• 한국건설관리학회논문집
• /
• 제14권2호
• /
• pp.35-44
• /
• 2013

보금자리주택 건설에서 분양가 인하의 하나의 방안으로 직할시공제가 도입되었다. 특정 발주방식을 대규모 공공건설사업에 적용 할 경우 본격적인 적용이전에 해당 발주방식에 대한 각계의 논의를 수렴하고 해당 발주방식이 사업성과에 미치는 영향을 다각도로 분석할 필요가 있다. 이에 본 연구에서는 공공건설사업에의 직할시공제 적용에 따른 공사비, 공사기간, 품질, 리스크 등 사업성과에 미치는 영향을 전문가 면담과 해외사례 조사를 통해 분석하고, 이러한 문제점들을 해결하고 공공건설사업에의 직할시공제의 효율적 적용을 위한 방안을 제시하였다. 먼저 직할시공제하에서는 발주자의 업무가 대폭적으로 증가하므로 해당 공공발주자 조직에서 증가된 업무 수행이 가능한지를 점검해야 하고, 이에 따른 발주자 조직과 업무절차의 변화가 필요하다. 아울러 직할시공제의 효율적 적용을 위해 다중시공기반 CM방식 등 다양한 수행방식을 적용 할 필요가 있으며, 공사관리 절차 및 시스템 구축, 협력업체 강화 등이 필요하다.

• 한국건설관리학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국건설관리학회 2002년도 학술대회지
• /
• pp.385-388
• /
• 2002

다수의 공사수행주체가 복잡한 생산프로세스 내에 존재하는 건설산업의 특성상 참여주체간에 발생하는 문제와 공정 간섭은 생산성 저하의 주된 원인이 된다. 이를 해결하기 위해 최근에 '다공종 통합발주방식'이 제안되었고 일부 대형업체를 중심으로 시범 운영되고 있다. 그러나 통합발주는 아직 제안 초기단계로 실질적인 시행을 위해서는 다양한 기초연구가 선행될 필요가 있다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 통합발주를 시행하여 원${\cdot}$하도급업체 모두가 효율성을 증진시킬 수 있는 작업요소를 규명하고자 한다. 이는 건설업 전반에 통합발주의 필요성을 인식시키고, 통합발주 시행 시에 다수의 공종을 통합하는 기준을 제공할 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.

• 한국건축시공학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국건축시공학회 2015년도 추계 학술논문 발표대회
• /
• pp.62-63
• /
• 2015

In this paper, to prevent overspending of the CM Fee, Agent CM for the normal work-oriented, Willing to separate order model being used in the construction, using a multi-national grouping Go to offer the right company, a number of groups according to the appropriate CM Fee setting is aimed to suggest a reasonable basis. This paper does not use the domestic point of order characteristic of the model, and using a different theory of affinity grouping projection method is presented. The main disadvantage of the domestic order model because it is a contractual relationship, the contractual relationship as unified as possible by the most reasonable way of construction and construction capabilities and commercialization agreement upon the ability of companies also expect to be very helpful. The grouping by using the multi-order construction of the separation problem of the increase and thus the management object construction type administration was to solve the problem.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제18권2호
• /
• pp.79-102
• /
• 2008

When several parties are involved in a dispute, it is usually considered desirable that the issues should be dealt with in the same proceedings, rather than in a series of separate proceedings. This saves time and money. It avoids the possibility of conflicting decisions on the same issues of law and fact, since all issues are determined by the same tribunal at the same time. Where there is a multi-party arbitration, it may be because there are several parties to one contract, or it may be because there are several contracts with different parties that have a bearing on the matters in dispute. In international trade and commerce, for individuals, corporations or state agencies to join together in a joint venture or consortium or in some other legal relationship of this kind, in order to enter into a contract with another party or parties, where such a contract contains an arbitration clause and a dispute arises, the members of the consortium or joint venture may decided that they would each like to appoint an arbitrator. A different problem arises where there are several contracts with different parties, each of which has a bearing on the issues in dispute. A major international construction project is likely to involve not only the employer and the main contractor, but also a host of special suppliers and sub-contractors. Each of them will be operating under different contracts often with different choice of law and arbitration clauses. The appointment of the arbitrator or the composition of the arbitral tribunal should be in accordance with the agreement of the parties. The parties have to be equally treated in the constituting of the arbitral tribunal and the arbitral proceedings. However, the right of the parties to nominate a member of the arbitral tribunal could be taken away from them, if they are subject to the restrictions by means of the law of the country where the arbitration is taking place. That is, multiple parties jointly should nominate one arbitrator, where there they have to exercise their substantive right in common, or one of them exert his substantive right, then it has an effect on another parties, or they, whether as claimant or as respondent, get the same or similar treatment in the arbitral procedure. Therefore it is necessary to intend to settle multi-party disputes quickly and efficiently.