Client Case Studies

Sort by
4 Results Found

University of Alberta

Best Value Demonstrates Value in University Procurement & Project Management

Implementation: 2010 – Present

The University of Alberta partnered with PBSRG at ASU to implement the Best Value Business Model with the following strategic objectives:

  • Become a measured organization
  • Increase preplanning and risk minimization
  • Procure and contract with high performing vendors
  • Increase accountability and performance of vendors throughout the contract lifetime.

U of A first piloted Best Value on three projects in distinct industries: services, construction, and design & engineering. After impressive results, U of A has expanded their Best Value portfolio to include numerous projects and an even wider variety of industries, including Information Technology (IT), travel management services, and a construction management program for all small construction projects on campus.

Testimonial: "Best Value saved 14-18 months in schedule and $8-12M in cost on the Design-Build Balmoral Project when compared with traditional processes that would have resulted in change orders during construction. Best Value also saved $500K per year in upfront costs on the University’s Custodial Services contract, plus an additional $400K on the following year of implementation and had an ancillary benefit of being able to internally reassign 3 FTEs to different work on a full time basis (indirect savings of $180K).   The vendor is working to an equal or higher standard than established for campus. " – Hugh Warren, Executive Director of Operations & Maintenance

9.9 / 10
Projects procured and run using Best Value
Total value of projects
Total Savings from first 3 projects
Cost Savings on DB Construction of high tech research facility
Up front savings on Custodial Services contract
U of A Project Manager satisfaction with Best Value vendors
Brian Stewart, Director of Procurement | | 780-492-2775
Hugh Warren, Executive Director of Operations & Maintenance | | 780-492-6405

[Download as PDF]

University of Minnesota

Best Value Achieves Cost Savings in Capital Projects Program

Implementation: 2005 – 2012

In 2005, the University of Minnesota Capital Planning and Project Management (CPPM) partnered with the PBSRG to increase the efficiency of the delivery of construction for the University's Twin Cities Campus. In 2007, after 2 years of testing, UMN-CPPM made the Best Value program a standard procurement option available on all projects. This decision was made in part due to the high performance results of the pilot program. A year later, the UMN-CPPM expanded the use of the program to include professional services (architectural, engineering, and consulting).

Testimonial: "This is one of the most logical, streamlined, factually based processes that actually measures performance that I have seen." - Michael Perkins, (Retired) Associate VP of Capital Planning. Listen to an Interview with Michael

$311.5 M
$329 M
9.6 / 10
Projects procured and run using Best Value
Total estimated budget of projects
Total awarded cost of projects
Projects completed without vendor cost increases
Procurements where Best Value was also lowest cost
Final post-project close out ratings of Best Value
Percent saved off total expected construction spend ($42M)
REFERENCE: Mike Perkins, (Retired) Associate VP of Capital Planning | | 612-877-0430

[Download as PDF]

Arizona State University

$100M Savings Generated by Best Value Projects

Implementation: 2006 – Present

ASU memorial unionIn 2006, Arizona State University utilized the Best Value process on an $800 Million procurement for campus wide food service. This not only was the largest project procured using the Best Value process, but was one of the largest food service contracts in University history. Based on the success of the implementation, the University continued the use of the program on other non-construction areas, including: Recreational equipment services, Sports marketing services, and IT services. In 2008, ASU implemented the Best Value process on their first design and construction project.

Testimonial: "The Best Value method literally took us through the process [of procuring the dining service contract] much more rapidly than we ever have done in the past. We’re talking weeks to do things that took months, and a couple months to do things that sometimes would've taken up to a year... I’m very grateful for the work that we're doing with Dr. Kashiwagi and the PBSRG." - Ray Jensen, Associate Vice President of Business Services [Retired]

Related Presentation - Risk Management of a Best Value Vendor - Fire breaks out in campus community/dining center

$1.64 B
$2.75 M
Projects procured and run using Best Value
Total value of projects
Overall customer satisfaction with Best Value
Reduction in Client Management Requirements on Dining Services contract
Annual Savings on IT Networking Project
REFERENCE: John Riley, Associate VP of Business Services | | 480.727.0894

[Download as PDF]

State of Hawaii & University of Hawaii

Best Value Promotes a “win-win” Scenario Between Owner and Contractors

Implementation: 1997 – 2002

In 1997, the State of Hawaii, Department of Accounting and General Services (DAGS), began implementing the Best Value process. Tired of the complaints they received on the traditional low-bid projects, DAGS was looking to increase the performance of their outsourced projects without spending more money. The initial pilot program was setup to test the Best Value process on roofing and painting projects. Soon the research expanded to mechanical, electrical, and renovation projects, and grew into a four-year program that generated a great amount of success for the State. In 2000, the University of Hawaii began implementing Best Value on a similar set of projects, yielding similarly high results. The research conducted at the University and the State was the longest running Best Value program at its time.

Testimonial: "Best Value promotes a partnering "win-win" scenario between the owner and the contractor... It reduces procurement time; it reduces risk to the owner, and it allows contractors to perform to the best of their abilities... The biggest difference with Best Value is that I could pretty much predict the final results of the projects. I was very confident that I would have a good product." - Charles Serikawa, Assistant Director of Facilities Management, University of Hawaii (Retired)

Projects procured and run using Best Value
Total size of projects

Percent of projects that were completed on time

Percent of projects that were completed within budget

Contractor change order rate

Average post project close out rating of vendor (1-10)
Average post project close out rating of Best Value (1-10)

REFERENCE:  Charles Serikawa, Assistant Director of Facilities Management(Retired) |

[Download as PDF]

Back to top