AbstractA construction project is oftern facing various

uncertainty environments, and the product of construction is

very complexity. Selecting a project delivery system is a critical
task, which determines the project schedule, quality and
investment objectives. This study proposes a decision- making
model for the selection of project delivery system which is based
on information entropy and grey relational grade analysis. In
order to overcome the subjective evaluations from the experts,
the theory of entropy weight is applied to modify the experts
subjective weight. The multi-attribute grey relational grade
decision-making is used to deal with the uncertainty
information for selection of project delivery system. The
application of the model in a real-world problem is provided.
The methodology provides an effective way for the owners to
select an appropriate delivery system for their project in the
uncertainty condition.
I. INTRODUCTION
ROJECT delivery methods not only define the roles,
responsibilities and risk allocation of the participants
involved but also set up a framework for project execution. A
project delivery strategy is the set of project delivery methods
that the owner may adopt for delivering the projects. A
change to this strategy may involve a broadening or a
lessening of delivery options. There are several systems of
project delivery to choose from. The most common
approaches are design-bid-build (DBB), design-build (DB),
construction management at risk or construction management
as general contractor (CM-at risk/GC), engineering-
procurement-construction (EPC) / turnkey, and construction
management as program management (CM/PM).
Consequently, selecting an appropriate project delivery
method is one of the key factors determining the success of a
project [1, 2]. To some extent, it determines the delivery time,
quality, and cost. It has been showed that an appropriate
project delivery method could reduce project costs by an
average of 5% [3]. No project delivery system is perfect, but
based on the unique requirements of each project one
particular project delivery system might be better than the
others. To increase the chances of project success, owners
Manuscript received April 15, 2009. This work was sponsored by
National Social Science Fund, PRC, NO: 06BJY085 .
LI Huimin is with Institute of Construction Project Management, Hohai
University, Nanjing, 210098, China. Phone: 086-25-83789850, E-mail:
lihuimin3646@yahoo.com.cn .
WANG Zhuofu is with Institute of Construction Project Management,
Hohai University, Nanjing, 210098, China. E-mail: zfwang@hhu.edu.cn
must choose appropriate project delivery system to meet their
needs.
Many researchers have done a lot of work on
designing/selecting project delivery system. Molenaar et al.
(1998) have collected relevant data of 122 projects in USA,
constructed five model based on multiple regression analysis ,
and forecasted the cost growth rate, scheduled growth rate,
expectations, management capacity and user satisfaction, but
the prediction accuracy is not very perfect[4]. Koncharl
(1998), Chan(2001), Florence(2004) have collected project
data in United States, Hong Kong, Singapore, structured
model based on multiple regression analysis to predict the
performance of the proposed project ,but have not provided
the regression equation, so the scope of application of the
model was limited[5-7]. Ibrahim (2005), Mohammed (2002)
have discussed the influencing factors of selecting the project
delivery systems, and set up the analytic hierarchy process
(AHP) decision-making model [8-9]. Gordon (1994)
proposed that selecting project delivery systems should
include the organization and contract strategy [10]. Alhazmi
et al. (2000) divided project delivery systems into three types
meaning a total of 12 kinds of ways, and proposed a
four-steps selecting model [11]. Spink (1997) discussed the
application environment of various project delivery systems,
and provided a graphic presentation of guidelines for
selecting DBB and DB methods [12].
The grey system theory was originally proposed by Deng
in 1982 [13]. It is effectively used to analyze the uncertain
systems with multi-data inputs, discrete data and insufficient
data [14]. Grey relational analysis is mainly applied in the
modeling analysis of the sequences relation, based on which
the grey relational analysis has been successfully applied in
the image processing [15], facilitys location of logistics [16],
etc.
In this paper, the factors influencing the selection of
project delivery system are proposed firstly. Section three
describes the grey relational analysis model for selection of
project delivery system. The model will be followed by a
real-world construction project case study to illustrate the
applicability of it in section four.
II. CRITERION FOR SELECTION OF PROJECT DELIVERY SYSTEM
A project delivery method is a system used by an agency or
owner for organizing and financing design, construction,
operations, and maintenance services for a structure or
Grey Relational Grade Decision Model for Selection of Project
Delivery System
Li Huimin, Wang Zhuofu
P
Proceedings of 2009 IEEE International Conference on Grey Systems
and Intelligent Services, November 10-12, 2009, Nanjing, China
978-1-4244-4916-3/09/$25.00 2009 IEEE 1033
facility by entering into legal agreements with one or more
entities or parties. Common project delivery methods include:
Design-bid-build (DBB) is the most common project
delivery option. It is often referred to as the traditional
option. There are three prime players: owner, designer
(architect) and builder (general contractor). Two separate
