I am no Shakespeare..but this is a topic that I think deserves some additional dialog and discussion…so, I am witting this more to gain your insights than as an informational post. The concept of IPD (Integrated Project Delivery for those of you not actively involved in the design and construction disciplines) is not brand new, but is getting a great deal more “play” since the AIA (American Institute of Architects) began to adopt and actually perpetuate the concept of IPD. Now, I know that many of you are not going to agree with all that I am going to comment on, and frankly, that is great. This topic is far from having any consensus or unanimity…far from it. Like any new idea or concept or methodology, your past and current paradigms will shape the lens from which you look at this subject…which makes this discussion all the more interesting to me.

For the sake of those not actively involved in this discussion, allow me to give some history:

1. There are three primary delivery methods for the delivery of a construction project: Design/Bid/Build, Design/Build and Construction Management (CM). All have pros and cons….but the trend over the past decade has been toward some form of design/build or negotiated agreement vs. D/B/B (there are a multitude of hybrids for each of these methods of project delivery)

2. According to the California chapter of the AIA in 2007, the definition of IPD is:

Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) is a project delivery approach that
integrates people, systems, business structures and practices into a process that collaboratively harnesses the talents and insights of all participants to reduce waste and optimize effi ciency through all phases of design, fabrication and construction. Integrated Project Delivery principles can be applied to a variety of contractual arrangements and Integrated Project Delivery teams will usually include members well beyond the basic triad of owner, architect, and
contractor. At a minimum, though, an Integrated Project includes tight collaboration between the owner, the architect, and the general contractor ultimately responsible for construction of the project, from early design through project handover.

3. The AIA further states is it position paper:

Integrated Project Delivery uses business structures, practices, and processes to collaboratively use the talents and insights of all participants in the design, construction and fabrication process. Beginning when the
project is fi rst conceptualized, the integrated process continues throughout the full life cycle of the facilities.

4. Finally, the AIA states:

Integrated Project Delivery is built on collaboration. As a result,
it can only be successful if the participants share and apply common values and goals.

Now….that last part is the section of the position paper that I agree with wholeheartedly…Integration without Collaboration is nothing more than a facade…a ruse…putting lipstick on a pig. If we are integrated, because we are all sitting around the same table, but do not collaborate, WHY BOTHER!

Now, I am a huge proponent of collaboration…I love a term that Doc Rivers, coach of the Bosten Celtics, used with his team. It is UNBUTU – I am who I am because of who we ALL are.. It is further defined as:

A person with Ubuntu is open and available to others, affirming of others, does not feel threatened that others are able and good, for he or she has a proper self-assurance that comes from knowing that he or she belongs in a greater whole and is diminished when others are humiliated or diminished

I was serving with Cogun, Inc. when IPD first started to make noise in the market place. I immediately started to do research and read the position paper from the AIA (you need to understand that I am kind of weird…I actually enjoy ready building code books as well…I also have a music degree…what does that tell you about me?). I spoke to several people on the topic and even had one of the Cogun team participate in some think tank meetings on the subject. During that time, I used to describe IPD as what our (Cogun) delivery method was but on steroids. I still believe that to an extent, but believe that there are other components that many firms do not adopt to really make IPD function like it should. Let me give you some of the atrtributes of what I believe are the tenants for a productive IPD project:

1. The primary responsibility of each member of an IPD team is to fulfill the objectives and goals of the client being served…not our own agenda
2. Every team has a leader….we will work to support that leader as that leader supports the agreed upon objectives and goals of the team, including the client
3. The client/owner is a vital part of the team….they must be at the table….heck…it is their project and money and not the rest of the teams
4. We all have expertise, but they are limited and silo’ed if they are not expressed and exercised in a collective format
5. Integration is not merely a gathering of a group of people to accomplish a task….it is the proactive, servant-hearted collaboration of this integrated group of people.
6. If I have been asked to serve on an IPD team and I do not believe that I can be a contributing part of the solution or am not able to commit the resources to meet the projects objectives, I will voluntarily withdraw from the team without fear of retribution or of being ostracized from future projects.
7. I must be willing to participate in a “give and take” process with the entire team in order to meet the objectives of the project from the perspectives of
a. Price….initial and ongoing..and usually in an “open book” setting
b. Design
c. Function
d. Schedule
e. Delivery
f. Sustainability
g. Life Cycle (I knew there would be a piece of this for Cool Solutions Group…thank you Lord)
8. I must only drink Global Need Coffee made by a man with spiked hair (OK, not really…just want to make sure you are still with me)
9. If I have a grievance, I will first approach the person with whom I have the issue and try to resolve it in private. If that is unsuccessful, I/we agree to take it to the project leader….and if necessary to the entire project team. I then agree to adhere to the collective agreement of the team.

Now….where do I not agree with IPD, at least as described by the AIA? I do not agree with the assumption of “shared risk.” How can members of the team who’s entire contract value is less that 1-5% of the total project cost have the same risk as someone with 60+% of the total financial aspect of the project? I don’t think that works. I also do not adhere to the notion that there should be a separate LLC established for the IPD to enter into. I do believe in shared accountability and shared responsibility, but based on my understanding of the AIA position, the idea of shared risk does not ring true to me.

So…to “IPD” or not….how would you answer that? You can learn more from the AIA as well as the IPD Association.

More on this at a future time

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.