Tag: Integrated Project Delivery

Project Delivery Methods: New 5-Part Online Series Available

in: AIACC / 0 Comments

Online-Project-Delivery-Courses_940-x-327-banner

The dynamic nature of project delivery has changed our collective view; the design and construction industry is rapidly evolving based on client demand. In today’s environment, there are variety of project delivery methodologies available and team members and advisors must understand how to make informed decisions about which option is most appropriate for each project. Choosing the most appropriate method can align stakeholders’ goals relative to risk, decision making, schedule, quality and cost control, and help leverage the skills, knowledge and resources available to each team member.

To assist in the ongoing professional development of the industry, the AIACC and aecKnowledge announce the release of a continuing education (CE) series, Project Delivery Methods. The five-part series is the culmination of a decade-long look at the exploration and evolution of alternative methods of project delivery and provides an important and objective resource. Whether you are an architect, engineer, contractor, specialty consultant, owner, CM or advisor, these courses enable you to make informed decisions about which method, or hybrid of methods, to utilize to achieve your goals and, ultimately, create a better built environment.

The series starts with an overview of various delivery methods available to public and private clients: Design-Bid-Build, Construction Management, Design-Build, and Integrated Project Delivery. Each subsequent course delves into detail about a specific project delivery method. In addition to detailed descriptions and diagrams of the contractual relationships, responsibilities of the various parties, quality control concerns, schedule and cost implications and capabilities required within each project delivery method, the courses contain case studies and lessons learned.

This series demystifies project delivery and is essential viewing for architects, engineers and construction professionals, as well as for owners and public agencies that want to know about factors that contribute to the success of various delivery methods. Each video course is accompanied by downloadable material including matrices, diagrams, case studies and glossaries of terms.

These online courses are approved for continuing education units by AIA/CES. This series also fulfills the Health, Safety and Welfare education requirements by many states to fulfill mandatory CE requirements for ongoing licensure. Additional materials, including free course previews, course descriptions, learning objectives and presenter biographies are also available.

Click here to access the series: Project Delivery Methods

 

Integrated Project Delivery: A History of Leadership, Advocacy, and Commitment

in: AIACC / 0 Comments

IPD, arcca 10.1

During my time in Sacramento as California State Architect, we embarked along with the AIA California Council (AIACC) on an effort to improve state building design and construction through the development of the Excellence in Public Buildings Program. This initiative was not simply an effort focused on improving design. It encompassed the entire arc of the delivery process, as well as maintenance and operations, as well as end user satisfaction, including a focus on sustainability.

What became very clear, very quickly was the fractured nature of the design and construction industry. Information was not shared in a way that reduced effort and improved outcomes. Technology had not penetrated the marketplace in a way that allowed for improved productivity. Statistics show that building construction is the only non-farm industry that has actually decreased in productivity since 1964. Slow to adopt new technology and mired in traditional delivery methods that are often inefficient and can become antagonistic, construction projects too often come in late and over budget. In addition, architects were seen as being incapable of producing workable construction documents, and the nature of the industry added to schedules and costs for owners.

Historically, building projects were a collaborative effort shared by owners, designers, and builders. This system began to change in the early 20th century, when states and private enterprise began to implement “competitive bidding” regulations requiring interested contractors to lump sum bid from “complete” design documents. Insurers convinced design professionals to shed risk by not actively participating in the craft of constructing their buildings. Eventually, trust among the major project stakeholders was eroded, often resulting in litigation over responsibilities and liabilities. Adversarial relationships among the stakeholders have impacted their ability to communicate effectively throughout project delivery. The results are cost and time overruns, dissatisfied owners and users, and billions of dollars of waste within the industry.

What was to be done? In 2002, the AIACC began to explore issues associated with project delivery and determine ways to improve efficiencies and better respond to client and community needs. 2002 AIACC President Carl Meyer, FAIA, convened a task force to encourage discussion within the design and construction industry about the market forces at work that would revolutionize project delivery.

In 2004, the Construction Users Roundtable also responded. This group of significant clients threw down a challenge to the industry that AIACC picked up in a way that leads the movement toward real change. Clients were demanding improvement. By implementing global communication, continuous process improvement, and integrated decision making into their own businesses, they sought to increase productivity and profitability and expected the same of their partners.