entities are engaged for design and construction, and award of
the design contract is based on a quality-based selection.
Design is followed by construction, which is generally bid
competitively, and then by some sort of inspection/quality
assurance or even complete construction management
services.
The design-build (DB) project delivery system has grown
in popularity and is seen by some in the industry as the perfect
solution in addressing the limitations of other methods. For an
owner, the primary benefit is the simplicity of having one
party responsible for the development of the project. While
the other systems often give rise to disputes among various
project participants- with owner acting as referee (or party
ultimately to blame)- in DB many of these disputes become
internal DB team issues, which do not affect the owner.
Design-build differs from traditional delivery methods in
many ways.
Construction management at risk (CM-at risk) is a delivery
method wherein an Architect/Engineer is selected to design
the project and separately a construction manager at risk is
selected to serve as a general contractor [17]. The
construction manager (CM) assumes the risk for construction
at a guaranteed price and provides design phase consultation
in evaluating costs, schedule, implications of alternative
designs and systems and materials during and after design of
the facility.
Engineering-procurement-construction (EPC)/turnkey is a
kind of general contracting, that is, the general contractor not
only charges the project design, procurement, construction,
commissioning services, etc, but also take responsibility for
the quality, safety, time, and cost overall responsibility, in
accordance with the contract.
The product of construction is manufactured under
uncertainty environment, and the process of production is
complexity. So there are many factors influencing the project
to delivery smoothly, including construction situation,
complexity of product, the process of manufacture, the
contractors, and the management capability of the owners.
Different benchmarks and surveys, introduced by Stillman
and Tomlinson in 1998 and Osgood in 2000, have shown that
there are numerous factors to be considered in the selection of
a delivery system. This research classifies the major factors as
table I [18].
III. GREY RELATIONAL GRADE DECISION MODEL FOR
SELECTING PROJECT DELIVERY
Grey analysis uses a specific concept of information. It
defines situations with no information as black, and those
with perfect information as white [19]. However, neither of
these idealized situations ever occurs in real world problems.
In fact, situations between these extremes are described as
being grey, hazy or fuzzy. Therefore, a grey system means
that a system in which part of information is known and part
of information is unknown. With this definition, information
quantity and quality form a continuum from a total lack of
information to complete information- from black through
grey to white. Since uncertainty always exists, one is always
somewhere in the middle, somewhere between the extremes,
somewhere in the grey area.
TABLE I
THE CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF PROJECT DELIVERY SYSTEMS
Criteria Description
Cost(C)
Achieving the lowest cost is a major concern
in project delivery contracts.
Schedule(S)
Time is an important factor for project success.
There may need to use a fast tracking method,
i.e. overlapping design and construction
phases.
Quality(Q)
The desire to maximize the control of aesthetic
and physical quality is a major factor to be
considered.
Complexity(Com)
A project may have a standard, repetitive, or
complex and unique design.
Scope Change(SC)
Sometimes it is necessary to have some
changes in the scope definition of the project.
Experience(E)
To decide which project delivery form of
contract is recommended; the availability of
the Client Agency staff resources and
experience is a major consideration.
Financial
Guarantee(FG)
The availability of enough funding at an early
stage of a project is an important.
Risk
Management(RM)
Managing to reduce possible risks is also an
important factor.
Uniqueness(U)
This addresses non-prototypical project
requirements.
Project Size(Size)
Although this is not one of the major drivers in
the selection process, it may still have some
significance.
Grey analysis then comes to a clear set of statements about
system solutions. At one extreme, no solution can be defined
for a system without information. At the other extreme, a
system with perfect information has a unique solution. In the
middle, grey systems will give a variety of available solutions.
Grey analysis does not attempt to find the best solution, but
does provide techniques for determining a good solution, an
appropriate solution for real world problems [20].
Grey relational analysis is an alternate solution to the
traditional statistical limitations. It is employed to search for
Grey Relational Grade (GRG) which can be used to describe
the relationships between the data attributes and to determine
the important factors that significantly influence some
defined objectives [21].
In this section, we briefly review the calculation process
for the grey relational analysis decision model for selection of
project delivery systems.
A. Obtain criterions matrix
Assumption, U is the set of project delivery systems.
m 1 2
U={method 1,method 2, ,method m}={u , u , , u } ,
V is the set of criterions.
1034
n 1 2
V={criterion 1,criterion 2, ,criterion n}={v , v , , v }
11 12 1
21 22 2
ij
1 2
) E=U V=(e
n
n
m n
m m mn
e e e
e e e
e e e

