Search

4BT

Close menu
Search Toggle menu
Improving Facilities Sustainment, Improving facilities sustainment outcomes

Improving Facilities Sustainment Outcomes

Improving facilities sustainment outcomes is critical to meeting mission, environment, and financial requirements.

What is facilities sustainment?  Sustainment includes all maintenance and repair activities necessary to keep an inventory of facilities in good working order. It includes regularly scheduled adjustments and inspections, preventive maintenance tasks, and emergency response and service calls for repairs.

Problem
The application of facilities sustainment has been via a flawed process.  A process that does not provide stakeholders with cost visibility, transparency, or management capabilities.   Stakeholders have had to work within disjointed planning, procurement, project delivery, and operations teams and processes to attempt to meet performance goals.  The net results have been a legacy of waste with overspending on the levels of 30% to 40%+, late projects, and inadequate quality.

A critical failure of traditional sustainment policies and practices has been the lack of cost visibility and transparency. 

Solution
Inconsistent and outed project delivery processes are the root cause of the legacy of waste.  Organizations can now implement a standardized robust programmatic process for all repair, renovation, and maintenance projects and work orders.  Application of a single process, adapted to organizational requirements, would eliminate the problems endemic to traditional methods, including Design-Bid-Build, Design-Build, Design/Contractor-at-Risk-Build, ‘et al’.

LEAN Job Order Contracting (JOC) for sustainment and Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) for major new construction, resolve the issues of traditional methods.  Both require information sharing on an early and ongoing basis and collaboration towards mutually beneficial, fully defined outcomes.  A common data environment (CDE) is also mandatory, especially a locally researched unit price cost database.  A critical failure of traditional sustainment policies and practices has been the lack of cost visibility and transparency.  There has not been a valid metric to enable cost management.

The robust practices, which have been proven for decades, enable the early and ongoing collaboration and information sharing of internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams as well as operational personnel.  Define workflows inclusive of approval stages, forms, and full audit trail assure compliance and enable a baseline for continuous improvement.

Enabling technology is also available to embed process and remove issues associated with disjointed asynchronous development of information from disparate domains/disciplines, so common with traditional methods.

Administrative burden is less due to the immediate availability of robust, actionable information.

The creation, exchange, and use of current, actional information among all appropriate participants and stakeholders reduces if not eliminates the typical problems causes by traditional methods including siloed and inconsistently formatted as well as outdated information.

 

Learn more?

what is joc

Why LEAN Construction Matters

LEAN Job Order Contracting

LEAN Job Order Contracting – LEAN Job Order Contracting is the process of integrating planning, procurement, and project delivery for physical infrastructure repair, renovation, maintenance, or new builds, across disparate internal and external teams, within a common data environment (CDE) to consistently enable quality, on time and on budget outcomes.

Requisite tools and support services are readily available and include but are not limited to the following.

  • JOC Program Development
  • JOC Program Management Technology
  • Locally Researched Detailed Line Items Unit Price Book (Local market component costs with labor, material, and equipment details.)
  • JOC Program Support Services
  • Independent Third-party Audits

LEAN Job Order Contracting LEAN Job Order Contracting

and Renovation projects

MANAGE Construction, Repair, and Renovation projects by EMPOWERING teams –

Isn’t it time you truly MANAGE Construction, Repair, and Renovation projects?

Robust processes, workflows, tools, and services exist to enable the consistent delivery of quality projects on time and on budget.   They EMPOWER internal and external teams to plan, procure, and execute projects collaboratively on an early and ongoing basis, while also ensuring a detailed, clearly communicated, and verifiable cost and technical scope of work.

At the core of these robust processes is a locally researched detailed unit price cost book. Line-item estimating is the only information that should be use for ANY repair, renovation, maintenance, or new build procurement and a local market unit price book is the only efficient method of obtaining and leveraging detailed cost information.  While many owners and design-builders unfortunately still rely on traditional methods such as national average cost data and location factoring, or historical data and economic indexing, or other forms of area cost factors, these methods introduce significant cost errors and increase overall project cost by 30%-40%.

Learn more?  www.4bt.us

 

improve facilities management

MANAGE Construction, Repair, and Renovation projects by EMPOWERING internal and external teams to plan, procure, and execute projects collaboratively on an early and ongoing basis, while also ensuring a detailed, clearly communicated, and verifiable cost and technical scope of work.

 

Improve Facilities Management, Improve Facilities Management Outomes

Begin to Improve Facilities Management Today

Begin to improve facilities management today by implementing change.  Change that will result in significant improvement in all repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build activities and outcomes.

improve facilities management

www.4bt.us

Productive Job Order Contracting

Productive Job Order Contracting

Productive Job Order Contracting (JOC) is important to all public sector real property owners.

Productive Job Order Contracting provides cost visibility and transparency and can be deployed at a 10x savings versus traditional offerings.

Most traditional JOC Programs focus simply on speeding procurement cycles.  As multiple independent audits have shown, the result has been a lack of financial oversight and poor cost management.  Savvy real property owners are now implementing JOC solutions that not only provide cost visibility and transparency, but also can be deployed at a 10x savings versus traditional offerings.

For JOC Programs to provide maximum benefit, internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams must operate collaboratively on an early and ongoing basis.  A third party “JOC Consultant” should be removed from the process other than for services independent auditing, training, and independent government estimating assistance.

Intelligently designed, implemented, and managed, JOC Program can consistently deliver quality repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds on time and on budget and maintain full compliace with less administrative burden and cost.

Roles and responsibilities are now changing to play a leadership role in assuring positive environmental and financial outcomes.  Innovative JOC Programs, tools, and services can play a key role in this transition.

 

Characteristics of a Productive JOC Program
• Requirements are spelled out in a multi-party agreement and integral Operations Manual/Execution Guide
• Integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery teams
• Characteristics of success are spelled out
• Strategic and tactical impediments to a programmatic approach for all projects are mitigated with the leadership and support of senior management
• Problem solving is encouraged
• Quantitative metrics and training are requirements
• Common data environment including locally researched detailed line item cost data

 

Learn how to define a best value JOC Program?

Why LEAN Construction Matters

LEAN Construction Framework – A Robust Solution fully supported by tools and services

An introduction to a LEAN Construction Framework – A Robust Solution fully supported by tools and services.

Efficient, balanced, and collaborative

  • Integrated internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams
  • Project team members are selected through value-based proposals and associated rankings/metrics
  • Written long-term multi-party agreement with integral operations manual/execution guide
  • Focus upon mutually beneficial outcomes
  • Defined workflows, stages/phases, documentation, approvals
  • Cost estimating and budgeting a continuous process, accomplished through intimate collaboration between internal and external planning, procurement, and project team members using locally researched, granular (line item) market data organized using standard data
  • Mandatory initial and ongoing multi-level and multi-format training
  • Regular third-party audits

Target and actual cost visibility and breakdown need major attention, mainly through the development of specific inter-organizational cost management system and granular, local market researched data.

Interested in a discussion?

REFERENCES
Ansari, S.; Bell, J.; Swenson, D. (2006). “A template for implementing target costing”.
Cost Management, ABI/INFORM Global, New York, 20 (5) 20-27.
Ballard, G.; Reiser, P. (2004). “The St. Olaf College fieldhouse project: a case study in
designing to target cost”. Proceedings… of the 12th Annual Conference on Lean
Construction, Denmark.
Ballard, G. (2006). “Rethinking Project definition in terms of Target Costing”.
Proceedings… of the 14th Annual Conference on Lean Construction, Santiago, Chile.
Broome, J.; Perry, J. (2002). “How practitioners set share fractions in target cost
contracts”. International Journal of Project Management, Elsevier, New York, 20 (1)
59-66.
Cooper, R.; Slagmulder, R. (1997). Target costing and value engineering. Productivity
Press, Portland, 379 p.
Cooper, R.; Slagmulder, R. (1999). Supply chain development for the lean enterprise:
interorganizational cost management. Productivity Press, Portland, 510 p.
Dekker, H.; Smidt, P. (2003). “A survey of the adoption and use of target costing in
Dutch firms”. International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, New York, 84
(3) 293-305.
Formiga, A. dos S. (2005). “Target costing implementation for cost estimating in
construction firms of Porto Alegre/RS, Brazil”. “Implantação do uso do Target
Costing na elaboração de orçamentos de obras em empresa de construção civil de
Porto Alegre-RS”. Master. Diss., Civil Eng., Federal University of Rio Grande do
Sul, Porto Alegre-RS, Brazil, 105 p. (in portuguese).
Granja, A. D.; Picchi, F. A.; Robert, G. T. (2005). “Target and Kaizen Costing in
Construction”. Proceedings… of the 13th Annual Conference on Lean Construction,
Sidney, Australia.
Ibusuki, U.; Kaminski, P. C. (2007). “Product development process with focus on value
engineering and target-costing: A case study in an automotive company”.
International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, New York, 105 (2) 459-474.
Kern, A.P.; Soares, A.C.; Formoso, C.T. (2006) “Target costing in cost planning and
control of construction projects”. “Custo-meta no planejamento e controle de custos
de empreendimentos de construção”. Proceedings… of the 11th Encontro Nacional de
tecnologia do ambiente construído (ENTAC), Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brasil (in
portuguese).
Lin, T. W.; Merchant, K. A.; Yang, Y.; Yu, Z. (2005). “Target Costing and Incentive
Compensation”. Cost Management, ABI/INFORM Global, New York, 19 (2) 29-42.
McNair, C. J.; Polutnik, L.; Silvi, R. (2006). “Customer-driven lean cost management”.
Cost Management, ABI/INFORM Global, New York, 20 (6) 9-21.
Monden, Y. (1995). “Target costing and kaizen costing”, Productivity press, Portland,
Oregon, 373 p.
Nicolini, D.; Tomkins, C.; Holti, R.; Oldman, A.; Smalley, M. (2000). “Can target costing
and whole life costing be applied in the construction industry?: evidence from two
case studies”. British Journal of Management, Blackwell Synergy Publishing,
London, UK, 11 (4) 303-324.
Robert, G. T.; Granja, A. D. (2006). “Target and Kaizen Costing Implementation in
Construction”. Proceedings… of the 14th Annual Conference on Lean Construction,
Santiago, Chile.
Williamson, A. (1997). “Target and Kaizen costing”. Manufacturing Engineer, IET,
Stevenage, UK, 76 (1) 22-24.
Yook, K.; Kim, I.; Yoshikawa, T. (2005). “Target costing in the construction industry:
evidence from Japan”. Construction Accounting & Taxation, ABI/INFORM Global,
New York, 15 (3) 5-18.

Facilitating BEST VALUE OUTCOMES in the built asset industry

Facilitating BEST VALUE OUTCOMES in the built asset industry through robust PROCESS and collaboration.

If you think technology like BIM, ERP, CMMS, IWMS… will enable you to resolve the rampant environmental and financial waste associated with built assets, don’t bother to read this.  You are part of the masses that think traditional solutions provided by big companies are safe for your career or can help your organization.  Facilitating BEST VALUE OUTCOMES in the built asset industry through robust PROCESSS and collaboration is the only proven path.

People, Process, Information come first, then Technology.   Most real property owners, design-builders, and oversight groups say they are aware of this, yet rarely make decisions based upon this simple reality.   Great teams of people working collaboratively toward mutually beneficial goals while sharing current actionable information on an early and ongoing basis is the ONLY path to the consistent delivery of quality repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build projects on time and on budget. 

Here what doesn’t work….

#1. Traditional design-bid-build or lowest bid

#2.  Using national average cost data, historical costs, area cost factors, or parametric costs to determine cost, material, schedule, and labor requirements.

#3.  Treating every project in a unique manner without applying a consistent process and workflow throughout planning, procurement, and project delivery

#4 Using email, spreadsheets, and/or paper files to manage requirements and teams

Here’s what works…

#1 Integrated project delivery (large projects) and LEAN, open, Job Order Contracting for repair, renovation, maintenance, and non-design intensive new construction

#2 Leveraging current, locally researched granular (line item) cost data inclusive of detailed labor, material, and equipment information.

#3 Integrating internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams

#4 Focusing upon mutually beneficial solutions and outcomes.

 

Facilitating BEST VALUE OUTCOMES
Repair, Renovation, Construction Cost Data

Facilitating BEST VALUE OUTCOMES in the built asset industry

Preventive Maintenance Costs and Checklists for All Frequencies

Valid construction estimates

Valid construction estimates

Valid construction estimates are based on processes and procedures, however, most organizations rely upon dated, ineffective methods.

Cost and time estimates are imperative to the success of any construction project, both during construction and throughout the project life.

Whether a repair, renovation, maintenance, sustainability, or new build project, certain fundamental processes and information are REQUIRED to create a valid construction estimate.  Here is an outline of those requirements:

#1.  An experienced professional cost estimator that is involved throughout the project planning, procurement, and project delivery life cycle and relies upon current best management practices versus inefficient traditional methodology.

#2 Detailed line item estimating.  Line-item estimating is the only method that provides a result that can be used for procuring a project of any size.  Failure to adopt this method results in an associated lack of cost visibility, transparency, and management capability.

#3 Current, locally researched cost database inclusive of all required labor, material, and equipment.  A national average cost database, area cost factoring, economic cost factoring, historical cost data, systems level estimating, and parametric estimating are insufficient when moving to the procurement stage.

Valid construction estimates are critical to efficient construction project management and best value outcomes.

 

Locally researched cost data, organized using expanded CSI Masterformat
Locally researched cost data, organized using expanded CSI Masterformat
Locally Researched Preventive Maintenance Cost Database, organized using expanded UNIFORMAT. Granular costs for each task, associated checklist, and frequency.
Locally Researched Preventive Maintenance Cost Database, organized using expanded UNIFORMAT. Granular costs for each task, asssociated checklist, and frequency.

 

via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us – Robust, integrated construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions.

Selecting JOC Contractors

Selecting JOC Contractors

Selecting JOC Contractors involves more than simply reviewing their coefficients/bid factors.

When considering JOC Contractors, remember you are investing to assure a long term, mutually beneficial relationship.

You want JOC Contractors who…

  • Demonstrate an interest in partnering to achieve best value outcomes for all participants and stakeholders
  • Are willing to share information in an open, collaborative manner
  • Seek to provide solutions to problems
  • Fully consider costs that impacts of all repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build activities.
  • Are open to learning about how to improve their work and the work of everyone involved.

 

Selecting JOC Contractors

www.4bt.us – Robust, LEAN Job Order Contracting Solutions – All the tools and services needed to design, implement, and manage a best value JOC Program!

 

An Efficient Approach to Facilities Sustainment

Integrate Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery – An Efficient Approach to Facilities Sustainment

An Efficient Approach to Facilities Sustainment requires the Integration of Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery Teams, a robust programmatic process, and a common data environment inclusive of locally researched granular cost data.

Process must complement the product/service, as well as participant, stakeholders, and other resources.

  • Integrate cross-functional teams and organizations
  • Consist application of a robust workflow
  • Structure process around current, locally market granular cost and technical data
  • Leverage technology as a tool, not a strategy
  • Early and ongoing involvement of cross-functional teams
  • Transparency of goals, process, rules and responsibilities
  • Frontloading of resources
  • Mandatory initial and ongoing training
  • Quantitative metrics
  • Performance-based reward system
  • Common information environment

An Efficient Approach to Facilities Sustainment

preventive maintenance cost database

A Solid Construction Project Delivery Framework, Why LEAN Construction Matters

A Solid Construction Project Delivery Framework to better address the complex problems of planning, procurement, and new builds.

This document outlines A Solid Construction Project Delivery Framework to better address the complex problems of planning, procurement, and new builds.

All the tools and support services to support this framework are available to ensure that over 90% of all repairs, renovation, maintenance, and new builds are delivered in a satisfactory, quality manner, on time and on budget.

Cost and schedule overruns, accidents, less than expected quality and inadequate functionality are the norm in the publics sector at federal, state, county, and local levels.  While the rampant economic and environmental waste is unsustainable, it continues unabated with virtually zero accountability or oversight.

A solid Construction Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery Framework – Characteristics, Capabilities, Tools, and Requirements – Outline

  1. Owner leadership, commitment, and competency
  2. Integrated internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams
  3. Long-term multi-party agreement with an integral Operations Manual / Execution Guide
  4. Quantitative performance-based metrics
  5. Common data environment, including current, local market granular line-item cost data and associated descriptions and details for labor, material, equipment, crews, productivity and involved tasks.
  6. Mandatory initial and ongoing training for all participants and stakeholders
  7. Regular third-party audits
  8. Enabling technology embedding processes, workflows, and information.

Poor Assumptions Drive Disaster

 

Root Causes of Construction Project Variability

job order contracting lessons

Why LEAN Construction Matters

Effective Strategies to Improve Facilities Repair, Renovation, Maintenance, and New Build Outcomes

The fundamental requirements for achieving adequate cost management with respect to physical infrastructure sustainment and new construction are shown below. Tools and services to accomplish the goal are readily available.

Physical Infrastructure Management – Requisite Tools

  1. Implementation of programmatic, robust, integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery process for ALL requirements.
  2. Locally researched, current, granular (unit price line item) cost data as the basic foundational element for all costing. (Note: The continued reliance upon historical costing, national average cost data, and the use of location or economic factoring has resulted in gross cost errors and significantly contributed to the mismanagement of resources.)
  3. Quantitative metrics
  4. Frequent independent third-party audits

Reach out to learn more.