The AIACC learned early on that, to be successful, we could not solely be a committee of architects. In order to break down the silos that exist between members of the team and be truly effective advocates for the issue, we had to expand the efforts to include a variety of design and construction professionals, as well as owners and members of the academic community. With subcommittees and programs focused on providing resources in the areas of education, policy, and practice, the AIACC has defined the issue and added significantly to the IPD “vocabulary,” as demonstrated by the following timeline of accomplishments:

May 2006 – AIACC publishes AEC Integration White Paper
August 2006 – AIACC publishes IPD Frequently Asked Questions
August 2006 – AIACC co-sponsors with McGraw-Hill Construction a survey of over 14,000 construction industry participants about IPD issues
May 2007 – AIACC publishes Integrated Project Delivery: A Working Definition
June 2007 – AIACC co-sponsors IPD “Change Conference” with McGraw-Hill Construction and launches the IPD website at www.ipd-ca.net
Nov 2007 – AIACC collaborates with National AIA to create IPD: A Guide
June 2008 – AIACC hosts the first “IPD Lessons Learned Symposium”
Aug 2008 – AIACC publishes the Model Progression Specifications
Nov 2009 – AIACC publishes IPD Frequently Asked Questions #2
May 2009 – AIACC publishes IPD: Experiences in Collaboration
Aug 2009 – AIACC co-sponsors the “IPD Seminar Series” with McGraw-Hill and Hanson Bridgett
Jan 2010 – AIACC collaborates with National AIA to create IPD: Case Studies

In addition to this list of items already completed—and hundreds of articles and presentations produced throughout the country—efforts continue with additional case studies, policy standards, regulatory requirements, publications on implementing IPD, and client advocacy efforts. All of which are important components in making a dramatic change in the way our industry constructs our built environment. The AIACC continues a steadfast commitment to this issue.

 

AIACC Leadership Continues Leading the Way with Integrated Project Delivery

in: AIACC / 0 Comments
AIA, AIA California Council, AIACC, architect, Integrated Project Delivery, IPD, Zigmund Rubel

The last several years, California and the AIACC have led the Nation with Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) processes and implementation. IPD is a project delivery approach that integrates people, systems, business structures and practices into a process that collaboratively harnesses the knowledge, talents and insights of all participants, in order to increase project value, reduce waste and optimize efficiency through all phases of design, fabrication and construction. However, it is important to note IPD is not solely a project delivery method unto itself; IPD principles can be applied to a number of different project delivery methods.

A large amount of work has been conducted and compiled by the AIACC to date and many resources developed to assist the design and construction industry better understand the implications of this new approach. This work has provided a catalyst for broader discussions, with early adopters of this type of project delivery paving the way, with other project delivery methodology benefiting from the collaboration tools and basic principles of IPD.

The AIACC’s IPD committee is an interdisciplinary group, consisting of representatives from the entire AEC community, Zigmund Rubel, AIA, Chair of the committee has been involved in the leadership for several years at the AIACC and has participated in the evolution of this concept. This year, the committee has been completely remade in the hopes that fresh perspectives will validate all the work that has been done up to this point and to expand existing resources; including the “Frequently Asked Questions”, “Experiences in Collaboration”, and “IPD: A Working Definition”. Originally, these three IPD publications were aspirational, but now that the industry has a better understanding of IPD, the committee will be diving deeper into the issues, providing the “how to” in making this delivery method work, and strategies to maximize collaboration.

According to Rubel, “The committee recognizes that IPD is not a single delivery method, and isn’t the only way to maximize ROI on a project. However, it does enable collaboration with most every delivery methodology. We see our purpose as informing project teams who want to utilize IPD about the risks and benefits, the opportunities, and other items for consideration. Our ultimate goal is to create a reference point where interested parties can go to get information regarding anything related to IPD.”

 

IPD is Working…..But, Where’s the Proof? – 6/2/11

in: Member Forum / 0 Comments

Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), is a collaborative delivery method that requires architects, contractors, owners and all stakeholders in the enterprise, to take on new roles and competencies. This necessitates a change in culture, especially for the practitioners where new methods of learning, in order to upgrade the industry and move to virtual environments, need to be implemented.

The AIACC is taking the lead in defining this issue within the design and construction industry and has developed several publications which respond to this changing environment.

While there may be no set definition of collaboration, the construction industry has had some unwritten guidelines in the past regarding collaboration on a project. However, currently the industry is grappling with the possibility of rewriting those rules to some degree. Any project, regardless of the delivery type, has several levels of collaboration in terms of how the design and building teams operate, govern and perform. IPD aims to establish guidelines for owner, architect, and construction professionals to create shared risk and reward structure in a project. Of the owner, architect and contractor, the architect may have the most responsibility for getting the project delivered correctly from the outset.

