Wilkinson, SMiller, GCobeldick, Margaret2017-10-312017https://hdl.handle.net/2292/36299Full text is available to authenticated members of The University of Auckland only.Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) has been used within the New Zealand infrastructure industry since at least the early 2000s, but there has been little in the way of broad, nation-wide evaluation of how this relatively new type of project delivery method is performing. Anecdotally, ECI in New Zealand is often promised as a delivery method that can improve the quality of construction project outcomes for clients, reducing construction programme and costs by facilitating collaborative design and construction between the client, designer and constructor. The question remained however – was ECI delivering on this promise? The background research demonstrated that ECI showed potential to support greater levels of design innovation, increased construction quality and other attributes which were presumed to be increasingly critical on future design and construction projects. This research project sought to answer the question above by interviewing 17 senior engineering professionals (the Participants) within the infrastructure industry. Their collective knowledge of ECI projects was used to determine how the projects were being delivered, the key positive and negative project attributes, and to allow comparison with other research conclusions. The research results were then used to prepare a guideline document, with information on how to achieve better ECI project outcomes. There were a number of consistent benefits reported by the Participants - with shortened project programmes, improved management of project risks, and development of trusted relationships between parties affirmed by the majority of Participants. However, the Participants noted inconsistent improvements in regard to construction quality and levels of innovation, in contrast with other research on ECI. In part this may be due to lack of experience or skills within the New Zealand industry. However, more critically it appeared that many clients continued to prioritise the lowest cost construction for their projects even when using the negotiated-cost approach of an ECI project. Consequently the ‘cost’ of improved quality and innovation rested with the designers and constructors. It was therefore concluded that for the industry to obtain full value from the ECI delivery method, the industry must have a change of heart, and accept that ECI operates as a negotiated-cost project with precedence given to the construction quality and design innovations: cost savings are not guaranteed. Without this acceptance, the full value of ECI is unlikely to be realised.Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated. Previously published items are made available in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher.Restricted Item. Available to authenticated members of The University of Auckland.https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/docs/uoa-docs/rights.htmhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/nz/ThesisCopyright: The authorQ112933490