About Contact Submit AdsSUBSCRIBE TO OURDAILY NEWSLETTER E-MAIL ADDRESS

Integrated Project Delivery Methodology

MORE OFTHOM MAYNE

9 May 2012

CornellNYC selectsArchitect for Net-Zero

Tech Campus

15 Sep 2011

2011 Monterey DesignConference

MORE PROJECTS ›

SELECTEDBUILDINGS

Sign In Register

Integrated Project Delivery © Tim Winstanley

Integrated project delivery is designed for collaboration from the commencement of a

project. The uniting of owner, architect, and contractor on a level playing field is conducive

to quality delivery. This triad branches out even further when subcontractors and consultants

are brought into the equation. The fundamentals of this process ensure maximum efficiency

and successful project delivery from all parties involved. More details and a case study of

Caltrans District 7 HQ after the break.

Legal Relationship

The legal relationship within the IPD structure is a shared risk/reward model – all parties are

equally vested. In the traditional practice, parties are quite often at opposite ends of the

spectrum, which results in targeting blame when issues arise. In order to streamline project

delivery and ensure quality and efficiency, having everyone share in the responsibility is

crucial. While liabilities and independent insurance tangents are still present in a technical

sense, the antagonistic aspect is eliminated when everybody is vested in the success of

the project. Significant cost savings can be achieved through reduced involvement with

lawyers and arbitrating processes as this is all achieved through the collaborative problem

solving process. Quite often all parties come together to form a single legal entity for the

duration of the project.

Management Committee

Management through committee within the IPD process is quite often approached through

diplomatic avenues. The flow of decision making is not necessarily hierarchical, rather

collaborative management that takes into account multiple parties expertise in order to

achieve optimal solutions. In terms of efficiency of flow of decision making, all major players

are typically housed within the same building/office for the duration of the project. This

minimizes the decision making timeline, as everyone is readily accessible and

management can take place under one roof. When problems arise, a democratic structured

workflow enables optimization, quick turnaround, and rapid implementation into a fluid yet

precise schedule.

Incentive Pool

The incentive pool is typically composed of the profits of the IPD contingency or percentage

of profits for the IPD entity. This method increases the value of performance and quality

World

MOSTVISITED OF THE WEEK

4 Apr 2014

Tree House / 6aArchitects

3 Apr 2014

Nine Bridges CountryClub / Shigeru BanArchitects

8 Apr 2014

AIA Names 10 MostImpressive Houses of2014

4 Apr 2014

The BIG U: BIG's NewYork City Vision for"Rebuild by Design"

6 Apr 2014

Summerhouse inDenmark / JVA

IPD Single Entity Design Build © Tim Winstanley

across the spectrum of all those individuals vested in the project. When cost saving

measures are achieved, the excess amount that would have gone to expenses can be

reintroduced to the project in another area or split amongst the individuals of the IPD team.

Reintroduction of saved funds back into the project inevitably allows for increased efficiency

and minimal fiscal waste. Areas that may have run over budget can receive funds from areas

where construction came in under budget. Whether the funds are split amongst the IPD

team or invested back into the project, the incentive pool is conducive to project success.

Shared Risk/Reward Working Environment

In order for all parties to collaborate on an even playing field, it is crucial for shared risk and

reward implementation. When all parties are equally vested, it is in the best interest of

everyone to problem solve efficiently because the success of the project depends on this

philosophy. The traditional methods of passing along blame and responsibility are virtually

eliminated from the equation and replaced with working environments that encourage

mentalities that seek for project prosperity.

Collaborative Design Assistance

The implementation of collaborative design assistance from the primary stages of

development is a key component in the IPD process. Involving consultants and specialty

trades allows for input that can achieve cost savings. The feedback and collaboration can

detect clashes and deficiencies before construction starts, thus eliminating costly design

mistakes. This process can result in significantly lower RFIs and COs based on the

premise that the majority of these issues would be distilled prior to the construction phase

and optimized for efficiency.

Collaboration Software

BIM software is leading the way for collaboration and the uniting of all aspects of project

delivery – architectural, engineering, mechanical, construction, costing, scheduling, and life

cycle management. The ability to unify all aspects of the design and construction into a

shared model is beneficial from numerous standpoints. The disconnect and constant

revision of drawings is significantly minimized by tightly integrating all these aspects into

live updateable models that can feed data to all team members and all the professions

involved in the project. Collaboration software allows for the complete construction of

projects in the digital realm and the ability for pre construction problem solving.

Efficient Construction

Traditional construction is typically wasteful and inefficient when compared to the methods

employed in integrated project delivery. With shared responsibility and the ability for

collaboration in the physical and digital arenas, it is inevitable that efficiency is prioritized.