Where 1, 2, , ; 1, 2, , . i m j n = = E is the Cartesian product of

V and U , that is, criterions matrix. The value of
ij
e can be
obtained from the expert questionnaire and reality value of a
project.
B. Determine the set of optimal criterions
In the set
1 2
[ , , ] E
n
e e e
- - - -
= , we assume that
k
e
-
( k=1,2, ,n )
is the optimal value of the k -th criterion optimal value. This
optimal value is the best value of all methods. There are two
kinds of criterions, positive criterion and negative criterion.
The positive criterion is that if the larger value is good for one
criterion, the criterion is considered as the largest value in all
schemes; the negative criterion is that if smaller value is good
for one criterion, the criterion is considered as the smallest
value in all schemes.
1 2
k
1 2
max( , , , ) j
min( , , , ) j
e
k k nk
k k nk
e e e when is postive criterion
e e e when is negative criterion
-

(1)
C. The normalize criterion matrix
Because there are different dimension and magnitude
among the judgment criterions, we cant directly contrast
them. To ensure the reliability of the result, we should
normalize the original value.
Assume that the value interval of the k-th criterion is
k1 2
] [ , e
k
e
,
k1
e is the smallest value of the k-th criterion in all
methods, and
k2
e is the largest value of k-th criterion in all
methods, then we can use the following formula to transfer
the original value into dimensionless value
ij
f (0,1) e
.
2
ij
1
/
/
f
ij k
k ij
e e when j is positive criterion
e e when j is nagative criterion

(2)
Where 1, 2, , ; 1, 2, , . i m j n = =
The normalized matrix F as follows:
11 12 1
21 22 2
ij
1 2
) =(f
n
n
m n
m m mn
f f f
f f f
f f f
F

Where 1, 2, , ; 1, 2, , . i m j n = =
D. Identification weight of the criterions
The general methods used to calculate the criterion weight
are Delphi method, Brain storming, Analytic Hierarchy
Process (AHP) and so on. Here, the information entropy is
employed to determine the criterion weight. Shannon
proposed the conception of information entropy for the
discrete stochastic variables. In information theory,
information is the measurement of system order degree, while
information entropy is the measurement of system disorder
degree. Information entropy is defined as:
( ) ( ) ( )
1
j
x ln
1
m
ij ij
i
H p x p x
k =
= (3)
Where
ij
x is the possible state of random independent
events.
( )
ij
p x is the probability of a particular state and
( )
0
ij
p x > ,
1
) 1 (
ij
m
i
p x
=
=

.The value of
( )
ij
p x can be
determined by following:
( )
1
ij
m ij
ij
i
f
p x
f
=
=

(4)
1
( ) ( ln ( ) )
m
i
ij ij ij
H x p x p x
=
=
(5)
1
1
1 ( ln (
ln
) )
m
ij
i
ij ij
v p x p x
n =
= +

(6)
1
m
j ij ij
i
w v v
=
=

(7)
1 2
[ , , , ]
T
n
W w w w = is the weight distribute vector , and
1
1
n
j
j
w
=
=

.
E. Grey relational grade matrix
Assume that
ij
c
is the relationship coefficient of the i-th
method of the j-th criterion.
ij
min min 1 max max 1
1 max max 1
ij ij
j i j i
ij ij
j i
f f
f f
G
p
c
+
=
+
=
(8)
where p is the identification coefficient, its interval is [0,1],
commonly , it is 0.5. So we can obtain the gray relational
grade matrix:
11 12 1
21 22 2
ij
1 2
n
n
m m mn
G
c c c
c c c
c c c
c



=



=

Where 1, 2, , ; 1, 2, , . i m j n = =
F. Determine the decision-making vector
The model of the grey relation synthesis decision- making
is on basis of follows:
R=G W (9)
T
1 2 m
,r , ,r R=[r ] is the integrative judgment result vector of
the m evaluated objects; W is weight vector.
1
n
i ij j
j
r w c
=
=