Public Sector Facilities Managment
Public Sector Facilities Managment

4bt.us

Why LEAN Construction Matters

The lack of a basic framework for the construction of facilities

The lack of a basic framework for the construction of facilities is the fundamental cause of rampant environmental and economic waste.

The term “construction” in this case is used for any repair, renovation, maintenance, or new building activity associated with a built structure (buildings, roadways, airports, bridges, dams, ….).

Any construction “project” can be defined as any number of more granular tasks that are performed in sequence or in parallel.  While every project may have its own unique characteristics, the overall planning, procurement, and project delivery process should follow a defined process across all participants and stakeholders.   The fundamental problem is that a robust programmatic process is rarely if ever applied to all projects by real property owners and their service partners.

Two robust programmatic processes that can integrate internal and external construction planning, procurement, and project delivery teams are LEAN integrated project delivery (IPD) and LEAN job order contracting (JOC).   Both programmatic processes are capable of consistently delivering quality projects on time and on budget, however, both are poorly understood and rarely implemented or managed correctly.

Why LEAN Construction Matters

ISO 50001-based energy management system

The ISO 50001-based energy management system is too little too late and fails to address the fundamental issue of rampant economic and environmental waste associated with facilities repair, renovation, maintenance, and new buildings.

 

Key problems.

#1 The program is self-paced.  No timelines.

#2 The program is no-cost.  Since when does no cost associate with value?

#3 There is no requirement for third party audits.  History has taught us to “trust but measure”, failure to learn from our past is a sure fire way to fail.

way for organizations to build a culture of structured energy improvement that leads to deeper and sustained savings that does not require any external audits or certifications.

 

The is only one proven way for facilities portfolio owners to…

  • Cut operational costs,
  • Achieve continuous improvement and
  • Improve risk management.

That “way” is a  process that involves implementing an organization wide robust programmatic process to all decisions and projects.  A programmatic process that mandates early and ongoing collaboration between all internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams invovles i facilities management, inclusive of complete technical and cost visibility, long-term multi-party agreements, a written operations manual/execution guide, a common data environment (example: locally researched granular cost data for repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds organized with a standard standard data architecture-MasterFormat, Uniformat, etc.), all focus upon mutually beneficial, clearly defined outcomes.

Levels of collaboration

Why LEAN Construction Matters

WBS-Work Breakdown Structure Matters

WBS-Work Breakdown Structure Matters for every repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds.

Terms and hierarchy are critical. WBS is significantly enhanced by CSI MasterFormat line-item tasks in terms of cost and labor quantification, especially when data is available in a locally researched database.

 

Work Breakdown Structure Matters Work Breakdown Structure Matters (more…)

Rethink your JOC Program

Rethink your JOC Program

It’s time to rethink your JOC Program.

4BT (Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us) has developed a SaaS (web-based) information management application, developed as a SaaS solution for the Job Order Contracting (JOC), Indefinite Quantity Contracting (IQC), and integrated project delivery.

Rethink your JOC Program in concert with public sector stewardship.

Faster, Better, Cheaper
Unlike traditional systems, the 4BT-PEP integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery teams for repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds, and reduces both administrative burden and overall costs.   It also does NOT require a percentage of construction volume as a fee.  Lastly the 4BT-PEP is far easier to implement and use.  4BT also supplies all associated support and training services.

Cost Book
4BT develops local market construction cost data and does not use either localization factors or economic factors.  Cost data is updated quarterly and/or as required/appropriate.  Furthermore, unlike other systems, a separate preventive maintenance cost book is available complete with costs for each task for each frequency, including labor and materials, and a checklist!

Technical Specifications
All costs are researched using appropriate technical specifications.  4BT can provide technical specifications of leverage client specifications.

Efficient Workflows
Robust workflows are embedded into 4BT JOC technology to enable owners to create and enter, review, communicate, and manage scopes of work from planning, through procurement, project delivery, and final closeout.  All phases, approvals, forms, and communications are available within the system without the need for emails or paper-based filing.  Each communication and document are linked to the associated JOC Program, Contract, Project, and Workorder, eliminating costly errors and delays associated with misinformation.

Full Compliance and Monitoring
A full audit trail is monitored within the system to assure validity, cost visibility, and cost management.  Every change is tracked within the 4BT-PEP system.   Furthermore, key performance indicators are available to enable JOC Program monitoring and continuous improvement.

Unique Solution
The 4BT-PEP JOC Information Management System is unique with no other systems capable of meeting all these requirements and it does so at a fraction of the price of traditional JOC systems.

masterformat construction cost estimating

Isn’t it time to rethink your JOC Program and achieve significant cost and time savings?

www.4bt.us

Rethinking Construction Cost Data

Rethinking Construction Cost Data and Improving Outcomes

Rethinking construction cost data is the first step towards improving repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build outcomes.

First let’s discuss a few myths perpetuated by time, vendors, and poor education:

#1. National average cost data can be used for estimating projects.  Project costs throughout the United States can easily vary by 60% or more.  Using a national average cost database for budgetary purposes is unreliable for similar reasons.

#2. Localization factors can be used to national average cost data to specific market conditions.  This is a complete fallacy perpetuated by vendors and many government organizations as it simplifies data collection and tends to add a false sense of security to those in charge of the purse strings.  Individual labor rates for tradesmen, material, and equipment costs vary significantly and must be researched per location.  City cost indexes or area cost factors are grossly inaccurate and generate result in error of 30%-40%+.

#3. Economic factors can be used to update estimates and/or cost data.  The application of a single factor to an estimate or cost database, for example the ENR cost index, results in gross errors.   Individual components within the estimate or cost database vary widely over time.  Just as line-item construction cost estimate is the only method of producing a valid result, individual items in an estimate and cost database need to be individually researched and updated.

 

Line-Item Construction Cost Estimating

Any experienced professional construction cost estimator knows that line-item construction cost estimating is the only way to provide a current reliable result.

Rethinking Construction Cost Data
Levels of Construction of Estimating and Associated Validity

This process requires a listing of all required construction activities and their quantities for the specified location and considers location and productivity and associated impactful variables.  Despite this fact, and the above, many real property owners accept lump sum bids from builders without preparing a line-item estimate.

Rethinking Construction Cost Data
Additional Cost Estimate Classifications

 

Creating a line-item estimate can be expedited with the use of locally researched line-time construction cost database than s not only reflect current local market conditions, but also is organized using clear terms and definitions as well as the CSI Masterformat data architecture.  Leveraging this approach also improves early and ongoing communications among owners, designers, and builders and mitigates both miscommunications and related change orders.

Rethinking Construction Cost Data
Rethinking Consruction Cost Data

 

Rethinking Construction Cost Data
Collaboration is CRITICAL

Learn more!

 

Public Sector Facilities Project Cost Management

Public Sector Facilities Project Cost Management

Public Sector Facilities Project Cost Management is required to address traditionally elevated levels of economic and environmental waste.

The good news is that robust solutions are readily available to enable the consistent delivery of quality repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction projects on time and on budget.

The bad news is that continuous, competent leadership is required that understands that change from current ‘ad hoc’ as wasteful practices is required.

Public Sector Facilities Project Cost Management involves tracking costs in real time throughout the full life cycle of planning, procurement, and delivery.

Efficiently planning projects, procuring projects, executing projects, and managing costs involve several fundamental elements.  All are mandatory with the lack of any single element resulting in the inability to produce consistent best value outcomes.
  1. Robust, integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery framework
  2. Integrated internal and external collaborative, capable teams working towards well defined and documented mutually beneficial goals
  3. Full support and commitment of leadership
  4. Mandatory initial and ongoing training for ALL participants and stakeholders
  5. Current, locally researched granular (unit price line line) cost data, organized by CSI Masterformat
  6. Quantitative metrics/performance indicators

What Is a Project Expense?

It is impossible to manage what isn’t measured and most public sector agencies fail at an elemental level, the lack of cost visibility.  The only valid cost measurement is a line-item estimate based upon local market conditions.  There is not a single Federal Sector organizations that requires this basic requirement for all repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build projects.  As this type of cost data is readily available, this failure is tragic and should be unacceptable to taxpayers and government professionals alike.
Projects cost money and therefore demand project expense tracking!  Being able to manage and track expenses is what keeps the project within a budget is a fundamental failure point.
Without verifiable cost data, inclusive of labor, material, and equipment requirements, cost, scope, and time cannot be managed.  It’s that simple.
Public Sector Facilities Project Cost Management
Local Granular Project Cost Data
Local Preventive Maintenance Cost Data - Checklist and Frequencies

Establish Facilities Repair, Renovation, Maintenance, and New Build Cost Managment Systems

The first requirement is to understand, institute, and manage a consistent robust programmatic approach for all activities.   While each project has its one unique set of characteristics there is no reason not to require core fundamental processes and workflow for each!  All the tools and support systems are readily available to support this level of dynamic functionality.

Information format is critical to collaborative lifecycle information sharing and use.  A common data environment (CDE) is needed for all teams.  This means a common set of industry standard terms and defintions, as well as data architectures (examples: CSI Masterformat, UNIFORMAT, OMNICLASS…).

Technology can help to reduce implementation and administration costs; however, the key is the robust programmatic process.  Technoloy must embed and support robust processes.  Technology solves little on its own as evidenced by the relative failures of ERP systems and BIM to provide a significant improvement without associated organization change.

Defined Workflows

Defined workflows for all participants assure that actionable information is available toapproprate team members in a timely manner added all associated requirements, timeliness, and approvals are properly acted upon.  Available tools and services enable all teams to gain access to information at any time without searching for emails or files. Common access to current vetted information is essential to any project cost management activity.  Traditional approaches and technology available for current “market leaders” lag in their ability to support integrated LEAN planning, procurement, and project delivery teams.

Root Causes of Construction Project Variability

 

Learn more….

Nonresidential Construction Market Update

Nonresidential Construction Market Update 2022 – Impact of higher financing and project delivery costs

Nonresidential construction DOWN decreased 0.4% in August

  • Largest declines in Highway/street, Water supply and Public Safety
  • Other sectors down include – Commercial, Healthcare, Education, Office, Manufacturing, and Power

 

Rising costs of financing and delivering construction services put brakes on nonresidential construction.

Now, more than ever, robust, efficient LEAN planning, procurement, and project delivery methods need to be deployed.

Public Sector Facilities Stewardship

Public Sector Facilities Stewardship and Data-driven Decision Making

Public sector facilities stewardship has traditionally received poor grades.   The fundamental reason the assumptions most public sector professionals have are incorrect when it comes to life-cycle management of the built environment.

Assumptions drive what information is collected, how it is collected, how information is analyzed, and what conclusions result, and subsequent actions taken.

Here are just a few of the incorrect assumptions held by many public sector organizations that result in excessive economic and environmental waste.

  1. Low bid is an acceptable form of procuring repair, renovation, maintenance, or new construction services.
  2. Planning, procurement, and project delivery can be accomplished by disparate teams that lack integration through their respective life cycles.
  3. Lumps sum bids from contractors or subcontracts, historical costs, or benchmark cost data are reliable forms of cost estimation.
  4. Large, traditional software/services providers provide the best solutions.
  5. Long term contracts and associated processes can’t be developed between owners, planners, designers, and builders that are mutually beneficial and could mitigate waste by 30%-40%.
  6. ….
Poor Assumptions Drive Disaster

 

Learn more about readily available solutions that work!

 

Is data-driven decision making possible?

Data – Observable information
Interpretations – What a person selects from observable information
Evaluations – Value judgments and meanings
Conclusions – Statements derived from Data, Interpretations, and Evaluations
Actions – Steps/actions taken

Principles of Sustainable Construction

Principles of Sustainable Construction

Principles of Sustainable Construction

  1. sustainable design

    • Materials
    • Transport
    • Water
    • Energy
    • Waste

  2. durability

  3. energy efficiency

  4. waste reduction

  5. indoor air quality

  6. water conservation

  7. sustainable building materials

    • Timber instead of steel
    • Concrete reinforced with natural fibers
    • Geo-textiles made from crops
    • Straw bales
    • Materials that are accredited as being responsibility sourced
The Principles of Sustainable Construction (Adapted from CIB, 1994 and Kibert, 2008)
Principles of Sustainable Construction
Framework for Building Material Management in Adaptation Projects

 

Process is King!

 

Robust Tools and Services….

 

Local Market Construction Cost Data

Local Market Construction Cost Data

Without granular, line item Local Market Construction Cost Data you can’t have a verifiable estimate.   Most organizations rely upon national average cost data, consultants, and/or historical data.   National average cost data is not representative of local market data even when cost indices or area cost factors are applied.  Historical data shows little more than what some cost to build, without any information of what costs should have been.

 

“A real irony is that respect for people requires that people feel the pain of critical feedback. If we do not give people accurate feedback based on real behavior they are not growing and we are not respecting them.”

– Akio Toyoda

 

 

Single Source of Truth

Construction, Renovation, Repair, and Maintenance Costs – RELIABLE Local Market Construction Cost Data is now available, and updated quarterly, without any factoring.

  • Expertly developed, maintained, and updated quarterly
  • For Owners, Design-builders, and Oversight Groups
  • Significantly reduced administrative burden and cost
  • Compliance
  • Enables integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery workflow
  • Secure Amazon AWS Cloud SaaS Technology – Available Program, Project, Contract, and Work Order Management System, inclusive of automate side-by-side estimate comparison
      • Dashboard – At a glance overview of organization-wide status and performance
      • Easy to navigate control center
      • Team management- Manage team member roles, workflows, documents, and cost data libraries.
      • Track multiple programs, contracts, projects, estimates/bids/proposals, issues/tasks, and workorders throughout their lifecycles.
      • Controlled secure global access to all uploaded files
      • Copy/paste estimates
      • Internal email that links all communications and information to workorder, project, and contract
      • Issues/Tasks ticketing system
      • Full document management system inclusive of version control
    •  Much more….
    • Online real-time collaborative estimate review
    • 65,000+ line items
    • Transparent and verifiable – Full visibility into labor, material, equipment, and crew/productivity information
    • Ability to develop new/custom line items -review, modify and price individual labor, material, and equipment cost components
    • WBS – CSI Masterformat

    Local Market Construction Cost Data

     

     

  • Local Market Construction Cost Data
    Local Market Construction Cost Data

    job order contract solution

  • www.4bt.uis

Why LEAN Construction Matters

Current Construction Cost Data CSI Masterformat

Current Construction Cost Data CSI Masterformat is now more important than ever.

4BT exclusively offers CSI Masterformat locally researched construction cost data that is updated quarterly

 

  1. Granular line-item construction cost data with labor, material, equipment, and productivity information
  2. Organized using expanded CSI Masterformat
  3. Over 65,000 line-items- repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build
  4. Locally researched without the use of cost factors or economic indexes. (Note: The use of localization factors (CCI, ACI, etc.) or economic factors (ENR, CPI, etc.) to create or update a cost database has been shown via independent researched to introduced gross cost errors.)
  5. Local preventive maintenance databases are also available including all frequencies and checklists, organized by expanded Triservices UNIFORMAT.

 

What is the CSI MasterFormat?

MasterFormat is critical to organizing and communicating building and construction cost and technical information.  It representents the basic elements required for detailed line-item construction cost estimating, the most valid form of costing.   Referred to as “the Dewey Decimal System” of repair, renovation, and construction, CSI MasterFormat is a series of coding systems, broken down and categorized within fifty (50) Divisions.

4BT offers cost data in expanded CSI Masterformat.  We leverage the CSI Masterformat structure and provide an even higher level of granularity.  CSI Masteformat contains eight (8) digits, for example, 23 22 23.23 Pressure-Powered Steam Condensate Pumps.  4BT coding contains 16 digits to allow for specific components/tasks.16 digit expanded Masterformat

CSI Masterformat

 

Every area of construction and manufacturing for the construction industry is covered under the CSI MasterFormat. This is true for commercial, industrial, and residential buildings.

Current Construction Cost Data CSI Masterformat

Current Construction Cost Data CSI Masterformat

Current Construction Cost Data CSI Masterformat

Current Construction Cost Data CSI Masterformat is critical to cost visibility and cost management for both owners and design-builders throughout the repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build planning, procurement, and project delivery life-cycle.

www.4bt.us

LEAN Job Order Contacting Solution

LEAN Job Order Contacting Solution

LEAN Job Order Contracting – Programmatic Approach Applied to ALL Projects and Workorders

  • Mitigate waste and variance
  • Effect positive change
  • Leverage knowledge from the building construction skilled trades
  • Develop program and project leadership
  • Focus upon outcomes
  • Mandatory cooperation
  • Common, clear, concise, and actionable local cost data
  • No excessive fees based upon construction value
  • Unparalleled service and support
  • Continuous audits
  • Identification, evaluation, and improvements to current processes
  • Consistent workflows, documentation, forms, workflows
  • Proven solution

 

Enable your organization to use existing funds more efficiently for repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction while ensuring full compliance.

LEAN Job Order Contacting Solution

LEAN Job Order Contacting Solution
Value Added Reseller
LEAN Job Order Contacting Solution
County Government

LEAN Job Order Contacting Solution LEAN Job Order Contacting Solution

Listing of LEAN Construction Practices

Listing of LEAN Construction Practices

Below is a listing of LEAN construction practices.  Of these, only LEAN Job Order Contracting provides a robust framework that integrates internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams within a common data environment inclusive of actionable cost visibility, defined workflows, and quantitative metrics.