BIM implementation can tightly control the various aspects of construction, from trade

interoperability, costing, scheduling, to life cycle sustainability. The ability for front end

planning and problem solving is crucial in eliminating construction excesses. Results from

incorporating this practice methodology and philosophy into the project delivery ensure long-

term success for all parties involved.

Integrated Leadership

IPD Single Entity Design Build © Tim Winstanley

© Justin Cross

Integrated project delivery is at its very core collaborative from all aspects. This includes

leadership amongst all parties. The traditional hierarchical philosophies of managing and

delivering projects no longer applies. Leadership roles are fluid in nature. Individuals with

expertise in specific areas are encouraged to take on leadership roles within their realm and

integrate their knowledge into the project with the goal of optimizing the delivery from early

stages. Implementing dynamic leadership within the process allows expertise to be gleaned

from individuals who might not have had input in the traditional delivery practice. The result

is a project that benefits from a breadth of expertise and significant optimization over the

traditional project.

Caltrans District 7 HQ Project Delivery Case Study

We recently had the opportunity to speak with architect Pavel Getov who was the project

architect with Morphosis – a Santa Monica based firm founded by the Pritzker prize winning

architect Thom Mayne – about the integrated project delivery process of Caltrans District 7

Headquarters. This project represented one of the first forays into the integrated project

delivery methodology. Located in the heart of downtown LA, the state had allotted a fixed

fund for construction and a tight schedule. The traditional methods of construction

administration and project delivery needed to change in order to deliver the project on time

and on budget, and be of the utmost quality.

Starting with the legal relationship, the architects, general contractor and state all signed on

together in the early stages. Legally, the contract was still a design build. However, as

Pavel explains, the process differed significantly from the traditional methods and functioned

as a predecessor for advanced project delivery methodologies of later projects. Even though

each entity had various levels of legal responsibility, together as a team the goal was to

work in unison to achieve the goals set out at the very beginning. Major subtrades including

© Justin Cross

concrete, steel, and mechanical were also brought into the equation at the start in order to

provide guidance and expertise while the project was still in its infancy stages of design.

With a tight budget of $165 million for construction costs, and a $10 million contingency

fund, any money saved during the collaborative design process would be reinvested into the

project. One area that benefited from this reinvestment of funds was the outdoor plaza,

benches, and lighting system. As with any project, flow of information is critical to success.

With the Caltrans, descriptions of basic intent would be passed to the state, whom would

make comments and send back to the on site team where it would be refined and shared

with all parties involved.

In terms of the construction administration, a logical sequence was adhered to in order to

maintain systems synchronization and ensure all parties were up to date with the latest

information. Coordination between all parties was integral to the success of a project of this

scale. Monthly, weekly, and daily meetings between the various parties and

recommendations from individuals with expertise in certain areas ensured up front problem

solving, limiting costly change orders down the line. It is of particular importance that during

the time of design and construction the commodities market was rising at an exponential

rate. In order to shield the project from unwanted price spikes of raw materials, the

structural steel design was one of the first elements to be finalized and ordered. By

preemptively purchasing the steel, the project was shielded from high prices that would have

resulted in the scaling back of the project. Some of the other significant areas that were

distilled prior to the designs leaving paper were the cement board façade system and the

installation method for the exterior perforated metal scrim system. The original designs

called for a particular size of cement board panel that would have resulted in lost product off-

cut waste. By bringing in the manufacturer in the preliminary stages, the size of the cement

panels were redesigned to suit the manufacturer’s stock size, with no detriment to the

aesthetic intent of the design. The metal scrim installation achieved cost savings by utilizing

a window washing system in place of using traditional scaffolding that would have

necessitated additional liability insurance and involved extensive labor for erection and

removal. It should be noted that Morphosis Architects were able to design a cement board

and perforated metal façade system for equal cost to an EIFS façade by involving the

subtrades early on who subsequently were able to provide insight into alternative methods

that allowed for money saved to be reinvested into other areas.

In regards to the collaborative software, Microstation was used for the majority of

construction documentation where 3D was distilled down to 2D documentation. Pavel notes

that at the time of construction, the building industry was still in transition as BIM was in its

preliminary stages. He emphasizes that the industry in its current state is equipped to

handle full 3D documentation, which is inherently efficient as it includes 4D data such as

cost, timeline, and building life cycle information.

In terms of overall construction, the Caltrans building is a great example of the collaborative

process that is inherent within integrated project delivery. The result was a project that was

delivered on time, on budget, of superior construction, and of a quality material palette.

Integrated Project Delivery © Tim

Winstanley

IPD Single Entity Design Build ©

Tim Winstanley

IPD Single Entity Design Build ©

Tim Winstanley

IPD Single Entity Design Build ©

Tim Winstanley

Design Build Traditional © Tim

Winstanley

Tender Traditional © Tim

Winstanley

© Justin Cross

© Justin Cross

Photographs: Justin Cross, Tim Winstanley