(10)
If the value of relation degree
i
r is larger, it proves that the
i-th method is closest to the optimal method, and we can get
the priority order of the methods.
1035
IV. REAL-WORLD CASE ANALYSIS
In this section, we apply the grey relation analysis model to
a real-world infrastructure project.
Nanjing Metro Co.Ltd. wanted to alternate and innovate
project delivery system in second section of metro shield
tunnel project. The alternative set of delivery systems is
design-bid-build (DBB), design-build (DB), engineer-
procureconstruct (EPC) and construction management at
risk method (CM at-Risk).
We invited ten experts including academics, contractors,
owners and engineers to set up a selection committee. Firstly,
they were invited to investigate the construction site and
discussed together. Secondly, we provided the preliminary
design document of the project and the organizational
structure and construction experience documents to the
experts. Thirdly, the questionnaires documents about the
criteria for selection of project delivery systems were
presented to the experts individually, and ask them to choose
the questions. Finally, we collected the questionnaires and
dealt with the data.
The process of decision-making is as following:
A. Step 1 Calculate the value of criterion matrix
The ten invited experts respectively appraise the
alternative methods under each attribute, using the comment
set V. In this paper, comment set V = {very poor (VP), poor
(P), fair (F), good (G), very good (VG)} is chosen, value of
comment set V are represented by 1,2,3,4,5. Then we
calculate the mean value of each criterion for every alternate
delivery method, and obtain the value of criterions matrix as
Table II showing:
TABLE II
VALUES OF THE CRITERIA MATRIX FOR EACH DELIVERY SYSTEM
Criteria
Method
C S Q Com SC E FG RM U Size
DBB 2.0 2.7 3.8 2.0 3.4 1.5 1.6 3.8 4.0 1.5
DB 1.9 1.8 1.9 3.4 1.5 3.1 2.6 4.0 4.9 3.8
CM-at risk 2.9 1.0 3.1 3.7 1.8 1.8 3.8 3.4 2.6 4.6
EPC 2.5 4.9 1.4 2.5 4.6 4.2 3.7 4.6 1.3 4.2
B. Step 2 Normalization of criterion matrix
Normalizing the criteria matrix in table II according to (2),
the result is as the following Table III.
TABLE III
NORMALIZATION OF CRITERION
Criteria
Method
C S Q Com SC E FG RM U Size
Optimal criterion set 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
DBB 0.6897 0.5510 1.0000 0.5405 0.7391 0.3571 0.4211 0.8261 0.8163 0.3261
DB 0.6552 0.3673 0.5000 0.9189 0.3261 0.7381 0.6842 0.8696 1.0000 0.8261
CM-at risk 1.0000 0.2041 0.8158 1.0000 0.3913 0.4286 1.0000 0.7391 0.5306 1.0000
EPC 0.8621 1.0000 0.3684 0.6757 1.0000 1.0000 0.9737 1.0000 0.2653 0.9130
C. Step3 Determine the weight of the criterion
The calculation of criteria weights is according to (4)-(7)
and the values of table II. The value of the weight vector is as
follows:
1 2 10
[ , , , ]
T
W w w w =
=[0.078,0.083,0.143,0.062,0.118,0.098,0.089,0.114,0.1
33,0.082]
D. Step 4 Calculate the relational grade coefficient
The relational coefficient matrix is calculated by (8), the
results are showed as following:
0.57 0.45 1.00 0.53 0.67 0.35 0.43 0.79 0.80 0.34
0.48 0.30 0.49 0.89 0.23 0.61 0.63 0.83 1.00 0.57
1.00 0.26 0.62 1.00 0.38 0.50 1.00 0.68 0.54 1.00
0.71 1.00 0.32 0.78 1.00 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.21 0.89
G






