarini, David</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Global News &amp; ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>ProQuest Military Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Science Journals</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Structural survey</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Davis, Peter R</au><au>Love, Peter E.D</au><au>Baccarini, David</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Bills of Quantities: nemesis or nirvana?</atitle><jtitle>Structural survey</jtitle><date>2009-05-29</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>99</spage><epage>108</epage><pages>99-108</pages><issn>0263-080X</issn><issn>2398-4708</issn><eissn>1758-6844</eissn><eissn>2398-4716</eissn><abstract>Purpose - Traditional Lump Sum (TLS) methods have been the primary procurement method within Australia. Yet, their use is beginning to wane in states such as: Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria where Design and Construct, Construction Management and hybrids thereof have become the norm. Considering the demands of clients, the increasing propensity to use non-traditional methods, the quality of drawings that are being produced, and the role of software applications such as Computer-Aided Design in directly generating quantities, this paper seeks to examine the role Bills of Quantities (BoQs) serve and how effective they are as a pre-contract and post-contract tool.Design methodology approach - Only limited empirical research has addressed the role and effectiveness of BoQs, particularly in Australia. With this in mind, the research adopted an exploratory approach to gain insights from industry practitioners about BoQs. A questionnaire survey was developed from the literature and used to solicit the opinions of practitioners about their role and effectiveness as a pre-contract and post-contract tool.Findings - The distributed questionnaire survey resulted in 86 responses from industry practitioners - quantity surveyors, building contractors, and project managers. The findings fundamentally reveal that the use of Bill of Quantities prepared in accordance with the standard method of measurement is on the decline and only useful as a tool for post-contract control.Originality value - The research has revealed that there is a need for industry to embrace alternative forms of measuring quantities in building projects. Abridged bills and builders' quantities are being increasingly demanded in Australia. Thus, it is suggested that this demand could drive the need for alternative forms of pricing in building projects and lead to the increasing use of non-traditional methods of measurement.</abstract><cop>Bradford</cop><pub>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</pub><doi>10.1108/02630800910956434</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0263-080X
ispartof Structural survey, 2009-05, Vol.27 (2), p.99-108
issn 0263-080X
2398-4708
1758-6844
2398-4716
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_216602557
source Emerald
subjects Australia
Construction
Construction industry
Contractors
Contracts
Design
Documentation
Interest rates
Methods
Purchasing
Studies
Workloads
title Bills of Quantities: nemesis or nirvana?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T18%3A00%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bills%20of%20Quantities:%20nemesis%20or%20nirvana?&rft.jtitle=Structural%20survey&rft.au=Davis,%20Peter%20R&rft.date=2009-05-29&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=99&rft.epage=108&rft.pages=99-108&rft.issn=0263-080X&rft.eissn=1758-6844&rft_id=info:doi/10.1108/02630800910956434&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E34967159%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=216602557&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true