1 aia update on integrated project delivery lean construction institute design forum january 8 2009...

1

AIA Update on Integrated Project Delivery

Lean Construction Institute Design ForumJanuary 8 2009

Markku Allison, AIA

2

position statement | 2007

3

Position No. 26: Project Delivery

The AIA believes that every project delivery process must address the quality, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability of our built environment. This

can best be effected through industry-wide adoption of an integrated approach to project delivery methodologies characterized by early

involvement of owners, designers, constructors, fabricators and end user/operators in an environment of effective collaboration and open

information sharing. The AIA also believes that an architect is well qualified to serve as a leader on integrated project delivery teams. The AIA further

believes that evolving project delivery processes require integration of education and practice in design and construction, both within and across

disciplines.

4

Ramifications

• Applies to all projects• Integrated, collaborative models are best

• Early involvement is important• Open information sharing is important

• Design and construction education integration should happen• Leadership may involve more than just the architect

5

sea change for the Institute

6

integrated project delivery guide | 2007.11.05

7

ipdg | key ideas

Principles of Integrated Project Delivery(general)

Mutual Respect and TrustMutual Benefit and Reward

Collaborative Innovation and Decision MakingEarly Involvement of Key Participants

Early Goal DefinitionIntensified Planning

Open CommunicationAppropriate Technology

Organization and Leadership

8

ipdg | key ideas

9

ipdg | key ideas

IPD principles can be applied to a variety of contractual arrangements

10

market interest (2009.01.08)

Owner Designer ConstructorSubcontractor EngineerSystems Supplier AttorneyInsurer StudentEducatorNone of the AboveGRAND TOTAL

223279711930310

1487332542114499518

199117926

12%44%11%2%8%2%3%1%3%3%

11%100%

11

research

12

Nearly 80% of respondents indicate they are aware of IPD; about half of respondents view themselves as knowledgeable or experienced.

Confidential

Base: Total Respondents n=2051

13

Based on the definition, reduction of conflict is the IPD attribute of greatest value to project teams.

Confidential


14

Based upon the definition, early involvement of key participants is the most important principle of IPD.

Confidential


15

Of the potential barriers provided to respondents, lack of legal precedent and industry partner skill sets are the greatest barriers to pursuing IPD.

Confidential

Base: Knowledgeable/Experienced with IPD n=1074

16

Lack of trust, lack of skills, lack of information about process and lack of appropriate technology are not significant barriers for most segments.

Confidential

Owner (n=137)

Architect (n=708)

Engineer (n=60)

Contractor (n=137)

Sub-contractor

(n=32)*

Know-ledgeable (n=583)

Experienced (n=480)

Lack of Legal Precedent 61% 67% 57% 52% 53% 76% 47%Industry Partner Support Not There 47% 58% 63% 52% 59% 62% 48%Lack of Insurance 46% 57% 45% 39% 53% 62% 41%Procurement Constraints/Limitations 56% 54% 43% 48% 44% 58% 45%Industry Partner Skill Sets 53% 64% 67% 50% 63% 67% 53%Uncertainty About Risk 48% 59% 53% 39% 38% 67% 39%Uncertainty about Compensation Structure

47% 56% 60% 38% 31% 65% 37%

Lack of Trust in Industry Partners 38% 36% 33% 24% 26% 38% 30%Lack of Necessary Skills 34% 25% 24% 10% 22% 29% 18%Lack of Info About Process 29% 28% 20% 25% 36% 32% 22%Lack Appropriate Technology 34% 21% 18% 13% 22% 26% 17%

Owners are the least likely to believe that lack of support by the industry is a barrier to IPD. The remaining segments view it as a barrier.

17

Lack of trust, lack of skills, lack of information about process and lack of appropriate technology are not significant barriers for most segments.

Confidential

Owner (n=137)

Architect (n=708)

Engineer (n=60)

Contractor (n=137)

Sub-contractor

(n=32)*

Know-ledgeable (n=583)

Experienced (n=480)

Lack of Legal Precedent 61% 67% 57% 52% 53% 76% 47%Industry Partner Support Not There 47% 58% 63% 52% 59% 62% 48%Lack of Insurance 46% 57% 45% 39% 53% 62% 41%Procurement Constraints/Limitations 56% 54% 43% 48% 44% 58% 45%Industry Partner Skill Sets 53% 64% 67% 50% 63% 67% 53%Uncertainty About Risk 48% 59% 53% 39% 38% 67% 39%Uncertainty about Compensation Structure

47% 56% 60% 38% 31% 65% 37%

Lack of Trust in Industry Partners 38% 36% 33% 24% 26% 38% 30%Lack of Necessary Skills 34% 25% 24% 10% 22% 29% 18%Lack of Info About Process 29% 28% 20% 25% 36% 32% 22%Lack Appropriate Technology 34% 21% 18% 13% 22% 26% 17%

Owners are the least likely to believe that lack of support by the industry is a barrier to IPD. The remaining segments view it as a barrier.