=
E. Step 5 Calculate the comprehensive judgment result
It is known that the weight W is given above, according to
(10), the comprehensive judgment result vector R is
R=G W=(0.563,0.798, 0.432,0.678)
According to the result of R, we can get the order of the
four methods:
DB> EPC> DBB >CM-at risk
So the candidates of the project delivery systems: DBB,
DB, CM-at risk and EPC, DB is the most appropriate method.
This result can be proposed to the owners, and help them to
make decision.
V. CONCLUSION
This study proposed a decision-making model for the
selection of project delivery system which is based on
information entropy and grey relational grade analysis. The
application of the model in a real-world practice was
provided. The proposed methodology is more comprehensive
compared with the previous work, especially in the
uncertainty environment. But there are some work should be
considered, such as how to deal with the imprecise and
subjective information given by the experts; how to
determine the weight of the experts`; finding a set of
importance factors influencing the selection of a delivery
system is a complex task to further research. Furthermore it is
1036
the essential and most important work to design and innovate
the project delivery system.
REFERENCES
[1] Adetokunbo A. Oyetunji, Stuart D. Anderson, Relative effectiveness
of project delivery and contract strategies, Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, 2006, Vol132,no.1, pp. 3-12.
[2] Gerald Yakowenko, Megaproject procurement: breaking from
tradition, Public Roads, 2004, Vol.18, no.1,pp. 48-53.
[3] Contractual Arrangements (Report A-7), Business Roundtable, New
York, NY. 1982.
[4] Molenaar K R., Songer A D. Model for public sector design-build
project selection, Journal of construction engineering and
management, 1998,Vol.124, no.6,pp.467-479.
[5] Koncharl M, Sanvido V. Comparison of U.S. project delivery system,
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 1998, Vol124,
no.6 , pp.435-444.
[6] Chan A P, Ho D C, Tam C M. Design and build project success factors:
Multivariate analysis, Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 2001,Vol.127,no.2,pp.93-100.
[7] Florence Yean Yng Ling, Swee Lean Chan, Edwin Chong, Predicting
performance of design-build and design-bid-build projects, Journal of
construction engineering and management, 2004, Vol13.no.1, pp.
75-83.
[8] Ibrahim M M, Khaled A, Decision support system for selecting the
proper project delivery method using analytical hierarchy process
(AHP), International Journal of Project Management, 2005, Vol.
23.pp.564-572.
[9] Mohammed I, Khalil A, Selecting the appropriate project delivery
method using AHP , International Journal of Project Management,
2002 ,Vol.20,pp.469-474.
[10] Gordon. C. M. Choosing appropriate construction contracting
method, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 1994,
Vol.120, no.1, pp. 196-210.
[11] Alhazmi T, McCaffer R. Project procurement system selection
model, Journal Construction Engineering and Management, 2000,
Vol.126,no.3,pp. 176-184.
[12] Spink C M, Choosing the right delivery system, Proceedings of the
1997 ASCE Construction Conference, pp. 63-71.
[13] J. L. Deng, Control problems of grey system, System and Control
Letters, 1982, vol. 5, pp. 288294.
[14] J. L. Deng, The primary methods of grey system theory, Huazhong
University of Science and Technology Press,Wuhan, 2005.
[15] Ziyang Zhen, Zhou Gu, and Yuanyuan Liu, A novel fuzzy entropy
image segmentation approach based on grey relational analysis,
Proceedings of 2007 IEEE International Conference on Grey Systems
and Intelligent Services, November 18-20, 2007, Nanjing, China,
pp.1019-1022.
[16] Bao Zhen-qiang, Wang Peng, Yang Fang, Zhu Cong-wei, Guo Lei,
Grey relation degree analysis for the facilitys location of logistics
distribution network, 2008 International Symposiums on Information
Processing, 23 - 25, May 2008, Moscow- Russia, pp: 615-619.
[17] Gordon CM, Choosing appropriate construction contracting method,
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,
1994,Vol.120,no.1, pp.196-210.
[18] Fereshteh Mafakheri, Liming Dai,Dominik Slezak,and Fuzhan Nasiri,
Project delivery system selection under uncertainty: multi-criteria
multi-level decision aid model , Journal of Construction Engineering
and Management, Vol.23, no. 4, pp. 200-206.
[19] J. L. Deng. Grey theory, Huazhong University of Science and
Technology Press,Wuhan, 2002.
[20] Chan WK and Tong TKL, Multi-criteria material selections and
end-of-life product strategy: Grey relational analysis approach,
Materials & Design, 2007, Vol. 28, no. 5, pp.1539-1546.
[21] Sallehuddin, Roselina Shamsuddin, Siti Mariyam Hj. Hashim, Siti
Zaiton Mohd . Application of grey relational analysis for multivariate
time series,Intelligent Systems Design and Applications,ISDA,2008
8th International Conference on , 26-28 Nov. 2008 , Kaohsuing,
Taiwan, pp.432-437.
1037