6 Sigma
Benchmarking
Concurrent Engineering (CE)
Conference Management (CM)
Daily clustering/huddle meeting
Design Structure Matrix (DSM)
Design Workshop or Big Room
Detailed Briefing
Error Proofing (Poka-yoke)
Fail Safe for Quality and Safety
First Run Study
Gemba Walk
Health and Safety Improvement Management
Integrated Project Delivery
Job Order Contracting
Just-in- time (JIT)
Kaizen
Kanban System
Last Planner System (LPS)
LEAN Job Order Contracting
Location-Based Management System (LBMS)
Onsite Management
Plan of Conditions and Work Environment or Environmental Management System
Prefabrication and Modularization
Pull Scheduling/Planning
Standardization
Target Value Design (TVD)
Teamwork and partnering
Total Production/Preventive Maintenance (TPM)
Total Quality Management (TQM)
Value Based Management/Value Streaming Mapping
Virtual Design Construction (VDC)
Visualization tools/management
Work Structuring and Scheduling

Listing of LEAN Construction Practices

via Four BT, LLC  – www.4bt.us

Why LEAN Construction Matters

Integrity in Public Sector Procurement of Facilities Repair, Renovation, Maintenance, and Construction Services

Integrity in Public Sector Procurement of Facilities Repair, Renovation, Maintenance, and Construction Services is essential to minimizing costs and ensuring quality and safety.

Obtaining the maximum projected value for each dollar of expenditure and ensuring that all purchasing transactions follow all state, local and federal regulations are, however, goals rarely met when it comes to the numerous repair, renovation, maintenance, and construction projects encountered by Federal, County, State, and Local Governments.

Robust policies and practices exist that support and facilitate optimal acquisition of goods and services by applying best methods and business practices to garner public confidence.  A professional, efficient procurement system begins with sound policies implemented through systematic, programmatic procedures. Internal controls, careful planning, and cost-efficient practices which provide the framework for the efficient planning, procurement, and project of repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction services.

The following are fundamental characteristics and requirements for assuring integrity in Public Sector Procurement of Facilities Repair, Renovation, Maintenance, and Construction Services.

  • Integration of and mandatory collaboration between internal and external Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery Teams on an early and ongoing basis, following a predefined workflow (EXAMPLE:  4BT OpenJOC Framework™)
  • Cost visibility and transparency via a detailed line item (not assemblies) current and locally researched unit price book
  • Multi-party long-term mutually beneficial contract with design-builders, inclusive of an Operations Manual / Execution Guide
  • No payments to software/services vendors based upon a percentage of construction value that would inflate costs and/or create a potential for a conflict of interest.

Integrity in Public Sector Procurement

Managing Multiple JOC Programs

Managing Multiple JOC Programs, Contracts, Projects, UPBs, and Workorders

 

 

Job Order Contracting Audits

Managing Multiple JOC Programs, Contracts, Projects, UPBs, and Workorders is now possible with full visibility and minimal administrative burden and cost!

Programs, Contracts, Projects, and Workorders vary in size, complexity, required governance.  Everything can now be done in a single point solution with full compliance.  Move from information silos and percentage fee systems to the 4BT OpenJOC Framework (TM).

 Contact us to learn how our clients are successfully managing complex programs within a single platform.

Learning Objectives:

  • What diverse and complex portfolios look like today
  • How to set yourself up for success
  • Cost data, locally researched for each site
  • Assure compliance with audits of all contractor proposals
JOC Program Line-item Estimating

JOC Program Line-item Estimating

While some degree of unit cost aggregation may be unavoidable, using assemblies or other “less detailed” groupings may adversely impact
cost analysis, tracking, and comparison.

Data classification is broadly defined as the process of organizing data by relevant categories so that it may be used and protected more efficiently. On a basic level, the classification process makes data easier to locate and retrieve

Regardless of the level of aggregation associated with a particular unit cost, it is critical to explicitly identify all the items that are included in each unit cost to enable the comparison of unit costs across projects and workorders!

Cost management involves different risks for all the parties involved, which highlights the need to manage risks properly.

• NEVER accept a lump sum estimate for a workorder/project without a full detailed line-item estimate and review of line-times and quantities.  Public sector organizations have a responsibility to be good stewards of tax dollars.
• Fully audit cost estimate and actual cost information.  Verify all aspects of the direct work (e.g., inspecting 100 percent of labor, materials, and equipment used) as well as the coefficient/adjustment factor used, and the type, number, and cost of non-prepriced line-items.
• Accept unit cost data with field verification of actual quantities, provided the unit price book (UPB) is locally researched and current.   The UPB and its update frequency should be noted in the Job Order Contract.

 

JOC Program Line-item Estimating joc line-item estimating

 

Note:  Use of traditional historical data and construction cost indexes is not comparable to current locally researched cost data. There are many construction cost data and indexes available:

• Handy-Whitman Index of Public Utility Construction Costs. These indexes show cost levels for different types of construction in the electric, gas, and water industries. The gas and electric indexes started in 1924, and the water indexes started in 1957. The indexes include general items of construction such as reinforced concrete and specific items of material or equipment such as pipe or turbogenerators.
• Engineering News-Record (ENR).  ENR publishes several construction cost indexes including the Construction Cost Index (CCI) and the Building Cost Index (BCI). BCI uses rates for skilled labor from specific trades and applies them to projects where materials are the highest proportion of the project cost. CCI uses rates for common laborers and applies those rates to projects where labor is the greatest proportion of the project cost.
• RSMeans Cost Data, This document is for construction cost reference information. It includes unit price data for a wide range of
construction item levels or categories such as assembly cost tables and building square foot costs as well as a reference section that includes crew tables, historical cost indexes, and city cost indexes.
• Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Price Index (CPI). This index is a measure of the average change over time in the prices paid by urban consumers for a market basket of consumer goods and services. It is the most widely used measure of inflation.
• Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Implicit Price Deflator. This index is a measure of the change in prices of all goods and services in the economy.

Comprehensive job order contracting (JOC) system

Comprehensive job order contracting (JOC) system implementation and support services

Comprehensive job order contracting (JOC) system implementation and support services are now available without excessive fees with the 4BT-PEP OpenJOC(TM) Job Order Contracting Knowledge Information Solution.

  • Develop standards, procedures, software, and cost data to help address the deficiencies in traditional JOC Programs
  • Ensure contractors do not inflate or negotiate price proposals to account for bidding adjustment factors too low.
  • Ensure contractors appropriately use non-pre-priced items and do NOT bundle multiple items into a single line time without full cost visibility of labor, materials, and equipment.
  • Select contractors based upon performance versus lowest bid.
  • Establish shared goals and exercise joint ownership of project decisions from start to finish.
  • Maintain transparency, oversight, and accountability standards required for public procurement that are often compromised by traditional JOC programs.
  • Established long-term collaborative working relationships that deliver value and purpose.
  • Never pay a percentage of construction volume for JOC products and services.

 

Complete JOC Program design, implementation, and support services:

  • Identify project team stakeholders and roles.
  • Implementation team identification and structure.
  • Detailed implementation schedule.
  • Compare current and planned program procedures and workflows, including approvals/forms, etc..
  • Develop improvement plan based on identified opportunities.
  • Prepare customized, locally researched line-item (not assembly) unit price book with descriptions and detailed labor, material, and equipment information.
  • Create facility inventory and dashboards
  • JOC Contractor outreach marketing
  • Support JOC contract general terms and conditions development and other documents used in the procurement of JOC contractors as well as in post-award workflows.
  • Assign and activate enterprise software user subscriptions.
  • Update unit price books per contract.
  • JOC Program onboarding, including Initial and ongoing multi-level and multi-format training.
  • Adjustment factor evaluations.

Comprehensive job order contracting (JOC) systemComprehensive job order contracting (JOC) system

Comprehensive job order contracting (JOC) system

Comprehensive job order contracting (JOC) system

Turnkey JOC Program

Turnkey JOC Program

The 4BT-PEP is a turnkey JOC Program that delivers the highest performance at the lowest possible administrative cost.

4BT exclusively provides all of the following, without the need to pay a percentage of construction volume, which results in excessive cost and failure to meet public sector fiscal responsibilities.

Powerful, yet easy-to-use services and tools that support efficient project delivery, including LEAN job order contracting that simplify administrative and operational processes, and drive best value repair, renovation, and new construction outcomes.

  • Assure an early and ongoing understanding of requirements among all project participants
  • Gain full cost visibility and control with local market cost data (no factoring of national data)
  • Optimize planning, procurement, and project delivery in terms of quality, compatibility, constructability, cost, risk, and function to meet customer needs
  • Improve project planning by avoiding, minimizing, or eliminating miscommunications
  • Improve work packaging and subcontracting to reduce project complexity
  • Build and maintain mutually beneficial long-term relationships and interactions to maximize timely communication, coordination, and cooperation
  • Standardize information, processes, and workflows, which enable localized decision-making and problem solving by those doing the work
  • Enable a dynamic, well-coordinated construction project delivery system
  • Identify and record good practices and learning in dealing with projects and reapply them in future projects job order contract solution

LEAN Construction Best Management Practices
Integrated Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery Processes

Program Design, Implementation, Operations, Support, and Management
JOC Contracts and Compliance Considerations
JOC Cost Estimating

AN ALL-INCLUSIVE PLATFORM TO PROMOTE COLLABORATION BETWEEN ALL PROJECT-TEAMS, INFORMATION, and WORKSPACES WITH REAL-TIME DATA.

 

Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), Lean Management, Lean IPD, Project Management, Business Strategy, Collaborative Contracting, Trust based Collaboration

Built Environment Sustainability, Why LEAN Construction Matters

Built Environment Sustainability – A Critical Need

Built environment sustainability is critical.

Facilities and other structure are responsible for 50% of material resources taken from nature, 40% of energy consumption and 50% of total waste resulting is significant land an air degradation.  From an economic perspective, waste is also extremely high with 80% of all projects being over budget, late, and otherwise poorly completed.

The GAO has issues reports for several decades noting the mismanagement of the built environment in the federal sector.   Cost visibility, cost management, and accountability are lacking.

Built Environment Sustainability is critical to environmental and economic security.

Robust processes and supporting tools and services are readily available to ensure that repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds are consistently delivered on-time, on-budget, and in a quality manner.

All that is needed is leadership and accountability.

  1. Planning, procurement, and project delivery teams and processes must be integrated
  2. All repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds work scopes should be documented in a detailed manner and reviewed by all appropriate team members.
  3. Project teams should include owner and design/builder.
  4. Technical and cost data should be standardized via a locally researched line item cost database using expanded CSI Masterformat and expanded UNIFORMAT as appropriate.
  5. Ongoing operations and maintenance impacts should be considered.
  6. The knowledge/expertise of those doing the work should be leveraged.  All individuals can be enabled to control or influence their
    multidisciplinary development. Outcomes will be enhanced by encouraging the site personnel to carry out needed updates/corrections.  Good contractors should be rewarded based on quality and time, and type of work, and associated information documented  construction work awarded accordingly.
    Concept C23 Evaluation, documentation and feedback of the issues of the constructability concepts
    should be maintained throughout the project to be used in later projects as lessons
    learned.
  7. Lack of understanding the importance and benefits of managing and waste.Built Environment Sustainability

 

Traditional construction procurement and even traditional IPD and JOC  project delivery do not resolve conflicting objectives of participants, skills and interests.   The latter resulting in higher costs without significant benefit.  Fragmentation and adversarial relationship between project participants can only be resolved with robust LEAN process implementation and a common data environment inclusive of locally researched granular unit price data.

Potential Owner barriers to consistent positive outcomes:

• Lack of awareness and resistance to robust LEAN, integrated construction planning, procurement, and project delivery frameworks.
• Perception that early planning and integrated teams are more costly
• Reluctance to invest additional effort in early project stages
• Lack of genuine commitment
• Distinctly separate procurement and facilities management teams
• Lack of construction experience
• Lack of team-building or partnering experience
• Disregard of level of collaborative skills when selecting contractors and consultants
• Contracting/procurement teams simply wanting to speed projects through process
• Misdirected objectives and performance measures

 

Benefits of integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery.

 

Steps to improvement…

1. Raise awareness of benefits

2. Identify barriers and key factors that influence adoption

3. Review/improve organizational capability

4. Remove barriers

 

Why LEAN Construction Matters

The role of procurement in measurably improving construction productivity

The role of procurement in measurably improving construction productivity is clear.  Procurement must be part of a collaborative and integrated team that involves owner planning and project delivery staff members.

Tools are services are readily available that can reduce overall costs by 30%+ while also improving quality and shortening project delivery times, IF implemented, and managed properly.  A robust tool is Job Order Contracting (JOC).

The role of procurement in measurably improving construction productivity is critical to achieving best value outcomes.

However, most procurement teams view JOC simply as a way to speed projects through the planning, procurement, and project delivery cycle. There is little thought given to the cost of the program, collaboration, or best value.
Cost visibility, transparency, and accountability are virtually nonexistent. Also, trust and true collaboration with design-builders is rare. Most traditional JOC Programs lack ✅ Urgency ✅ Accountability ✅ Communication and ✅ Empathy.

Implementing a best value JOC Program is a skill that requires owner leadership, commitment, and accountability.

A few comments to consider…

#1. If you are paying a percentage of total JOC construction value for JOC tools and services, you are more than likely wasting significant taxpayer funds.

#2 Best value JOC Programs require strong teams with independent thinkers. “Command and control” techniques simply won’t work and simply result in push back from participants and poor performance. You JOC Program must encourage buy-in to a mutually beneficial long term way of working. The team must win, not just the owner. While the owner provides leadership, each team member must have the ability to shape the course of action without micromanagement in order to yield more robust outcomes.

#3 A collaborative best value JOC Program takes time and progresses through incremental stages. Unfortunately, many existing programs have never been set up properly from day one.

Procurement professionals need to be able to pivot to taking a more collaborative approach to getting things done.

The role of procurement in measurably improving construction productivity is critical to best value outcomes.

Learn more…

#collaboration #leadership #jobordercontracting #jobordercontracting #jocexcellence #bestpractices
#JOCconsultant #facilitiesmangement #productivity #contractmanagement #team #contractors #design #job #planning #projects #empathy #communication

 

Construction Project Delivery Leadership, Public Sector

Construction Project Delivery Leadership – Public Sector

Greater focus is required upon Construction Project Delivery Leadership in the public sector.

Efficient management of the built environment is critical to the environment, economy, and our overall well being.  Repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build activities however have been notoriously ill managed.  Both formal and professional education have not prepared real property owners to address the basics of planning, procurement, and project delivery that enable the consistent delivery of quality repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build activities on-time and on-budget.

SHARING OF KNOWLEDGE

Collaborative information sharing, on an early and ongoing basis is a fundamental requirement.  Owner and design-builder planning, procurement, and project delivery teams MUST work together within a common information environment and share clearly defined, mutually beneficial goals.  Both technical and financial information MUST be shared at a granular level (i.e. locally researched detailed line item unit price information, inclusive of labor, material, and equipment subsets).

Until information is shared in the above manner there can be no significant improvement of the extreme levels of waste associated with architecture, engineering, construction, or operations of the build environment.

VISION

Methods, workflows, tools, and services are readily available to delivery exceptional value.  Overall cost savings of 30%-40% are possible and achieved by better defined and clearly communicated work scopes, shorter project delivery times, and fewer change orders.  Project delivery excellence and performance that deliver exceptional value all participants and stakeholders should be mandatory.   It is a social responsibility that demands accountability for all public sector real property owners.

 

NEXT STEPS

  • Do your homework!  Research and learn about inclusive, collaborative methods
  • Integrated internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams
  • Emphasize education and leadership growth
  • Leverage the knowledge of the actually doing the work
  • Pilot robust LEAN methods (OpenJOC Job Order Contracting, and Integrated Project Delivery)
  • Require a Common Data Environment (CDE) with foundational current locally researched granular cost data
  • Build long term partnerships that encourage knowledge-sharing and synergistic outcomes

Demand more…

Knowledge management improvement would reduce systematic errors and yield significant improvements in project delivery.

Construction Project Delivery Excellence

 

Why LEAN Construction Matters

Design-Bid-Build (DBB), Design-Build (DB), Construction Management (CM), Design-Build-Operate (DBO), Design-Build-Finance-Operate (DBFO), Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), Project Alliancing (PA), Cost Led Procurement (CLP), Integrated Project Insurance (IPI), Two Stage Open Book and Early BIM Partnering (EBP}, LEAN Job Order Contracting (4BT-OpenJOC System)

Design-Bid-Build (DBB), Design-Build (DB), Construction Management (CM), Design-Build-Operate (DBO), Design-Build-Finance-Operate (DBFO), Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), Project Alliancing (PA), Cost Led Procurement (CLP), Integrated Project Insurance (IPI), Two Stage Open Book and Early BIM Partnering (EBP}, LEAN Job Order Contracting (4BT-OpenJOC System)

Of all the above, only Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and LEAN Job Order Contracting (4BT-OpenJOC System) integrate planning, procurement, and project delivery to an extent that can consistently drive 30%-40% cost savings over “traditional methods”, decreased total procurement and project time, and improve both quality and the overall satisfaction levels of all participants/stakeholders…. if designed and implemented properly.

Requirements:

  • Public Construction Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery Teams must provide leadership and commitment to defining and supporting clearly defined requirements and mutually beneficial goals.
  • A robust programmatic approach must be applied to ALL projects.
  • A common data environment, including granular, current, locally researched line-item cost data at the core (organized using CSI Masterformat)
  • Integrated internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams
  • A multi-party long-term contract with an integral Operations Manual/Execution Guide
  • …..

