Evaluating the Cost Performance of Modern Methods of Construction in a House Building Experiment

Modern methods of construction (MMC) are welcomed by authorities as opportunities to accelerate economic growth and meet their housing needs, largely due to the conjecture that MMC are economically competitive. While scholars have discussed the consequences of using individual MMC, arguing for their economic productivity, including allegedly superior time and quality performance, and marginally inferior cost performance, the published studies lack rigorous substantiation. This knowledge gap is partially addressed by offering an evaluation of the detailed cost performance of four MMC, namely one timber frame, two identical steel frame modular MMC, and one concrete and one steel frame panelized construction system, in a live house construction experiment. Unlike previous studies where the data required adjustments for, inter alia, time and location, the context of this live research experiment was a construction project that was managed by a single contractor on one construction site. The research method includes an investigation of the site conditions and residential building designs, interviews with relevant construction personnel, and analysis of cost records. The actual cost performance of the four MMC houses was poorer than previously argued in the literature, which was mainly attributable to the higher building superstructure, preliminary, and repair costs. The cost performance of the two identical MMC houses also differed. These findings are significant in the context of the questionable time and quality performance of MMC and are likely to impact their sustainability and desirability unless improvements are achieved.