18

1052 projects: over 30% behind schedule and over budget

Source: AIA Survey 2008

19


38% of DBB projects behind schedule22% of IPD projects behind schedule

62% of DBB projects on or ahead78% of IPD projects on or ahead

20


37% of DBB projects over budget25% of IPD projects over budget

63% of DBB projects on or under budget75% of IPD projects on or under budget

21

488 IPD projects: overages drop by almost 2/3


90% of IPD projects on or ahead of schedule86% of IPD projects on or under budget

22

BIM appears to be influential in the success of IPD projects.

Confidential

Base: Experienced with IPD n=488Base: Experienced/Project included BIM n=254

23

Sustainability goals are common in IPD projects, and appear to be influential in achieving sustainability goals.

Confidential

Base: Experienced with IPD n=488Base: Experienced/Project included

Sustainability Goals n=336

24


11%

16%

4%

10%

14%

25

Anecdotal but driving to quantitativeIPD seen as influential in accomplishing sustainability goals

Collaborative models establish stronger goalsImplementing complex sustainability strategies is best accomplished

with more stakeholders

Connections to Sustainability

26

50to50 | 2007.12.12

27

50 specific strategies to move toward carbon reduction.A how-to resource for practitioners and others.

Text, diagrams, and images.

50to50

28

agreements

29

Transitional Forms | B195, A195, A295More recognizable, familiar

Utilizes GMP contract with pre-construction services

Immediately familiar and usable within today’s environment

SPE – Full Integration | C195More provocative, unique approach

Single Purpose Entity (Limited Liability Company)

All for one and one for all

IPD Agreements – Two Approaches

30

GMP Amendment

Owner Architect Agreement

Business Terms

General Conditions

All Responsibilities of Owner, Architect and Contractor for All

Phases of Design and Construction

Owner Contractor Agreement

Business Terms

A295 Transitional IPD Forms

31

Owner

C

C C

C

A CM

SPE

SPE Contract Structure

1

1. SPE Agreement

2. SPE Member Services Agreement

2 2

3. SPE OwnerAgreement

3

4. Non-Member Agreement

32

• Structures the SPE

• Provides for SPE management

• Includes procedure for establishing Target Cost

• Contains Dispute Resolution provision

CM

O

A

Owner

Construction ManagerArchitect

SPE

SPE Agreement – C195

33

• Owner Funds SPE

• Owner Audit Rights

• Limitation of Liability, Indemnification and Waiver of Claims

• All disputes resolved under SPE dispute resolution provisionsCMA

SPE

Owner

SPE Owner Agreement – C196

34

• Services at Cost

• Incentive and Goal Achievement Comp.

• SPE has Audit Rights

• Limitation of Liability, Indemnification and Waiver of Claims

• All disputes resolved under SPE dispute resolution provisions

SPE

CMA

Owner

SPE Member Services Agreement – C196

35

• With Non-Member consultants and contractors

• Contracts for stipulated sum or GMP

C

C C

C

Owner

SPE

CMA

SPE Non-Member Agreements

36

E202: BIM Protocol Exhibit

37

Phase

UniFormat 300 Series

Level of Development

Model Element Author

Notes

38

Key Definitions

Coordination

Model Standards

Ownership

39

Model Management

40

Levels of DevelopmentLOD 100: Massing content indicative of volume, location, and orientation.

LOD 200: Generalized systems or assemblies with approximate quantities.

LOD 300: Specific assemblies accurate in terms of quantity, size, shape, location, and orientation.

LOD 400: LOD 300 with fabrication, assembly and detailing information added.

LOD 500: “Record Model”

41

Flow-down

42

Traditional Delivery

43

Integrated Project Delivery

44

Non-UniFormat Elements

45

2008

MHC SmartMarket Report2008

3xPT WhitepaperConsensus opinions about industry change

from owners, contractors, and architects

QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

46

Coming soon!

On Compensation:Considerations for Teams in a Transformed Industry

Outline•Introduction

•Motivations of Team Members: Why Do We Do This•Compensation for What: Ingredients of Compensation

•Current Compensation Models•New Value Propositions

•Appendix A: Three Sample Models•Appendix B: FAQs about Compensation

47

www.aia.org/ip

www.aia.org/sustainability

1 aia update on integrated project delivery lean construction institute design forum january 8 2009...

Documents