Learn more…

 

 

Facilities Maintenance and Repair Goals

Facilities Maintenance and Repair Goals

Facilities Maintenance and Repair Goals include…

  • Optimizing asset value
  • Life-cycle management in concert with organizational mission
  • Maximization of maintenance and repair cost visibility and cost management
  • Mitigation of unplanned events
  • Enhancement of facility user experiences and satisfaction
  • Integration of internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery team
  • Knowledge retention and growth
  • Implementation and continuous improvement of robust LEAN operating models
  • Clarity roles and responsibilities via contract and an integral operations manual/execution guide
  • Asset inventory
  • Standardized and ongoing physical and functional condition assessments
  • Decision support tools to assist in project prioritization and execution
  • Enabling collaborative technology to support monitoring and management
  • Quantitative metrics/key performance metrics (KPIs)

www.4bt.us

 

 

Why LEAN Construction Matters

2022 Job Order Contracting

4BT, founded in 2016, is a certified veteran-owned small business (VOSB), and was founded by JOC program management, technology, and cost data experts with decades of experience with industry sector leading organization including the RS Means Company, LLC, 4Clicks Solutions, LLC, and VFA, Inc.

 

4BT provides a complete range of JOC tools and services, including but not limited to,

  1. enterprise JOC knowledge management technology,
  2. locally researched facilities repair, maintenance, and construction cost data inclusive of line-item modifiers,
  3. technical specifications, and full training,
  4. consulting, and
  5. support services.

 

4BT tools and services were specifically developed to provide a lower cost, higher performing Job Order Contracting Solution. Instead of a sole focus upon faster procurement we enable on time, on budget, quality outcomes. We of an alternative to a monopolized JOC market with excessive administration costs based on percentage fees of total JOC construction volume.  Multiple audits of JOC Programs clearly support the need for better performing JOC solutions (JOC Program audits can be found here or via internet search.)

 

JOC (JOB ORDER CONTRACTING) Programs, however, can fail if they….

 

  • do not abide by core JOC and LEAN and principles,
  • do not focus upon building and keeping public sector owner and contractor capabilities and knowledge via a collaborative robust process,
  • require reliance upon full-time “JOC consultants”,
  • require payment associating fees based upon a percentage (%) of JOC construction value, resulting in an average 10x cost liability versus simple procurement of software, cost data, and support services. Based upon best management practices and readily available tools and support services, there should never be need for a long-term and/or perpetual “JOC consultant” to “manage” a JOC Program. A best value JOC Program outcome can only be reached by continuous improvement enabled, per LEAN principles, whereby all participants are being fully informed and enabled to contribute to problem solving and driving mutually beneficial best value outcomes without the barrier of a third parties.
  • lack of robust ongoing evaluation procedures to assure consistent, compliant program execution.

www.4bt.us

 

Facilities Maintenance Cost Data

and new build processes and workflows and continuously improve

Standardized repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build processes and workflows and continuously improve

  • Select, define, clarify, and cost all repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds
  • Leverage current, granular, local labor, material, and equipment costs to ensure a detailed, well communicated Scope of Work
  • Define and clarify problem situations and address via collaborative methods
  • Standardized repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build processes and workflows and continuously improve
  • Full integrate internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams
  • Lead planning for implementation and build organizational learning

Standardized repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build processes and workflows and continuously improve

Standardized repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build processes and workflows and continuously improve

www.4bt.us

Root Causes of Construction Project Variability

Root Causes of Construction Project Variability

Here a list of the root causes of construction project variability resulting in 85% of ALL repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds being… late, over budget, unsatisfactory to one or more participants or stakeholders, or otherwise economically or environmentally wasteful.

Addressing the Root Causes of Construction Project Variability can easily result in 10 to 30 percent reductions in expected completion time and cost savings of 10 to 25 percent or more.

  1.  Lack of robust and integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery processes
  2.  Poorly defined and poorly communicated Scope of Work
  3.  Failure to leverage current locally researched granular task level construction cost data
  4.  Owner lack of leadership, commitment, and/or accountability
  5.  Non collaborative internal and/or external team members
  6.  Non-mandatory initial and ongoing training for ALL participants and stakeholders
  7. Failure to have a database of preventive maintenance task, costs, and checklists, complete with frequencies and a standardized data architecture
  8. Non-continuous monitoring of quantitative key performance indicators

Addressing the above can easily result in 10 to 30 percent reductions in expected completion time and cost savings of 10 to 25 percent or more.

www.4bt.us

Root Causes of Construction Project Variability

Root Causes of Construction Project Variability

Root Causes of Construction Project Variability

Construction Productivity Solutions

Construction Productivity Solutions

Construction productivity solutions are readily available that integrate planning, procurement, and project delivery to consistently enable on-time, on-budget, quality outcomes with full financial visibility and compliance.

“Procore”, “Revit”, (insert any tech) are not solutions. They don’t embed robust programmatic frameworks and current verifiable granular local market task data.

Learn more…

 

Construction Productivity Solutions

Improving Public Sector Facilities Life-cycle Management

Improving Public Sector Facilities Life-cycle Management – Hard Questions MUST be asked and ANSWERED!

Improving public sector facilities life-cycle management is critical to the economy, the environment, and to our safety.

  • What changes are necessary for improvements in repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build policy and practices are required?
  • Can currently available alternative methods provide measurable improvement?
  • What are the barriers to change in policy, practices, tools, and services?
  • Which economic levers can be used to achieve critical change?
  • How can we better leverage standardized information to improve outcomes?
  • How can formal and professional education be improved?
  • What is required to integrate internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams?
  • Are legislative and regulatory tools needed to enable measurable improvement?
  • Why are public sector AECOO participants and stakeholders lagging with respect to sustainability,
  • What is required to resolve the pervasive lack of leadership, competency, and accountability endemic to many/most public sector organizations?

Improving Public Sector Life-cycle Management

www.4bt.us

Learnings from JOC Program Audits

Learnings from JOC Program Audits and AEC Industry Research

There are multiple learnings from JOC Program Audits (see audit results)

 

  1. Lack of direct Owner participation and leadership (versus using a third-party intermediary/consultants) can result in higher overall costs, higher JOC Program administrative costs, lack of cost visibility and controls, and a potential for misuse/fraud.
  2. The use of localization factors (city cost indices, area cost factors) or economic factors (ENR, CPI…) does not provide adequate cost control or cost visibility.
  3. JOC contractor coefficients/adjustment factors should always exceed 1.0 if the unit price book is prepared correctly.
  4. Initial and ongoing training for ALL participants and stakeholders is critical to JOC Program success.
  5. JOC Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery Teams must be integrated and observe robust LEAN philosophies and practices.  
  6. Using JOC to simply speed procurement can lead to key issues with both compliance and project delivery cost/efficiency.
  7. Paying for JOC Program tools and service via a percentage fee based upon construction volume can result in excessive costs to all participants and stakeholders.  This approach can exceed ten times (10x) that of procuring tools and services via a SaaS model with easily defined annual and/or per unit costs.
  8. Lack of understanding, collaboration, commitment, and accountability among Owner planning, procurement, and project delivery teams is the number one cause of JOC Program failure.
  9. Intelligently designed and implemented JOC Programs can improve productivity 3x, reduce administrative costs by 75%, and lower overall project delivery costs by 30%-40%. 
  10. Quantitative metrics are critical to JOC Program success as are regular independent third-party audits.

Common goals, metrics, and the adoption of a programmatic versus project centric approach can drive significant improvements in efficiency and compliance.  A common set of terms and definitions is also extremely important to collaborative information sharing, without this, inclusive of a locally researched granular unit price book, “apples to apples” comparisons and mutual understanding on an early and ongoing basis are virtually impossible.

 

Owner leadership and commitment to an open JOC Program based upon robust principles is the ONLY path to measurable gains in efficiency and quality.  There is no “secret sauce” and everyone must use the same (or similar) tools and techniques and deliver the same (or similar) results.  Owners must strive to assure everyone acknowledges this reality, and mandate that all participants openly share data and lessons learned.

The current levels of lack of trust pervasive among project teams, poorly defined conditions of satisfaction or goals from owners can easily be changed.

Open JOC Programs and associated tools and services can…

  1. Establish common metrics.
  2. Create trust and enable early and ongoing information sharing.
  3. Establish and maintain long-term internal and external team relationships.
  4. Measurably reduce economic and environmental waste.

Learnings from JOC Program Audits

Learn more…

 

LEAN Job Order Contracting is an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) project delivery method that integrates internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams. Via the LEAN 4BT OpenJOC(TM) Framework multiple projects can be completed over the life of one long-term contract on-time, on-budget and in a fully compliant manner with full cost visibility and cost control.  The 4BT OpenJOC Solution is the best value choice for public sector owners who complete a high volume of routine repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build construction projects each year.

masterformat construction cost estimating

www.4bt.us

LEAN Construction Facts

LEAN Construction Facts

LEAN Construction FACTS

  1. Core principles of LEAN and LEAN construction predate TOYOTA and TPS.
  2. LEAN solutions that integrate People, Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery and that are capable of 30%-40% cost savings are readily available.
  3. The following are NOT LEAN construction solutions, but span a variety of philosophies and/or individual components tools:  LastPlanner System, Kaizen, Kanban, Value Stream Mapping (VPM), Construction Process Analysis (CPA), Five Whys, Pareto Analysis, 5S, BIM, Poka Yoke, Six Sigma….
  4. Current LEAN construction methods include Integrated Project Delivery, Job Order Contracting, Alliance Contracting…. although there are very few robust implementations.
  5. A short-list of LEAN construction requirements includes:  Owner leadership, commitment, and support, a long-term multi-party agreement and associate operations manual/execution guide, initial and ongoing training for ALL participants and stakeholders, current locally researched detailed line-item construction cost task organization using a standard data architecture, quantitative metrics, mutually beneficial goals…

Transition from a project-based approach to a programmatic approach is critical in achieving measurable improvements in quality, cost, and overall sustainability.

LEAN Construction Facts

LEAN Construction Facts

Mitigate labor and materials waste!

LEAN Construction Facts

Focus on people, process, and information!

LEAN Construction Facts LEAN Construction Facts

Measurable productivity improvement is impossible without understanding individuals, organizations, and their needs.

LEAN Construction Facts Simple Introduction to LEAN Construction https://www.4bt.us/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Lean_and_Sustainable_Construction_A_Syst-1.pdf

LEAN Construction Facts LEAN Construction Facts LEAN Construction Facts LEAN Construction Facts LEAN construction facts

 

 

 

 

Kanban-a focus on just-in-time delivery and team load-balancing

LastPlanner System – Collaborative, commitment-centric pull planning and look-ahead planning support by regular team meetings, percentage completion, and variance analysis.

 

 

Productive Construction

Productive Construction – Traits of Collaboration

Productive construction and collaboration go hand in hand.

The traits of collaboration include:

  • co-location
  • commitment
  • multidisciplinary work
  • decision authority
  • productive environment
  • training
  • accountability
  • immediate feedback
  • consensus leader selection

Based upon the above, why would anyone be surprised by the lack of productivity and rampant economic and environmental waste endemic to public sector facilities repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds?

The good news is that any public sector entity can reduce waste and save 30%-40% of its resources through the implementation of robust processes that integrate planning, procurement, and project delivery across internal and external teams.

Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery System Performance is CRITICAL to Improving Productivity.

Learn more?

Productive Construction Productive Construction Productive Construction

 

References:

 

AIA. (2008). AIA Document C195 – 2008, Standard Form Single Purpose Entity Agreement for Integrated Project Delivery, Exhibit D (Work Plan). US: AIA.
AIA California Council. (2007). Integrated Project Delivery: A Working Definition (2nd ed.). US.
AIA National, & AIA California Council. (2007). Integrated Project Delivery: A Guide (1st ed.). U.S.: AIA.
Ashcraft, H. W. (2011). IPD Teams: Creation, Organization and Management. San Francisco: Hanson Bridgett LLP.
Association for Project Management. (2000). APM Body of Knowledge. In M. Dixon (Ed.). UK: APM.
Baiden, B. K., & Price, A. D. F. (2011). The effect of integration on project delivery team effectiveness. International Journal of Project Management, 29(2), 129-136. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.01.016
Barlish, K. (2011). How To Measure the Benefits of BIM: A Case Study Approach. (Master of Science), Arizona State University, Arizona, US.
Barrett, R. (2013). Liberating the Corporate Soul: Taylor & Francis.
Brennan, M. D. (2011). Integrated Project Delivery: A Normative Model For Value Creation In Complex Military Medical Projects. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, IL, US.
Brewer, W., & Mendelson, M. I. (2003). Methodology and Metrics for Assessing Team Effectiveness. The International Journal of Engineering Education, 19, 777-787.
Chelson, D. E. (2010). The Effects of Building Information Modeling on Construction Site Productivity. University of Maryland,
College Park, US
Cleves, J. A., & Dal Gallo, L. (2012). Integrated Project Delivery: The Game Changer. Paper presented at the American Bar Association Meeting: Advanced Project Delivery: Improving the Odds of Success.
Coates, P., Arayici, Y., Koskela, L., Kagioglou, M., Usher, C., & O’Reilly, K. (2010). The key performance indicators of the BIM implementation process. Paper presented at the The International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering, Nothingham, UK.
ConsensusDOCS. (2007). ConsensusDOCS 300: Standard Tri-Party Agreement for Integrated Project Delivery (IPD). US.
Constructing Excellence. (2006). UK Construction Industry: Key Performance Indicators. UK.
Cox, R., Issa, R., & Ahrens, D. (2003). Management’s Perception of Key Performance Indicators for Construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 129(2), 142-151. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2003)129:2(142)
Department of Treasury and Finance. (2006). Project Alliancing: Practitioner’s Guide. Australia: Department of Treasury and Finance.
El Asmar, M. (2012). Modeling and Benchmarking Performance for the Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) System. (Doctor of Philosophy), University of Wisconsin – Madison, US.
El Asmar, M., Hanna, A., & Loh, W. (2013). Quantifying Performance for the Integrated Project Delivery System as Compared to Established Delivery Systems. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 04013012. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000744
Ertel, D., Weiss, J., & Visioni, L. J. (2001). Managing Alliance Relationships: A Cross Industry Study of How to Build and Manage Successful Alliances. Massachusetts, US: Vantage Partners.
Franz, B., & Leicht, R. (2012). Initiating IPD Concepts on Campus Facilities with a “Collaboration Addendum” Construction Research Congress 2012 (pp. 61-70): American Society of Civil Engineers.
Freeman, J., Weil, S. A., & Hess, K. P. (2006). Measuring, Monitoring, and Managing Knowledge in Command and Control Organizations, NY.
Galloway, P. D. (2013). Managing Gigaprojects: Advice from Those Who’ve Been There, Done that. US: ASCE.
Garvin, D. A. (1993). Building a learning organization. Harvard Business Review, 71(4), 78-91.

and Maintenance Practices, Repair Renovation and Maintenance Practices

ATTN: Public Sector Facilities Professionals – Rethink, Reshape, Rebuild Repair, Renovation, and Maintenance Practices to improve productivity, quality, and efficiency

ATTN: Public Sector Facilities Professionals – Rethink, Reshape, Rebuild Repair, Renovation, and Maintenace Practices to improve productivity, quality, and efficiency,

Traditional facilities planning, procurement, and project delivery simply doesn’t work.  Economic and environmental waste are the norm due to the lack of integrated robust processes and teams.

Managing uncertainty and risk on an early and ongoing basis is the only way to measurably improve repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build outcomes on a consistent basis.  This can ONLY be accomplished by the following core activities:

  1. Owner leadership and commitment relative to the adoption of robust, proven programmatic processes that integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery.
  2. Collaborative internal and external teams that work towards clearly defined, mutually beneficial goals
  3. A common data environment, including current, locally researched granular task that are written using plain English and include labor, material and equipment costs and information.
  4. Mandatory initial and ongoing training
  5. A written operations manual/execution guide as part of a multi-party, long-term contract.
  6. Quantitative metrics

 

Repair, Renovation, and Maintenance Practices Repair, Renovation, and Maintenance Practices Repair, Renovation, and Maintenance Practices Integrated LEAN construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions Repair, Renovation, and Maintenance Practices Repair, Renovation, and Maintenance Practices masterformat construction cost estimating

Learn more?

Collaboration in Construction

Collaboration in Construction is NOT a CHOICE

masterformat construction cost estimatingCollaboration in construction is not a choice if your goals are consistent quality, on time and on budget repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build outcomes.

Integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery terms leveraging a robust process and common data, including granular, locally researched labor, material, labor, and equipment, organized via expanding CSI Masterformat as also requisite components.

Learn more…

www.4bt.us

LEAN Capital Project Delivery

LEAN Capital Project Delivery

LEAN Capital Project Delivery (LEAN CPD) creates a dynamic, collaborative environment in which repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds requirements can consistently be achieved in a quality manner, on-time, on-budget, and in full compliance.

Any public sector real property owner can realize the above and reduce waste by 30% to 40% with a bit of leadership and commitment.

Proven solutions have existed for decades and are far from complex.  All the tools and support services needed are readily available to enable initial deployment within three to six months.

 

What is LEAN CPD?