The methodology and structure of Integrated Project Delivery is proving its value. For several years, IPD has demonstrated the strengths of its process. Developing partnerships amongst the project participants has proven to be extremely effective. When evaluating how IPD is working across the design, construction and building professions, and the effectiveness has been documented, and project owners are happy with the outcomes as well. Jim Bedrick, FAIA, and Vice President, of Virtual Building and Design for Webcor Builders, recently stated, “Since its inception, the IPD approach has yielded successful results on many projects. In the 2010 AIA California Council study of six completed IPD projects, there were zero change orders not related to owner-initiated scope changes – this is typical of the metrics we are finding. It’s clear that the IPD approach of supporting collaboration through alignment of business interests is benefiting all participants in these projects.” (The National AIA has many successful case studies as well.)

In addition, the parties involved in the IPD process appreciate the many benefits and protections offered them via the contract language. In other contract structures, if an architect does extra work they may not necessarily see extra money for their efforts. The IPD incentive structure for compensation allows those who work harder, the opportunity to receive compensation for it. The process also causes participants to work more closely as a team, rather than individual silos, thus, greatly increasing the communication among all the team players, as well as focusing on collaboration efforts. The end result impacts all those involved in the risks, as well as any financial reward. IPD can generate many legal questions, such as “What do you mean I can’t sue the other guy that I’m working with?” Large firms often say they want to do things this way because there are no turf boundaries, and because there is a chance to make additional profit.

Another benefit is that the IPD process can be a bit easier for small firms due to the fact that relationships tend to be less formal and there is typically more collaboration in smaller firms. As we know, it can be difficult at times to turn a battleship, therefore, making it tough for larger firms to change course.

Project obstacles created since the economic collapse have caused owners to forget why they didn’t like design bid build, but now they are finding out that problems in the design bid build process still exist. The past couple of years generated a drop in the use of IPD, but recently IPD has started to pick back up with the economy picking up a bit. In moving forward the structure of IPD will be successful, it’s just getting people on board with the idea. Getting the assembly right from the outset is crucial. There are many successful examples of the IPD process working well in the development of projects, especially in the healthcare field. One of these examples is the eight-story Encircle Health Center in Appleton, Wisconsin. A 150,000 sq. ft. outpatient facility that includes primary care, internal medicine, various physician specialist suites, imaging, labs and more. This project utilized BIM and 3D software to model the building. And a website was maintained to provide continual updated information for all project participants, as well as information exchange.

 

Jim Bedrick FAIA, Receives Fellowship from the National AIA College of Fellows

in: Featured Article / 0 Comments

Jim Bedrick, FAIA, Vice President of Virtual Building and Design for Webcor Builders, was recently elevated to the National AIA College of Fellows. He will be inducted at the investiture ceremony in New Orleans in May, at the National AIA Convention, and looks forward to attending the event.

Bedrick holds degrees in Architecture and Electrical Engineering, and has more than 25 years of experience in the AEC industry. After practicing architecture for 10 years, he moved to the design and management of information systems for architecture firms. In 1998 he joined 3Com Corporation, directing information technology for their world wide construction and facilities management division. In 2001, he joined Webcor, where his focus is in the use of information technology for simulation, coordination, communication and knowledge sharing in design and construction teams.

Being active in many organizations has helped Bedrick with the advancement of information technology to the AEC industry, including Stanford University’s Center for Integrated Facilities Engineering, and the International Alliance for Interoperability. In addition, he is active in the AIA where he serves on the Board Knowledge Committee and the Contact Documents Committee, and is a major contributor to the Integrated Project Delivery effort. Bedrick works toward building bridges between construction and architects, through virtual building practices. This process works well in nearly every situation and builds collaboration on project teams.

Bedrick and six of his other colleagues from the San Francisco Chapter were elevated to the College of Fellows. He was at a committee meeting when heard the good news, and shared the excitement with his peers. He states the application process took some time to put together, but it was enjoyable going through his life’s experiences, what has been accomplished, then documenting it.

The AIACC announces, and congratulates the fourteen California architects who recently received the distinguished honor of Fellow, and will be inducted into the prestigious College of Fellows at the 2011 AIA National Convention in New Orleans. This honor is awarded to architects who have made significant contribution to architecture and society, and who have been an AIA member for more than 10 years. In the coming weeks, each new Fellow will be featured in a brief article online. So watch the website for more information about the new recipients; those who can now include the designation of FAIA.