Client departments had entrusted delivery of construction of buildings to an infrastructure implementing department monopoly managed through a service delivery agreement within the inter-governmental framework. The performance of the public sector infrastructure implementing department had been plagued by inefficiency; and in most cases yielded poor results. Recently, a client department had through an open public tender sourced an infrastructure implementing agent to achieve project objectives and service delivery goals; managed through a legally binding contract. The quest is for projects to be delivered on time, within budget and to the required quality; and communities access the needed services. In both cases, the traditional design-bid-build approach is used, differing on management and supervision.
The focus of this study is to assess the performance of the implementing department and that of the implementing agent in respect of four elements of the infrastructure delivery process: penalties, variation orders, planned contract duration versus actual completion duration and actual duration/time lapse between practical completion and presentation of final account. Based on quantitative data analysis, the implementing agent performed better than the implementing department on all the four elements. The study concludes that an implementing agent has a role in the public sector; and qualitative data revealed preference for it to be placed with the implementing department and not with the client department. The study recognizes the need to create enabling conditions and sustainability measures to nurture such an intervention.
Thesis (MSc.) (Project Management)---University of Pretoria 2012