LEAN collaborative project delivery is a programmatic framework in which planning, procurement, and project delivery teams, information, and workflows are integrated on an early and ongoing basis.  Owners, designers, and builders are a cohesive team as are their associate planning, procurement, and project delivery professionals.

While each “project” may be unique, the associated planning, procurement, and project delivery framework is the same.  This ensures early and ongoing sharing of information within a common data environment (CDE).  While much has been written about BIM, digital twins, and similar technologies.  LEAN CPD addresses the fundamental problems associated with the AECOO sector (architecture, engineering, construction, owner, operator/operations), which are 1.) lack of financial and technical visibility within a commonly understood verifiable format, 2.) lack of well-defined and mutually beneficial outcomes, 3.) failure to fully leverage the knowledge of those acutally doing the work, and 4.) lack of a robust process framework.

If your organization is interested in lowering costs, improving efficiency, and building long term, mutually beneficial relationships, let’s talk.

 

  1. Increase the effectiveness of your limited repair, renovation, maintenance, and capital spending budget
  2. Significantly improve your traditional planning, procurement, and project delivery methods
  3. Implement a proven, robust process methodology to reduce waste, compress schedules, lower costs, and improve overall satisfaction for all participants and stakeholders.
  4. Validate success with quantitative metrics/key performance indicators (KPIs)
Integrated LEAN construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions
LEAN Capital Project Delivery increases efficiency and reduces facilities management costs via the implementation of a robust programmatic process to all repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build requirements,
Why LEAN Construction Matters

Learning about Job Order Contracting?

Learning about Job Order Contracting?

What is Job Order Contracting (JOC)? JOC is both a procurement mechanism and a project delivery method.  When designed and managed properly, JOC integrates planning, procurement, and project delivery processes and teams under a consistent programmatic workflow.  In terms of procurement JOC is bid indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract  between  a facility  owner  and  a professional  JOC construction contractor.   JOC contracts typically have a one year durations, and up to four (4) option years.  Extensions are not generally allowed or advisable

When should JOC be used? JOC is proven to expedite construction work on existing or new facilities and other types of physical infrastructure for repair, renovation. remodeling, maintenance, and new construction requiring minimum design.

What tools are required for JOC? A locally researched unit price book (UPB) is core element.  The use of national average cost data (with or without location factors) or assemblies do not provide adequate cost visibility or cost transparency.  A unit prices book of 40,000 line items is sufficient for any JOC Program.

Do I need to hire a JOC consultant? Absolutely not.  All the tools and services needed to design, implement, and manage an efficient and compliant JOC Program can readily be procured.

Do I need to procure a set of technical specifications from a JOC products and services provider? No. If you have an existing set of technical specifications that a current and appropriate, these can be referenced in the JOC.  The UPB will automatically reflect commercial tasks for your area.  If new tasks, or technical specifications are required, they can easily be added.

What is a typical JOC workflow?

 

 

What training and support is needed?  All training and support is available from service-oriented, client-centric JOC vendors to assure owners and contractors can operate efficiently.  These vendors have a goal to assure owners can manage their own JOC Programs in a fully compliant and effective manner.  Training is multi-formant and multi-level and is available generally includes training videos and “Quick Start Guides” that can be accessed through various technologies.

Can owners create independent estimates?  Yes.  Owners can develop detailed cost proposals by line item and prepare an independent estimate. The owner creates an independent estimate in the same manner that a JOC contractor does, by creating a detailed scope of work and selecting line items and quantities.  The agency can then automatically compare the estimate to the contractor estimate via the JOC software and focus on variances.

via 4bt.us

Learning about Job Order Contracting is the first step towards efficient facilities repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds.

Request the full white paper…

Job Order Contract Program Requirements

Successful Job Order Contract Program Requirements

Here’s a concise list of requirements for a successful JOC Program.

  1. Competitive solicitation for professional JOC contractors based upon performance and technical ability.
  2. Selection of multiple JOC contractors with proven performance and expertise
  3. Published unit price book that is locally researched and regularly updated (no use of location or economic factors)
  4. Trust, mutual respect, and leverage of the knowledge of those actually doing the work.
  5. Leadership support and commitment
  6. Mandatory initial and ongoing training
  7. Quantitative key performance indicators
  8. Regular independent third-party audits
Job Order Contract Program Requirements
Job Order Contract Program Requirements
Job Order Contract Program Requirements
Job Order Contract Program Requirements

Job Order Contract Program Requirements

via 4bt.us

job order contracting

Construction Cost Estimating Lunacy

Construction Cost Estimating Lunacy!

accuracy: ac·cu·ra·cy – the degree to which the result of a measurement, calculation, or specification conforms to the correct value or a standard. – Oxford Languages

Accuracy is a very common term used in describing the primary attribute required in construction cost estimates.

The use of the term accuracy in concert with a construction cost estimate is questionable is questionable at best but is sheer lunacy if the standard is the final construction cost!

Construction cost management, inclusive of repair, renovation, maintenance, etc., will continue to be elusive until the is a fundamental change in construction planning, procurement, and project delivery methods and processes, including the cost estimating approach.

The ONLY via method of estimating a project is to use a current, locally researched granular cost database with appropriate means and methods.  That is a known standard/datum.

Information accuracy, however, is a term I can live with, as it is a function of the correctness of input data.


 

#management #construction #project #change #maintenance #procurement #database #planning #constructioncostdata

 

 

The Reality of Construction Cost Management

The Reality of Construction Cost Management

The reality of construction cost management is that it is impossible without visibility.  Over 95% of ALL repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build projects lack cost visibility.

And don’t get me started in the need for a focus on overall process regarding planning, procurement, and project delivery.

 

reliable construction cost data

 

The Reality of Construction Cost Management The Reality of Construction Cost Management

Why LEAN Construction Matters

JOC Programs that make sense.

JOC Programs that make sense deliver comprehensive, integrated robust processes, professional services, and enabling software solutions to enable public sector facilities management teams to more efficient mange building and other structure in concert with mission goals.

Robust programmatic process for all repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction projects.

4BT (Four BT LLC) JOC and physical asset life-cycle management expertise and technical capabilities are embodied in its 4BT-PEP JOC Knowledge management system.  The 4BT-PEP JOC Solutions enable clients to improve operational performance, optimize investments and drive measurable cost savings.

Enabling enterprise cloud technology

Data driven planning, procurement, and project delivery is supported by a locally researched granular line-item construction task database that is updated quarterly, without the use of location factoring or economic multipliers.

Data driven decision-making

 

construction cost dataconsidering a job order contract

Roadmap to LEAN Construction

Roadmap to LEAN Construction – Existing robust integrating planning, procurement, and project delivery

Implementing a roadmap to LEAN Construction and efficient planning, procurement, and project delivery is neither complex nor costly.  The benefits of the change include consistent delivery of 90%+ of all repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build projects on-time, on-budget, and per detailed specifications.

The question is why aren’t LEAN construction solutions being implemented to any significant effect, and why are there so many being used improperly?

 

What is LEAN?  Lean is a philosophy that began with Henry Ford (not Toyota) in “recent” history and existed long before that.  In basic terms LEAN involves mutual respect among all participants and stakeholders, information sharing, and a goal of continuous improvement.  (See-Origins of LEAN – LEAN Enterprise Institute)

LEAN Construction Solutions – LEAN construction solutions have existed for over three decades and have now evolved to include all the requisite tools and services for rapid implementation.  LEAN solutions can be tailored to organizational needs; however, core elements remain constant.  These core elements are mandatory to achieve maximum benefit.

Core Elements of LEAN Construction 

  • Owner leadership, commitment, and competency
  • A defined programmatic process consistently applied to all programs, contracts, and projects
  • Focus upon clearly defined mutually beneficial outcomes
  • Integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery methods and teams on an early and ongoing basis
  • Common data environment inclusive of locally researched detailed line-item construction task with granular labor, material, and equipment data points
  • A written Operation Manual or Execution Guide in association with a multiparty contract.
  • Quantitative metrics/key performance indicators to drive continuous improvement
  • Mandatory initial and ongoing training for all participants
  • Enabling technology to support lower deployment and management costs as well as organization-wide consistency
Roadmap to LEAN Construction
Roadmap to LEAN Construction

 

Why LEAN Construction Matters

The True Origin of LEAN

“Although there are instances of rigorous process thinking in manufacturing all the way back to the Arsenal in Venice in the 1450s, the first person to truly integrate an entire production process was Henry Ford. At Highland Park, MI, in 1913 he married consistently interchangeable parts with standard work and moving conveyance to create what he called flow production. The public grasped this in the dramatic form of the moving assembly line, but from the standpoint of the manufacturing engineer the breakthroughs went much further.”

The True Origin of LEAN begins with Henry Ford with respect to flow production and leveraging the knowledge of those doing the work.

LEAN did NOT originate in JAPAN or with TPS.

Forget, 5S, Gemba, Jidoka, Kaizen, Kanban, Muda, Poka-Yoke, PCDA, Takt time, Value Stream Mapping,

The core principles of LEAN originated with Henry Ford.

A Brief History of LeanFord lined up fabrication steps in process sequence wherever possible using special-purpose machines and go/no-go gauges to fabricate and assemble the components going into the vehicle within a few minutes and deliver perfectly fitting components directly to line-side. This was a truly revolutionary break from the shop practices of the American System that consisted of general-purpose machines grouped by process, which made parts that eventually found their way into finished products after a good bit of tinkering (fitting) in subassembly and final assembly.   (Source: LEAN Enterprise Institute (https://www.lean.org/explore-lean/a-brief-history-of-lean/)

Lean Construction solutions are now readily available.

 

JOC Program Policy

JOC Program Policy

The following JOC Program policy considerations are provided for general knowledge.

I. Purpose
The use of Job Order Contracting (JOC), when properly designed and managed, provides a means for an organization to optimize the planning, procurement, and project delivery of repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction of buildings and other forms of physical infrastructure.   It is important to check any statutes or regulations in your specific area to determine if any limitations exist on the use of this method.

 

JOC Program Policy

II. Scope
A JOC Program that observes current best management practices with incorporate the following elements.

  1. A minimum and maximum value for the annual construction volume.
  2. A minimum and maximum value for a single project/workorder, as well as a statement that a project/workorders cannot be broken up into several projects to circumvent the JOC Program’s established maximum value per project/work order.
  3. The term of the Job Order Contract, typically one year with up to four (4) option years.
  4. Definition of the types of construction services that can be done using the JOC Program (General construction, Roofing, Maintenance, etc.)
  5. A locally researched detailed line-item unit price book (National average cost data using location factors or economic factoring is not recommend, nor is the use of assemblies or higher levels of cost aggregation.)
  6. The levels of use of disadvantaged and local contractors/subcontractors.
  7. Workflows, forms, and other policies that are clearly defined in the contract and an associated operations manual/execution guideJOC Program Policy
  8. Regular independent third-party audits.
  9. A review of EVERY JOC contractor proposal/bid for JOC Program compliance.
  10. Mandatory initial and annual training for all JOC Program participants.
  11. Regular updating of the JOC unit price book (UPB).  At a minimum an annual update, with quarterly updates as needed/available.  (Again, UPBs should be fully researched when updated and not simply use a factor for updating costs.
  12. The owner is solely responsible for the JOC Program versus a “JOC consultant”.  Owners must have appropriate leadership and technical capabilities.

JOC Program Policy

III. Contractor Prequalification and Selection
All JOC contractors must be evaluated by submitting a coefficient and their company experience and then selected as an awardee for a specific JOC Program.   Prospective contractors submit a coefficient (generally 1.20-1.40) for designated categories of work, such as 1.) normal work hours, 2.) work done outside of normal work hours, and 3.) non-prepriced line items. A potential contractor must submit information that provides a reasonable expectation that it can meet JOC Program performance requirements as well as have required licensing and/or certifications.

IV. JOC Project Review and Selection
The owner JOC Program Administrator will evaluate each potential JOC project to determine if it is in the best interest of the owner to use the JOC method for the project. Each individual job order will not be approved until the designated responsible, knowledgeable person other than the project manager has independently reviewed o the JOC contractor’s cost proposal. The independent review shall ensure that the contractor’s proposal aligns appropriately with the owner’s scope of work, that the listed tasks are appropriate at a line item level and the quantities are accurate.  I

V. JOC Staff
The owner JOC Program Administrator is responsible for ensuring that all personnel associated with the JOC program are professionally trained regarding the JOC procedures and use of the JOC knowledge-based management software; and for ensuring that JOC staff represent the owner’s best interest, consistent with ethics and regulatory responsibilities.
The JOC Program Administrator shall ensure that all internal and external JOC Program participants receive adequate training to properly administer the JOC contracts and that project managers are sufficiently involved in administering the job orders and assure JOC training materials for ongoing use are suitable for all levels and types of personnel and updated as needed.  Owner personal administrating or directly participating in the approval of JOC projects/work orders hall not be affiliated with any entity that provides services related to the project, such as design, construction, or engineering support services, or JOC consulting services.

 

Additional Information

  1. A detailed scope of work, completed after a joint site visit (owner and contractor) must fully defined requirements such that the contractor can create a detailed line item estimate using the associated locally researched detailed line-item unit price book.
  2. A notice to proceed, issued by the owner, must include the approved detailed line-item estimate, and other documents per the contract, and a dates for the work to be initiated and substantially completed.
  3. Any change orders or “supplemental job orders” MUST follow the same procedures as a new work order.JOC Program Policy
  4. The total cost of items not listed in the pre-priced unit catalog shall not exceed ten percent (10%) of the total cost
    proposal.  If items not listed in the UPB are included in the contractor’s proposal, the contractor will be required to obtain three (3) written quotes and use the lowest qualifying quote. For non-prepriced items.    If three (3) quotes are unavailable the contractor must justify in writing the reasons that three (3) quotes were not obtained. The use of all non-prepriced items
    must be approved by the appropriate owner individual.  The Owner shall retain all documentation related to the selection of the non-prepriced items, including the three (3) written quotes obtained by the contractor or the documented reason for the lack of three (3) quotes, and considered adding these items to the UPB at the next annual update cycle.

via www.4bt.us

 

 

 

 

Construction Cost Management = Transparency and Credibility

Construction Cost Management = Transparency and Credibility

Construction Cost Management = Transparency and Credibility

Is your construction cost estimate…

  1. Comprehensive?
  2. Well-documented?
  3. Credible?
  4. Unbiased?

CORE PRINCIPLES

  1. An estimate is no better than its basis.
  2. An estimate is a prediction and carries uncertainty.
  3. An estimate is a decision-making tool.
  4. Variations in an estimate can be found in the basis.

FACTORS IMPACTING AN ESTIMATE

  • Access
  • Corruption/fraudulent practices
  • Culture
  • Data architecture (standardized, common terms, definitions, information formats)
  • Early and ongoing communication of participants
  • Environmental aspects
  • Equipment availability
  • Local and general market conditions
  • Location
  • Labor availability and skill
  • Material availability
  • Means and methods
  • Organizational leadership
  • Owner leadership and competence
  • Programmatic approach and planning, procurement, project delivery methodology
  • Project timeline
  • Scale/size
  • Statement of Work (SOW) detail
  • Supporting technologies
  • Technical and cost visibility and transparency
  • Team skill (internal and external) of all participants and stakeholders

 

 

Contact Us
First
Last

via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us – LEAN Construction Solutions – Locally researched detailed unit price cost data, Integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery, Job Order Contracting tools and services.

Construction Cost Estimating Factors

Construction Cost Estimating Factors

Construction Cost Estimating Factors 2022 – Construction Cost Estimating Factors that determine validity, transparency, and level of cost management capability.

 

CORE PRINCIPLES

  1. An estimate is no better than its basis.
  2. An estimate is a prediction and carries uncertainty.
  3. An estimate is a decision-making tool.
  4. Variations in an estimate can be found in the basis.

FACTORS IMPACTING AN ESTIMATE

  • Access
  • Corruption/fraudulent practices
  • Culture
  • Data architecture (standardized, common terms, definitions, information formats)
  • Early and ongoing communication of participants
  • Environmental aspects
  • Equipment availability
  • Local and general market conditions
  • Location
  • Labor availability and skill
  • Material availability
  • Means and methods
  • Organizational leadership
  • Owner leadership and competence
  • Programmatic approach and planning, procurement, project delivery methodology
  • Project timeline
  • Scale/size
  • Statement of Work (SOW) detail
  • Supporting technologies
  • Technical and cost visibility and transparency
  • Team skill (internal and external) of all participants and stakeholders

via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us – LEAN Construction Solutions – Locally researched detailed unit price cost data, Integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery, Job Order Contracting tools and services.

Robust LEAN Job Order Contracting

Robust LEAN Job Order Contracting 2022

Optimizing repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction outcomes isn’t difficult. It does, however, require a robust LEAN Job Order Contracting programmatic framework.   Real property owner leadership and commitment to fundamental change from traditional methods are the first steps.  Owner support and a programmatic LEAN JOC Program combine to integrate internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams to enable the consistent delivery of quality repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds on-time and on-budget, without excessive administrative cost or burden.

 

Status Quo

Public sector repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction projects continue their legacy of failure due to two primary reasons:

1. Lack of owner leadership and support, and

2. Continued use of archaic and antagonistic planning, procurement, and project delivery methods.

Most poor outcomes can be traced to one or both of these primary failure points.

