Investigating the feasible configurational paths in selecting project delivery method between design-bid-build and design-build

Purpose Scholars have proposed various quantitative and qualitative methods for evaluating criteria affecting the selection of project delivery method (PDM). However, these approaches often focus on individual perspectives, lacking a holistic perspective. To address this, this study employed qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to investigate the configurational impact of critical criteria affecting the selection between design-bid-build (DBB) and design-build (DB). Design/methodology/approach Collecting data from 20 DBB cases and 20 DB cases in China and South Korea, we applied the fuzzy-set QCA model from three perspectives: the entire dataset, division between the two countries and the segmentation between owners and contractors. Findings First, with the whole data’s analysis, the results show that DBB emerges as the preferred option when project performance objectives are inconsequential or when projects face substantial regulatory issues and intricate project management problems. Conversely, DB is selected for projects that exhibit complexity or significant project management issues with the high-ability owner and high-project performance objectives. Second, the findings indicate that both countries prioritize project characteristics and project performance objectives when selecting DB, no matter how other criteria exist. Third, the result reveals a similarity in one path between owners and contractors, characterized by the presence of project performance objectives and the absence of the other four criteria. Originality/value This study provided insights into the criteria influencing PDM selection from a comprehensive perspective, serving as a decision support tool for owners facing similar construction projects.