CII Annual Conference 2005: Research Presentation

1
CII Annual Conference 2005 Research Presentation
Commodity vs Value-Added ServicesLost in
Translation
presented by
Commodity vs Value-Added Contractor Services
Research Team
2
Commodity vs Value-Added Contractor Services
Research Team (RT 205)

• Jose A. Buitrago CSA Group
• Jim Early BEK, 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 OLeary 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

3
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.

4
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.

5
Recommendations

• Owners and Contractors
• Ensure you understand each other (definitions).
• Owners
• Use bid selection tool understood by both
  parties.
• Identify commodity vs net value-added services.
• Contractors
• Provide net value-added proposals.
• Understand when providing commodity vs net
  value-add.
• Use available tools to differentiate services.