Change Management

All the tools and support services needed to assure significant improvement are readily available.   Proper implementation of a programmatic approach to each project maximizes internal and external team collaboration, via shared workflows, information, and technology.   This approach enables knowledge of those doing the work to be leveraged, as well as the necessary oversight to significantly improve outcomes.

A LEAN JOC Program delivers…

  • A well-defined and effectively communicated scope of work
  • Financial and technical visibility and transparency
  • Full compliance with applicable requirements
  • A laser focus upon mutually beneficial outcomes
  • Longer term, mutually beneficial relationships
  • A common data environment (CDE) including a granular, locally researched unit price book
  • Consistent delivery of projects on time and on budget and  higher levels of satisfaction participants and stakeholders
  • Significantly improved use of financial resources – fewer change orders and virtual elimination of legal disputes

Robust LEAN Job Order Contracting improves construction productivity, compliance, and overall satisfaction while reducing cost time.

Robust LEAN Job Order Contracting

via Four BT, LLC, the AEC industry’s innovative integrated project delivery, detailed locally researched construction cost data, and SAAS technology solutions provider. Integrating powerful, proven project planning, procurement, and execution methods to help guide organizations to achieve accelerated improvement of their facilities repair, renovation, and construction outcomes. We focus upon supporting a collaborative culture and client-specific programs centered upon delivering customer value, driven by proven LEAN processes, actionable data, enabling cloud technology, ongoing training, and continuous improvement

Why LEAN Construction Matters

Effective Construction Cost Estimating

Effective construction cost estimating must be done at a detailed line-item level using local market data.

Effective construction cost estimating

Learn more?

https://4bt.us/local-construction-cost-data/

Construction Cost Estimating - Single Source of Truth

Construction Cost Estimating – Single Source of Truth

There is only one sole source of truth for construction cost estimating, locally researched detailed line-item unit price data and associated quantities.   Any owner, designer, builder who is not observing this fact has limited cost visibility and is likely to be “off” by 30%-40% or more.

Most federal government agencies incorrectly cost estimate, including the GSA, as they don’t understand this basic fact and do not have robust, organization-wide cost estimating practices.

It’s beyond time for improved leadership, competence, and accountability.

Construction Cost Estimating - Single Source of TruthConstruction Cost Estimating - Single Source of TruthConstruction Cost Estimating - Single Source of Truth

References:

GAO-19-57 – FEDERAL REAL PROPERTY ASSET MANAGEMENT Agencies Could Benefit from Additional Information on Leading Practices

GAO-21-215 – CAPITAL FUND PROPOSAL Upfront Funding Could Benefit Some Projects, but Other Potential Effects Not Clearly Identified

GAO/GGD-00-172R Study on Facility Design Reviews – Federal Facilities Council’s Report on the Role of Facility Design Reviews in Facilities Construction

GAO-19-157SP – Substantial Efforts Needed to Achieve Greater Progress on High-Risk Areas

GAO-22-104481 – DEFENSE INFRASTRUCTURE DOD Should Better Manage Risks Posed by Deferred Facility Maintenance

GAO-21-596 – FEDERAL REAL PROPERTY ASSET MANAGEMENT Additional Direction in Government-Wide Guidance Could Enhance Natural Disaster Resilience

Optimizing Construction

Optimizing Construction, Repair, Renovation, and New Build Outcomes

Optimizing Construction, Repair, Renovation, and New Build Outcomes requires a robust programmatic process that is consistently applied and continuously improved.

Let’s start with what methods will NOT WORK if used on their own…

  • Design-bid-build
  • CPM
  • Last Planner / Last Planner System
  • Kaizen
  • CM@R/CM@Risk
  • Design-build
  • Blackbelt
  • Six sigma
  • Gemba
  • Kanban
  • Mudi
  • Muri
  • Poke yoke

Now let’s talk about what will work.   A process is needed that integrates internal and external teams on an early and ongoing basis throughout the Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery phases and beyond.

Construction program management processes and technology must be connected with real-time data (locally researched unit price cost data) and workflows in order to be efficient and successful and keep project teams on the same page. The siloed approach just doesn’t cut it anymore.

A process, with associated workflows and tools, that…

  1. Allows the consistent delivery of quality projects on time and on budget independent of size, scope, and complexity.
  2. Should be scalable across project types, sizes, locations, and teams.
  3. A detailed scope of work, including a detailed line time list of unit task (not assemblies/systems) with associated granular labor, material, cost, crew, and productivity data, all organized using a standard data architecture (CSI Masterformat), and all locally researched (no used of “national average cost data”, “location factors”, or “economic factors”
  4. All tasks should represent what can typically be accomplished in a single workday.
  5. Provides flexibility for specific organizational requirements.
  6. Rewards performance and problem solving
  7. Is easy to understand and deploy with minimal administrative burden and cost
  8. Encourages and retains feedback and input from the people doing the work, continuously building a knowledge base.
  9. Provides sufficient granularity to monitor and improve sustainability.
  10. Integrates internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams.

Currently only two programmatic processes enable all the above items LEAN IPD and LEAN JOC.

Optimizing Construction, Repair, Renovation, and New Build Outcomes for owners, architects, engineers, and builders.
Optimizing Construction, Repair, Renovation, and New Build Outcomes for owners, architects, engineers, and builders.

What’s needed for LEAN IPD or LEAN JOC?

  1. Owner leadership and long-term commitment and equal support from all internal and external teams.  The process won’t work if not followed by all.  Staying on course with a new system of operation is nontrivial.
  2. Change Management – Getting everyone onboard with a new process isn’t easy, everyone is ambivalent about change.
  3. Direct owner participation – Management officials must be able to guide employees and external teams directly and efficiently, without the filter of a third party “consultant”.  The essence of the lean method of operation is derived by how well leadership can work with internal and external teams.
  4. Training and education – Implementing and maximizing the benefit of takes time and dedication.  Initial and ongoing training for ALL participants and stakeholders as well as quantitative metrics/performance indicators are mandatory. Cohesive teamwork is essential for lean systems.  Each team member must be well versed in their role, responsibilities, and deliverables.   Optimizing outcomes is dependent upon all participants.
  5. Continuous Improvement – Leadership must be vigilant to changes in the internal or external environment and adapt accordingly.

Via Four BT, LLC – Integrated Construction Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery Solutions

www.4bt.us

Integrated LEAN Construction

Integrated LEAN Construction Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery for Owners and Design-Builders

While we hear about integrated project delivery (IPD), alternative project delivery, and job order contracting, are they truly fully developed processes with supporting tools and services …integrated LEAN construction planning, procurement, and project delivery for owners and design-builders requires internal and external teams to collaborate appropriately through the project lifecycle.

Consistent, significant improvements in productivity, quality, cost reduction, and delivery times can only be achieved by “checking all the following boxes”:

[  ] Owner leadership and commitment to change

[  ] Collaborative organizational culture

[  ] A robust program-based framework that includes LEAN processes and workflows

[  ] Mandatory initial and ongoing training for ALL participants and stakeholders

[  ] A common data environment (shared glossary of terms and definitions, locally researched detailed unit price cost data

[  ] An execution guide and supporting technology as part of the multi-party agreement

[  ] Shared focus upon mutually beneficial outcomes and continuous improvement

[  ] Quantitative metrics

[  ] Performance-based reward system

The above provides a foundation to allow a real property owner and their design-builders to efficiently manage their ongoing repair, renovation, sustainability, maintenance, and new build projects.

Integrated LEAN construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions

Integrated LEAN construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions

 

 

 

www.4bt.us – Integrated LEAN construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions

Why LEAN Construction Matters

GHG, SHG, SEC Regulations – Facilities Regs and Reporting Changes Coming Soon

New GSG, SHG, SEC Facilities Regulations and Reporting Requirements on the near-term horizon.

GHG Regulations

Is your organization ready?

How a company assesses and plans for climate-related risks may have a significant impact on its future financial performance and investors’ return on their investment in the company. (SEC 17 CFR 210, 229, 232, 239, and 249)

“ESG- Using Environmental, Social and Governance factors to evaluate companies and countries on how far advanced they are with sustainability. Once enough data has been acquired on these three metrics, they can be integrated into the investment process when deciding what equities or bonds to buy.”

ISO 14064

ISO14064 Boundaries

  • Organizational
  • Control
  • Equity share
  • Operational
  • Direct GHG emissions and removals
  • Energy indirect emissions
  • Other indirect emission

GHG/SEC Reporting

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) proposal to require that public companies disclose climate-related information. 17 CFR 210, 229, 232, 239, and 249, RIN 3235-AM87

Public organizations will be required to provide climate-related information in their registration statements and annual reports, including information about climate-related risks that are likely to have a material impact on its business, results of operations, or financial condition. The required information about climate-related risks would also include disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions, which have become a commonly used metric to assess exposure to risk. In addition, under the proposed rules, certain climate-related financial metrics would be required in audited financial statements.

  • The proposed rules would require public filers to provide climate-related information in registration statements and annual reports such as the Form 10-K. The proposed rules draw from existing disclosure frameworks including the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures and the Greenhouse Gas Protocol.
  • Companies would be required to disclose Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions, including data on carbon offsets.
  • Companies would be required to disclose Scope 3 GHG emission “if material” or if the company has explicitly set climate goals.
  • In addition to GHG emissions data, the proposal would require companies to provide forward-looking statements about how climate risks are likely to affect their business, and information about the company’s governance around climate risks.
  • The proposed rules contain a “safe harbor” for liability for Scope 3 emissions disclosure. Commissioner Peirce raised concerns about the efficacy of this safe harbor language.

Additionally, GHGRP (codified at 40 CFR Part 98) requires reporting of greenhouse gas (GHG) data and other relevant information from large GHG emission sources, fuel and industrial gas suppliers, and CO2 injection sites in the United States. This data is used by organizations to track and compare facilities’ greenhouse gas emissions, identify opportunities to cut pollution, minimize wasted energy, and save money. States, cities, and other communities can use EPA’s greenhouse gas data to find high-emitting facilities in their area, compare emissions between similar facilities, and develop common-sense climate policies.

Base year GHG inventory is step one and determines your facilities carbon footprint, Step 2 is Reducing Carbon Footprint, Step 3 = Offset.

How to reduce the carbon footprint of a building?

  • Design for long life and adaptability
  • Source building material, bricks, cement, aggregate and sand from the closest source to reduce the transport distance and related emissions
  • Modify and refurbish instead of demolishing or adding to avoid unnecessary production and transport of building materials
  • Ensure that waste and off cuts are reduced by specifying standard sizes
  • Ask suppliers for information on their energy practices to create awareness and allow for the making of informed decisions.

Reduction possibilities

  • Energy savings
  • Awareness
  • Auto switch off
  • Buffer zones
  • Waste and packaging
  • Take back agreements
  • Use of biogas for chilling
  • Use of organic waste as mulch/compost
  • Transport
  • Hybrid vehicles for fleet

National averages and ‘ad hoc’ processes won’t work

A locally researched, detailed unit price cost database and an associated LEAN, integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery process are both critical to reducing the carbon footprint of facilities and other built infrastructure.

Conclusion

The journey towards efficient life-cycle management of the built environment, carbon literacy, and LEAN process is not easy.

The challenge for organizations is developing appropriate leadership and commitment. Collaboration and integration of internal and external teams, and shared information that is transparent from cost and technical perspectives are all fundamental requirements.

Change is difficult for everyone. It’s critical to understand the risks and opportunities, and to establish a long-term commitment

“Greenwashing” is a huge problem. “LEED certification” is not sufficient to meet GHG requirements or other regulations (current and pending). LEED is NOT a standard, it’s a rating system.

via Four BT, LLC – Integrated LEAN Facilities Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery Solutions

Integrated LEAN Construction Solution, Why LEAN Construction Matters

Integrated LEAN Construction Solution

4BT OpenJOC / 4BT OpenBUILD – The integrated LEAN construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solution deployed as a cloud SaaS platform, and complete with full support services.

Enterprise Management capability for Mutiple Programs, Contracts, Projects, Proposal/Bid, Workorders, Contractor, Subcontractors, and Forms/Documents. management. Complete with locally detailed line-item unit price construction cost data BIM integration.

Valid construction cost information

Valid construction cost information

Valid construction cost information has a sound basis in logic or fact, reasonable, cogent, well-grounded, justifiable, and appropriate to the end in view.

The “end in view” for any real property owner and their design-build partners is a well communicated, detailed scope of work, early and ongoing collaboration, and a mutually beneficial outcome.

Valid construction cost information

Robust management of construction project information is central to the consistent achievement of best value outcomes.  The foundation of this information is a locally researched detailed unit price database, complete with labor, material, and equipment granularity.

 

 

Construction Cost Data Insights

Construction Cost Data Insights

Add local construction cost data insights into your facilities repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build planning, procurement, and project delivery activities, and gain 30%-40% greater cost visibility.

Most real property owners lack the ability to measure a project to determine if it’s successful or not.   At the end of the day, you need to have data to measure the success of any facilities project.   It’s important going into any project to really understand the scope of work at a detailed level from both cost and technical perspectives.  Locally researched, detailed line time cost data and associated quantities is the only true baseline from costs and performance can be measured.

A major cause of failed projects is the lack of valid information throughout their lifecycle.  This can now be changed for everyone… owners, designers, builders, and oversight groups.

Construction Cost Data Insights Construction Cost Data Insights Construction Cost Data Insights

 

 

Why LEAN Construction Matters

Integrated Construction Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery Solution

Consistent delivery of quality repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build projects on time and on budget is possible using an integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery solution.

Robust construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions are suitable for facilities as well as horizontal physical infrastructure repair, renovation, maintenance, sustainability, and new build projects.    Traditional project delivery modes have shown to repeatedly fail to deliver value to owners, designers, and end users, building users, and the general community.

Shared profit and risk and jointly developed project goals and values are keystones for team alignment for any project.

Research has readily demonstrated significant improvements are possible in the overall project delivery process from a cost, schedule, and quality perspective, as well as improved inter and intraorganizational relationships.

Achieving and Maintaining Excellence Requires – Collaboration, Team Alignment and Tracking, Accountability, Clarity of Goals, Problem Solving, Fiscal Transparency, Robust Process, Common/Shared Data Environment, Levelling Up Team Knowledge

The ultimate benefit provided by integrated construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solution is significantly improved life-cycle total cost of ownership asset management.
Integrated Construction Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery Solution

Learn more about…
Choosing IPD & Lean
Team Selection
Developing Contract
Developing Parties
Champions
Decision Structure
Clarity of Goals
Resources & Facilitation
Lean
Team Alignment
Collaboration
Team Culture
Budget and Schedule
Building Outcomes

References:

• Abdirad, H., & Dossick, C. S. (2019). 12 Restructuration of architectural
practice in integrated project delivery (IPD): Two case studies.
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(1), 104–
117. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-05-2018-0196
• Cheng, R., & Johnson, A. (2016). Motivation and Means: How and Why
IPD and Lean Lead to Success [Report]. Lean Construction Institute and
Integrated Project Delivery Alliance.
http://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/198897
• Choi, J., Yun, S., Leite, F., & Mulva, S. P. (2019). 36 Team Integration and
Owner Satisfaction: Comparing Integrated Project Delivery with
Construction Management at Risk in Health Care Projects. Journal of
Management in Engineering, 35(1), 05018014.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000654
• Collins, W., & Parrish, K. (2014). The Need for Integrated Project Delivery
in the Public Sector. 719–728.
https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784413517.074
• Ibrahim, M. W., Hanna, A., & Kievet, D. (2020). 32 Quantitative
Comparison of Project Performance between Project Delivery Systems.
Journal of Management in Engineering, 36(6), 04020082.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000837
• Kent, D. C., & Becerik-Gerber, B. (2010). Understanding Construction
Industry Experience and Attitudes toward Integrated Project Delivery.
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(8), 815–825.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000188
• Ling, F. Y. Y., Teo, P. X., Li, S., Zhang, Z., & Ma, Q. (2020). 4 Adoption of
Integrated Project Delivery Practices for Superior Project Performance.
Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and
Construction, 12(4), 05020014. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-
4170.000042Integrated Construction Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery Solution

Primary Factors Impacting Construction Outcomes

The 2 Primary Factors Impacting Construction Outcomes in the Public Sector

The 2 primary factors impacting construction outcomes in the public sector are,

#1 Owner leadership, commitment, and competence, and

#2 Construction delivery method.

Most of us are aware of the rampant, economic, and environmental waste endemic to public sector facilities repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction.

Virtually nothing has been done to address the fundamental cause.

All the tools and services required to ensure that over 90% of projects are delivered in a quality manner, on time and on budget, however, major barriers have prevented their adoption.

The “system” is broken.  The traditional practice of design, bid, build has proven antagonistic, costly, and unsustainable.  Nonetheless it remains the norm.   Integrated project delivery and LEAN job order contracting have proven capable of significant gains in productivity and associated cost savings.  Both enable cost visibility, transparency, and management, while also developing the capabilities of all involved participants (owners, designers, builders).

Proper implementation and management of these superior project delivery methods requires fundamental change in the working environment.  The associated change management process is nontrivial and requires leadership, commitment, and competence on the part of public sector owners.   Therin lies the rub.   Current real public sector property owners simply don’t have awareness of the issues or how to solve them.  Furthermore, there is a pervasive lack of accountability and oversight.

Primary Factors Impacting Construction Outcomes

 

 

strategic collaboration for construction

Strategic Collaboration Framework for Construction

Strategic Collaboration Framework for Construction

  1. Top management commitment and support
  2. Robust programmatic processes and workflows
  3. Effective and open communication across inter and interorganizational teams.
  4. Integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery phases
  5. Mandatory initial and ongoing training/continuous improvement workshops.
  6. Well communicated mutually beneficial goals and objectives.
  7. Early and ongoing involvement of owners / designers / contractors /
    subcontractors.
  8. Clear contracting language with written operations manuals / execution guides
  9. Performance-based incentives.
  10.  Regular monitoring of partnering process, including third-party audits.
  11.  Share information among partnering participants within a common data environment, inclusive of locally researched detailed line-item unit costs.
  12. Enabling collaborative technology
strategic collaboration for construction
Shared Technical and Cost Information

Characteristics of Strategic Collaboration and Efficient Construction Project Delivery

Characteristics of Strategic Collaboration and Efficient Construction Project Delivery

The characteristics of strategic collaboration and efficient construction project delivery are discussed below.

Organizations that provide leadership and commitment to collaborative environments are rare.  Those that do share the following characteristics which are present from original signing of a multi-party agreement, through implementation and ongoing management (Crowley & Karim, 1995; CII, 1989).    Communication and knowledge exchanges and growth are enabled by an underlying common programmatic process for every project and activity that eases knowledge transfers and is dependent upon strength of relationships between individuals and the type of knowledge exchanged (Reagans & McEvily, 2003; Hansen, 1999).

  • Mutual trust and respect
  • Shared vision
  • Long-term commitment
  • Dedication to common goals
  • Clear direction responsibilities and line of authority for team members
  • Common data environment (glossary of terms and definitions, locally researched detailed unit price cost data)
  • Mandatory early and ongoing collaboration for each project
  • Integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery processes and team
  • Shared boundaries
  • Global oversight with localized decision-making
  • Quantitative metrics and continuous monitoring
  • Performance-centric reward system
  • Initial and ongoing training for all participants and stakeholders
  • Interorganizational and intraorganizational information sharing on an early and ongoing basis
  • Focus upon mutually beneficial outcomes
Characteristics of Strategic Collaboration and Efficient Construction Project Delivery
Characteristics of Strategic Collaboration and Efficient Construction Project Delivery

The benefits of strategic collaboration vs. traditional construction planning, procurement, and project delivery are well documented and partially listed below (Chan et al., 2004; Black et al., 2000; Grajek et al., 2000; Gransberg et al., 1999).

  • Lower project related cost growth
  • Projects completed at or under budgeted cost
  • Reduced project related cost growth per change order
  • Shorter construction schedules than planned
  • Zero costs associated with disputes and claims
  • Fewer disputes and claims
  • Increased quality satisfaction
  • Increased satisfaction in working relationships

All the tools and support services are readily available to enable strategic collaboration and efficient delivery of any type or size of repair, renovation, maintenance, or new build activity.   The only true barrier is owner leadership and commitment.

Characteristics of Strategic Collaboration and Efficient Construction Project Delivery
Stategic Collaboration versus Traditional Approaches

 

REFERENCES
Abudayyeh, O. (1994). Partnering: a team building approach to quality construction
management. Journal of Management in Engineering, 10(6), 26-29.
Akintoye, A., McIntosh, G., & Fitzgerald, E. (2000). A survey of supply chain collaboration and
management in the UK construction industry. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply
Management, 6(3), 159-168.
Alderman, N., & Ivory, C. (2007). Partnering in major contracts: Paradox and metaphor.
International Journal of Project Management, 25(4), 386-393.
Anderson, L., & Polkinghorn, B. (2011). Efficacy of Partnering on the Woodrow Wilson Bridge
Project: Empirical Evidence of Collaborative Problem-Solving Benefits. Journal of Legal
Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction, 3(1), 17-27.
Adnan, H., Shamsuddin, S. M., Supardi, A., & Ahmad, N. (2012). Conflict prevention in
partnering projects. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 35, 772-781.
Aggus, S. R., & Hiscocks, E. J. S. (2007). Coventry Framework Partnership. Proceedings of the
ICE-Municipal Engineer, 160(1), 37-44.
Anvuur, A. M., & Kumaraswamy, M. M. (2007). Conceptual model of partnering and alliancing.
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 133(3), 225-234.
Army Corps of Engineers. (2010). “Partnering: A Tool for USACE, Engineering,
Construction, and Operations,” IWR Pamphlet 91-ADR-P-4.
Associated General Contractors of America, “Partnering: A Concept for Success,” Washington,
D.C. AGC Publication #1205, September 1991.
Back, W. E., & Sanders, S. R. (1996). Partnering in a unit price environment. Project
Management Institute.
Badenfelt, U. (2010). I trust you, I trust you not: a longitudinal study of control mechanisms in
incentive contracts. Construction Management and Economics, 28(3), 301-310.
Barlow, J. (2000). Innovation and learning in complex offshore construction projects. Research
Policy, 29(7–8), 973-989.
Barnes, M. (2000, August). Civil engineering management in the Industrial Revolution. In
Proceedings of the ICE-Civil Engineering (Vol. 138, No. 3, pp. 135-144). Thomas Telford.
Bates, G. D. (1996). Feature: I Don’t Believe in Change Just for the Sake of Change. Journal of
Management in Engineering, 12(3), 20-24.
Bates, G. D. (1996). Garden of managerial delights. Journal of Management in Engineering, 7.
Bates, G. D. (1996). What Project Partnering Is and Is Not. Journal of Management in
Engineering, 12(1), 10-10.
Bayliss, R., Cheung, S. O., Suen, H. C., & Wong, S. P. (2004). Effective partnering tools in
construction: a case study on MTRC TKE contract 604 in Hong Kong. International
Journal of Project Management, 22(3), 253-263.
Beach, R., Webster, M., & Campbell, K. M. (2005). An evaluation of partnership development in
the construction industry. International Journal of Project Management, 23(8), 611-621.
Bennett, J., & Peace, S. (Eds.). (2006). Partnering in the construction industry: A code of practice
for strategic collaborative working. Routledge.
Bemelmans, J., Voordijk, H., & Vos, B. (2012). Supplier-contractor collaboration in the
construction industry – A taxonomic approach to the literature of the 2000-2009 decade.
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 19(4), 342-368.
Black, C., Akintoye, A., & Fitzgerald, E. (2000). An analysis of success factors and benefits of
partnering in construction. International Journal of Project Management, 18(6), 423-
Boddy, D., & Macbeth, D. (2000). Prescriptions for managing change: a survey of their effects in
projects to implement collaborative working between organisations. International
Journal of Project Management, 18(5), 297-306.
Bower, D. J., Crabtree, E., & Keogh, W. (1997). Rhetorics and realities in new product
development in the subsea oil industry. International Journal of Project Management,
15(6), 345-350.
Brennan, R. (1997). Buyer/Supplier Partnering in British Industry: The Automotive and
Telecommunications Sectors. Journal of Marketing Management, 13(8), 759-775.
Bresnen, M. (2007). Deconstructing partnering in project-based organisation: Seven pillars,
seven paradoxes and seven deadly sins. International Journal of Project Management,
25(4), 365-374.
Bresnen, M. (2009). Living the dream? Understanding partnering as emergent practice.
Construction Management and Economics, 27(10), 923-933.
Bresnen, M. (2010). Keeping it real? Constituting partnering through boundary objects.
Construction Management and Economics, 28(6), 615-628.
Bresnen M., Edelman, L., Newell, S., Scarbrough, H., & Swan, J. (2002). Social practices and the
management of knowledge in project environments. International Journal of Project
Management, 21, 157-166.
Bresnen, M., & Marshall, N. (2000). Building partnerships: case studies of client–contractor
collaboration in the UK construction industry. Construction Management & Economics,
18(7), 819-832.
Bresnen, M., & Marshall, N. (2000). Motivation, commitment and the use of incentives in
partnerships and alliances. Construction Management & Economics, 18(5), 587-598.
Bresnen, M., & Marshall, N. (2000). Partnering in construction: a critical review of issues,
problems and dilemmas. Construction Management & Economics, 18(2), 229-237.
Bresnen, M., & Marshall, N. (2002). The engineering or evolution of co-operation? A tale of two
partnering projects. International Journal of Project Management, 20(7), 497-505.
Brooke, K. L., & Litwin, G. H. (1997). Mobilizing the partnering process. Journal of Management
in Engineering, 13(4), 42-48.
Bubshait, A. A. (2001). Partnering: An Innovative and Effective Project Organization Concept.
Cost Engineering, 43(4), 32-37.
Bygballe, L. E., Jahre, M., & Sward, A. (2010). Partnering relationships in construction: A
literature review. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 16(4), 239-253.
Carr, F. (1999). Partnering in construction: A practical guide to project success. Aba Professional
Education.
Cathcart, A. (2003). Channel Tunnel Rail Link: a contract partnership. In Proceedings of the ICECivil Engineering (Vol. 156, No. 5, pp. 41-44). Thomas Telford.
Chan, A. P. C., Chan, D. W. M., Chiang, Y. H., Tang, B. S., Chan, E. H. W., & Ho, K. S. K. (2004).
Exploring critical success factors for partnering in construction projects. Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management-Asce, 130(2), 188-198.
Chan, A. P., Chan, D. W., Fan, L. C., Lam, P. T., & Yeung, J. F. (2006). Partnering for construction
excellence—A reality or myth?. Building and environment, 41(12), 1924-1933.
Chan, A. P., Chan, D. W., Fan, L. C., Lam, P. T., & Yeung, J. F. (2008). Achieving partnering
success through an incentive agreement: lessons learned from an underground railway
extension project in Hong Kong. Journal of Management in Engineering, 24(3), 128-137.
Chan, A. P. C., Chan, D. W. M., & Ho, K. S. K. (2003). An empirical study of the benefits of
construction partnering in Hong Kong. Construction Management & Economics, 21(5),
523-533.
Chan, A. P., Chan, D. W., & Ho, K. S. (2003). Partnering in construction: critical study of
problems for implementation. Journal of Management in Engineering, 19(3), 126-135.
Chau Kwong, W. (1997). The ranking of construction management journals. Construction
Management & Economics, 15(4), 387-398.
Cheng, E. W., & Li, H. (2004). Development of a practical model of partnering for construction
projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 130(6), 790-798.
Chen, T. T., & Kao, C. H. (2010). A study of identifying success variables for construction
partnering via SEM framework. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 18(5), 629-
Chen, W. T., & Chen, T. T. (2007). Critical success factors for construction partnering in Taiwan.
International Journal of Project Management, 25(5), 475-484.
Cheng, E. W., & Li, H. (2002). Construction partnering process and associated critical success
factors: quantitative investigation. Journal of Management in Engineering, 18(4), 194-202.
Cheng, E. W., & Li, H. (2007). Application of ANP in process models: An example of strategic
partnering. Building and Environment, 42(1), 278-287.
Cheng, E., Li, H., Drew, D., & Yeung, N. (2001). Infrastructure of Partnering for Construction
Projects. Journal of Management in Engineering, 17(4), 229-237.
Cheng, E. W. L., Li, H., & Love, P. E. D. (2000). Establishment of critical success factors for
construction partnering. Journal of Management in Engineering, 16(2), 84-92.
Cheng, E., Li, H., Love, P., & Irani, Z. (2004). Strategic alliances: a model for establishing long
term commitment to inter-organizational relations in construction. Building and
Environment, 39(4), 459-468.
Cheung, S. O., Ng, T. S., Wong, S. P., & Suen, H. C. (2003). Behavioral aspects in construction
partnering. International Journal of Project Management, 21(5), 333-343.
Cheung, S. O., Suen, H. C., & Cheung, K. K. (2003). An automated partnering monitoring
system—Partnering Temperature Index. Automation in Construction, 12(3), 331-345.
Cheung, S. O., Yiu, T. W., & Chiu, O. K. (2009). The aggressive–cooperative drivers of
construction contracting. International Journal of Project Management, 27(7), 727-735.
Chinowsky P.S., Diekmann, J., O’Brien, J. (2010). Project Organizations as Social Networks.
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(4), 452-458.
Chinowsky P., Diekmann, J., & Galotti, V. (2008). Social network model of construction. Journal
of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(10), 804-812.
Cho, K., Hyun, C., Koo, K., & Hong, T. (2009). Partnering process model for public-sector fasttrack design-build projects in Korea. Journal of management in engineering, 26(1), 19-29.
Conley, M. A., & Gregory, R. A. (1999). Partnering on small construction projects. Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, 125(5), 320-324.
Construction Industry Institute (CII). (1989). Meeting the Challenges of the Future. Special
Publication – Interim Report, Partnering Task Force Construction Industry Institute,The
University of Texas at Austin, August 1989.
Construction Industry Institute (CII). (1991). In Search of Partnering Excellence. Special
Publication 17-1, Partnering Task Force Construction Industry Institute,The University of
Texas at Austin, July 1991.
Construction Industry Institute (CII). (1996). Partnering II-a Model for Excellence. Special
Publication 17-1, Partnering Task Force Construction Industry Institute,The University of
Texas at Austin, July 1991.
Cook, E. L., & Hancher, D. E. (1990). Partnering: contracting for the future. Journal of
Management in Engineering, 6(4), 431-446.
Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (Eds.). (2009). The handbook of research synthesis
and meta-analysis. Russell Sage Foundation.
Cowan, C., Gray, C. F., & Larson, E. W. (1992). Project partnering. Project Management Institute.
Crane, A. (2001). Local authorities achieve best value through partnering and demonstration. In
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Municipal Engineer (Vol. 145, No. 3, pp.
203-208).
Crane, T. G., Felder, J. P., Thompson, P. J., Thompson, M. G., & Sanders, S. R. (1997). Partnering
process model. Journal of Management in Engineering, 13(3), 57-63.
Crane, T. G., Felder, J. P., Thompson, P. J., Thompson, M. G., & Sanders, S. R. (1999). Partnering
measures. Journal of Management in Engineering, 15(2), 37-42.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods
Approaches-3/E.
Crowley, L. G., & Karim, M. A. (1995). Conceptual model of partnering. Journal of Management
in Engineering, 11(5), 33-39.
Cunningham, L. S., & Pomfret, M. A. (2007). Partnering contracts in practice at Blackpool, UK. In
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Municipal engineer (Vol. 160, No. 1, pp.
17-21). Institution of Civil Engineers.
Davis, P., & Love, P. (2011). Alliance contracting: adding value through relationship
development. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 18(5), 444-461.
DeVilbiss, C. E., & Leonard, P. (2000). Partnering is the foundation of a learning organization.
Journal of Management in Engineering, 16(4), 47-57.
Dietrich, P., Eskerod, P., Dalcher, D., & Sandhawalia, B. (2010). The dynamics of collaboration in
multipartner projects. Project Management Journal, 41(4), 59-78.
Di Marco, M., & Taylor, J. (2011). The impact of cultural boundary spanners on global project
network performance. The Engineering Project Organization Journal, 1(1), 27-39.
Doloi, H. (2009). Relational partnerships: the importance of communication, trust and
confidence and joint risk management in achieving project success. Construction
Management and Economics, 27(11), 1099-1109.
Doloi, H. (2012). Empirical analysis of traditional contracting and relationship agreements for
procuring partners in construction projects. Journal of Management in Engineering,
29(3), 224-235.
Drexler Jr., J., & Larson, E. (2000). Partnering: Why Project Owner-Contractor Relationships
Change. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(4), 293-297.
Edmonds, M., & Hogan, M. (2000, March). Millennium Coastal Park: Llanelli Land Bridges. In
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Municipal engineer (Vol. 139, No. 1, pp. 21-26).
Ellison, S. D., & Miller, D. W. (1995). Beyond ADR: working toward synergistic strategic
partnership. Journal of Management in Engineering, 11(6), 44-54.
Eom, C. S., Yun, S. H., & Paek, J. H. (2008). Subcontractor evaluation and management
framework for strategic partnering. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 134(11), 842-851.
Eriksson, P. E. (2008). Procurement effects on coopetition in client-contractor relationships.
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(2), 103-111.
Eriksson, P. E. (2010). Partnering: what is it, when should it be used, and how should it be
implemented?. Construction Management & Economics, 28(9), 905-917.
Eriksson, P. E., Atkin, B., & Nilsson, T. (2009). Overcoming barriers to partnering through
cooperative procurement procedures. Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management, 16(6), 598-611.
Eriksson, P. E., & Laan, A. (2007). Procurement effects on trust and control in client-contractor
relationships. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 14(4), 387-399.
Eriksson, P. E., & Nilsson, T. (2008). Partnering the construction of a Swedish pharmaceutical
plant: case study. Journal of Management in Engineering, 24(4), 227-233.
Eriksson, P. E., Nilsson, T., & Atkin, B. (2008). Client perceptions of barriers to partnering.
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 15(6), 527-539.
Eriksson, P. E., & Pesämaa, O. (2007). Modelling procurement effects on cooperation.
Construction Management and Economics, 25(8), 893-901.
Errasti, A., Beach, R., Oyarbide, A., & Santos, J. (2007). A process for developing partnerships
with subcontractors in the construction industry: an empirical study. International
Journal of Project Management, 25(3), 250-256.
Fong P.S-W., & Chu L. (2006). Exploratory study of knowledge sharing in contracting companies:
A sociotechnical perspective. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,
132(9), 928-939.
Fortune, C., & Setiawan, S. (2005). Partnering practice and the delivery of construction projects
for housing associations in the UK. Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management, 12(2), 181-193.
Gadde, L. E., & Dubois, A. (2010). Partnering in the construction industry—Problems and
opportunities. Journal of Purchasing and Supply management, 16(4), 254-263.
Gardiner, P. D., & Simmons, J. E. L. (1998). Conflict in small-and medium-sized projects: Case of
partnering to the rescue. Journal of Management in Engineering, 14(1), 35-40.
Gellatly, G. M., Burtwistle, P., & Baldwin, A. N. (2000, August). Groupware—the key to
successful partnering: a case study. In Proceedings of the ICE-Civil Engineering (Vol. 138,
No. 3, pp. 119-123). Thomas Telford.
Glagola, C. R., & Sheedy, W. M. (2002). Partnering on defense contracts. Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, 128(2), 127-138.
Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational researcher,
5(10), 3-8.
Gottlieb, S., & Haugbolle, K. (2013). Contradictions and collaboration: partnering in-between
systems of production, values and interests. Construction Management and Economics,
31(2), 119-134
Grajek, K. M., Gibson, G. E., & Tucker, R. L. (2000). Partnered project performance in Texas
Department of Transportation. Journal of infrastructure systems, 6(2), 73-79.
Granovetter, M. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.
Gransberg, D. D., Reynolds, H. L., Boyd, J., & Gokdogan, G. (1998). Evaluation of the TxDOT
partnering plus program (No. TX-97/0-1729-S,).
Gransberg, D. D., Dillon, W. D., Reynolds, L., & Boyd, J. (1999). Quantitative analysis of
partnered project performance. Journal of Construction Engineering and ManagementAsce, 125(3), 161-166.
Gullick, D., Cairns, R., & Pearson-Kirk, D. (2007). Application of partnering principles to a
framework contract. In Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Municipal
engineer (Vol. 160, No. 3, pp. 127-133). Institution of Civil Engineers.
Hagedoorn, J. (1996). Trends and Patterns in Strategic Technology Partnering Since the early
Seventies. [Article]. Review of Industrial Organization, 11(5), 601-616.
Hansen, M. (1999). The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge
across Organizations Subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82-111.
Harback, H. F., Basham, D. L., & Buhts, R. E. (1994). Partnering paradigm. Journal of
Management in Engineering, 10(1), 23-27.
Hartmann, A., & Bresnen, M. (2011). The emergence of partnering in construction practice: an
activity theory perspective. Engineering Project Organization Journal, 1(1), 41-52.
Hartshorne, D. C., & Cadman, P. (1999). Storm flood relief tank-Westbourne Avenue, Rhyl.
Proceedings of the ICE-Municipal Engineer, 133(2), 77-82.
Harwood, K., & Follett, B. (2007). Warwickshire–Arup partnership: the first five years.
Proceedings of the ICE-Municipal Engineer, 160(1), 45-53.
Hitt, M. A., Tihanyi, L., Miller, T., & Connelly, B. (2006). International diversification:
Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management, 32(6), 831-867.
Hong, Y. M., Chan, D. W. M., Chan, A. P. C., & Yeung, J. F. Y. (2012). Critical Analysis of
Partnering Research Trend in Construction Journals. Journal of Management in
Engineering, 28(2), 82-95.
Hughes, D., Williams, T., & Ren, Z. (2012). Is incentivisation significant in ensuring successful
partnered projects?. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 19(3), 306-319.
Hughes, D., Williams, T., & Ren, Z. (2012). Differing perspectives on collaboration in
construction. Construction Innovation: Information, Process, Management, 12(3), 355-368.
Humphreys, P., Matthews, J., & Kumaraswamy, M. (2003). Pre-construction project partnering:
from adversarial to collaborative relationships. Supply Chain Management: An
International Journal, 8(2), 166-178.
Ingirige, B., & Sexton, M. (2006). Alliances in construction: investigating initiatives and barriers
for long-term collaboration. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 13(5), 521-535.
Javernick-Will, A. (2011). Knowledge-sharing connections across geographical boundaries in
global intra-firm networks. The Engineering Project Organization Journal, 1(4), 239-253.
Jiang, J. J., Klein, G., & Chen, H. G. (2001). The relative influence of IS project implementation
policies and project leadership on eventual outcomes. Project Management Journal, 32(3), 49-55.
Johnson, T. R., Feng, P., Sitzabee, W., & Jernigan, M. (2012). Federal acquisition regulation
applied to alliancing contract practices. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 139(5), 480-487.
Jones, K., & Kaluarachchi, Y. (2007). Operational factors affecting strategic partnering in UK
social housing. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 14(4), 334-345.
Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality and job
satisfaction: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 530.
Kadefors, A. (2004). Trust in project relationships—inside the black box. International Journal of
Project Management, 22(3), 175-182.
Kadefors, A., Björlingson, E., & Karlsson, A. (2007). Procuring service innovations: contractor
selection for partnering projects. International Journal of Project Management, 25(4), 375-385.
Kassarjian, H. H. (1977). Content analysis in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 8-18.
Kaluarachchi, Y. D., & Jones, K. (2007). Monitoring of a strategic partnering process: the
Amphion experience. Construction Management and Economics, 25(10), 1053-1061.
Katzenbach, C., and Smith, D., (1993). The wisdom of teams. Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Keil, J. (2007). How partnering benefits the construction process. Pipeline & Gas Journal, 234(12), 59-61.
Kirca, A. H., Jayachandran, S., & Bearden, W. O. (2005). Market orientation: a meta-analytic
review and assessment of its antecedents and impact on performance. Journal of
Marketing, 69(2), 24-41.
Kirca, A. H., & Yaprak, A. (2010). The use of meta-analysis in international business research: Its
current status and suggestions for better practice. International Business Review, 19(3), 306-314.
Krippendorff, K. (2012). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage.
Kumaraswamy, M. M., & Matthews, J. D. (2000). Improved subcontractor selection employing
partnering principles. Journal of management in engineering, 16(3), 47-57.
Kwan, A. Y., & Ofori, G. (2001). Chinese culture and successful implementation of partnering in
Singapore’s construction industry. Construction Management & Economics, 19(6), 619- 632.
Laan, A., Noorderhaven, N., Voordijk, H., & Dewulf, G. (2011). Building trust in construction
partnering projects: an exploratory case-study. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 17(2), 98-108.
Lahdenperä, P. (2012). Making sense of the multi-party contractual arrangements of project
partnering, project alliancing and integrated project delivery. Construction Management
and Economics, 30(1), 57-79.
Lai, I. K., & Lam, F. K. (2010). Perception of various performance criteria by stakeholders in the
construction sector in Hong Kong. Construction Management and Economics, 28(4), 377-391.
Lambert, D. M., Emmelhainz, M. A., & Gardner, J. T. (1996). So you think you want a partner? Marketing Management, 5(2), 24.
Larson, E. (1995). Project partnering: results of study of 280 construction projects. Journal of
Management in Engineering, 11(2), 30-35.
Larson, E. (1997). Partnering on construction projects: a study of the relationship between
partnering activities and project success. Engineering Management, IEEE Transactions
on, 44(2), 188-195.
Larson, E. W., & Drexler, J. A. (1997). Barriers to project partnering: Report from the firing line.
Project Management Institute.
Lau, E., & Rowlinson, S. (2009). Interpersonal trust and inter‐firm trust in construction projects.
Construction Management and Economics, 27(6), 539-554.
Lazar, F. D. (1997). Partnering-new benefits from peering inside the black box. Journal of
Management in Engineering, 13(6), 75-83.
Lazar, F. D. (2000). Project partnering: improving the likelihood of win/win outcomes. Journal of
Management in Engineering, 16(2), 71-83.
Le-Hoai, L., Dai Lee, Y., & Son, J. J. (2010). Partnering in construction: Investigation of
problematic issues for implementation in Vietnam. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 14(5), 731-741.
Lehtola, M. M., van der Molen, H. F., Lappalainen, J., Hoonakker, P. L., Hsiao, H., Haslam, R. A., & Verbeek, J. H. (2008). The effectiveness of interventions for preventing injuries in the construction industry: a systematic review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35(1), 77-85.
Li, H., Cheng, E. W., & Love, P. E. (2000). Partnering research in construction. Engineering,
Construction and Architectural Management, 7(1), 76-92.
Li, H., Cheng, E. W., Love, P. E., & Irani, Z. (2001). Co-operative benchmarking: a tool for
partnering excellence in construction. International Journal of Project Management,
19(3), 171-179.
Ling, F. Y. Y., Ong, S. Y., Ke, Y., Wang, S., & Zou, P. (2014). Drivers and barriers to adopting
relational contracting practices in public projects: comparative study of Beijing and
Sydney. International Journal of Project Management, 32(2), 275-285.
Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical Meta Analysis. Applied Social Research Methods Series, Vol. 49.
Loraine, R. K. (1993). Project specific partnering. Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management, 1(1), 5-16.
Losada, M. (1999). The complex dynamics of high performance teams. Mathematical and
Computer Modelling 30(9-10), 197-192.
Love, S. (1997). Subcontractor partnering: I’ll believe it when I see it. Journal of Management in Engineering, 13(5), 29-31.
Lu, S., & Yan, H. (2007). An empirical study on incentives of strategic partnering in China: Views
from construction companies. International Journal of Project Management, 25(3), 241-249.
Lu, S., & Yan, H. (2007). A model for evaluating the applicability of partnering in construction.
International Journal of Project Management, 25(2), 164-170.
Manley, K. (2002). Partnering and alliancing on road projects in Australia and internationally.
Road and Transport Research: a journal of Australian and New Zealand research and practice, 11(3), 46-60.
Mason, J. R. (2007). The views and experiences of specialist contractors on partnering in the UK.
Construction Management and Economics, 25(5), 519-527.
Maturana, S., Alarcón, L. F., Gazmuri, P., & Vrsalovic, M. (2007). On-site subcontractor evaluation method based on lean principles and partnering practices. Journal of
Management in Engineering, 23(2), 67-74.
Mazouz, B., Facal, J., & Viola, J.-M. (2008). Public-private partnership: Elements for a project based management typology. Project Management Journal, 39(2), 98-110.
Miles, R. S. (1996). Twenty-first century partnering and the role of ADR. Journal of Management in Engineering, 12(3), 45 55.
Mollaoglu-Korkmaz, S., Sparkling, A., Thomas, S. (2013). An Inquiry to Move an Under-utilized Best Practice Forward: Barriers to Partnering in Architecture, Engineering, and Construction Industry. Project Management Journal – (Paper under review)
Mollaoglu-Korkmaz, S., Swarup, L., & Riley, D. (2013). Delivering Sustainable, High-Performance Buildings: Influence of Project Delivery Methods on Integration and Project Outcomes.
Journal of Management in Engineering, 29(1), 71-78.
Moore, C. C., Mosley, D. C., & Slagle, M. (1992). Partnering: guidelines for win-win project
management. Project Management Institute.
Mosey, D. (2009). Early Contractor Involvement–An Overview. Early Contractor Involvement in
Building Procurement: Contracts, Partnering and Project Management, 6-21.
Mentzer, J. T., Min, S., & Zacharia, Z. G. (2000). The Nature of Interfirm Partnering in Supply
Chain Management. Journal of Retailing, 76(4), 549.
Meng, X. (2012). The effect of relationship management on project performance in
construction. International Journal of Project management, 30(2), 188-198.
Naoum, S. (2003). An overview into the concept of partnering. International Journal of project
Management, 21(1), 71-76.
Nielsen, D. (1996). Feature: Partnering for Performance. Journal of Management in Engineering,
12(3), 17-19.
Ning, Y., & Ling, F. Y. Y. (2013). Comparative study of drivers of and barriers to relational
transactions faced by public clients, private contractors and consultants in public projects. Habitat International, 40, 91-99.
Ng, S. T., Rose, T. M., Mak, M., & Chen, S. E. (2002). Problematic issues associated with project
partnering — the contractor perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 20(6), 437-449.
Olds, B. M., Moskal, B. M., & Miller, R. L. (2005). Assessment in Engineering Education:
Evolution, Approaches and Future Collaborations. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 13-25.
Orr, J. (2012). The Ruby Bay bypass–the project that pushed the boundaries. Proceedings of the
ICE-Municipal Engineer, 165(4), 215-218.
Packham, G., Thomas, B., & Miller, C. (2003). Partnering in the house building sector: a
subcontractor’s view. International Journal of Project Management, 21(5), 327-332.
Pena-Mora, F., & Harpoth, N. (2001). Effective partnering in innovative procured multicultural project. Journal of Management in Engineering, 17(1), 2-13.
Pesämaa, O., Eriksson, P. E., & Hair, J. F. (2009). Validating a model of cooperative procurement
in the construction industry. International Journal of Project Management, 27(6), 552-559.
Phua, F. T. (2006). When is construction partnering likely to happen? An empirical examination
of the role of institutional norms. Construction Management and economics, 24(6), 615-624.
Phillips, S., Martin, J., Dainty, A., & Price, A. (2008). Analysis of the quality attributes used in establishing best value tenders in the UK social housing sector. Engineering,
Construction and Architectural Management, 15(4), 307-320.
Polkinghorn, B., La Chance, R., & La Chance, H. (2006). An analysis of the Maryland Department
of Transportation State Highway Administration’s partnering program and process.
Maryland Department of Transportation, State Highway Administration. (Internal report to MDSHA).
Pocock, J. B., Hyun, C. T., Liu, L. Y., & Kim, M. K. (1996). Relationship between project interaction and performance indicators. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 122(2), 165-176.
Puddicombe, M. S. (1997). Designers and contractors: impediments to integration. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 123(3), 245-252.
Radziszewska-Zielina, E. (2011). Fuzzy control of partnering relations of a construction enterprise. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 17(1), 5-15.
Rankin, J., Jameson, P., & Yarwood, N. (2007). NEC X12 at the heart of Worcestershire Highways. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Municipal Engineer (Vol. 160, No. 1, pp. 31-36).
Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2004). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(3), 554-554.
Rogge, D., Griffith, A., & Hutchins, W. (2002). Improving the effectiveness of partnering (No. FHWA-OR-RD-03-09).
Romancik, D. J. (1995). Partnership toward improvement. Project Management Institute.
Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1978). Issues in summarizing the first 345 studies of interpersonal expectancy effects. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(3), 410-415.
Saunders, K., & Mosey, D. (2005). PPC 2000: Association of consultant architects standard form of project partnering contract. Lean construction journal, 2(1), 62-66.
Schmader, K. J. (1994). Partnered project performance in the US naval facilities engineering
command. Texas University at Austin.
Shek-Pui Wong, P., & Cheung, S. O. (2004). Trust in construction partnering: views from parties of the partnering dance. International Journal of Project Management, 22(6), 437-446.
Singh, J. (2005). Collaborative Networks as Determinants of Knowledge Diffusion Patterns. Management Science, 51(5). 756-770.
Smith, A., & Culp, G. (2000). Continuous partnering helps ensure project success. Journal/American Water Works Association, 92(11), 74-81.
Smith, J., & Wohlstetter, P. (2006). Understanding the different faces of partnering: a typology of public-private partnerships. School Leadership & Management, 26(3), 249-268.
Solis, F., Sinfield, J.V., & Abraham, D.M. (2013). Hybrid Approach to the Study of Inter-Organization High Performance Teams. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139(4), 379-392.
Stephens, M., & Thomas, D. (2001). Partnership: a marriage made in Kent. In Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Municipal engineer (Vol. 145, No. 3, pp. 219-226).
Swan, W., & Khalfan, M. M. (2007). Mutual objective setting for partnering projects in the public sector. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 14(2), 119-130.
Tabish, S. Z. S., & Jha, K. N. (2011). Identification and evaluation of success factors for public construction projects. Construction Management and Economics, 29(8), 809-823.
Tang, W., Duffield, C. F., & Young, D. M. (2006). Partnering mechanism in construction: an empirical study on the Chinese construction industry. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(3), 217-229.
Tang, W., Qiang, M., Duffield, C. F., Young, D. M., & Lu, Y. (2009). Enhancing total quality management by partnering in construction. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering
Education and Practice, 135(4), 129-141.
Tang, L., Shen, Q., & Cheng, E. W. (2010). A review of studies on Public–Private Partnership projects in the construction industry. International Journal of Project Management, 28(7), 683-694.
Thomas, S. (2013). A Collaborative and Team-Oriented Approach to Construction Project Delivery: Barriers to Partnering in the United States. (Unpublished Masters Plan B Report). Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
Thomas, S. R., Tucker, R. L., & Kelly, W. R. (1999). Compass: An assessment tool for improving project team communications. Project Management Institute.
Thompson, P. J., & Sanders, S. R. (1998). Peer-reviewed paper: Partnering continuum. Journal of Management in Engineering, 14(5), 73-78.
Tuchman, J. (2011). Collaborative Group Envisions Repository for Best Practices. ENR: Engineering News-Record, 267(15), 15.
Turner, J. H., Pearce, S., Fenton, M. J., & Sims, B. (2007). Effective partnering—remediating the former Avenue coking works. Proceedings of the ICE-Municipal Engineer, 160(3), 117- 126.U.S.
Voyton, V., & Siddiqi, K. (2004). Partnering: Tool for construction claims reduction. Journal of Architectural Engineering, 10(1), 2-4.
Weston, D. C. (1992). An analysis of project performance for partnering projects in the US Army Corps of Engineers. Texas University at Austin.
Weston, D. C., & Gibson Jr, G. E. (1993). Partnering-project performance in US Army Corps of Engineers. Journal of Management in Engineering, 9(4), 410-425.
Wood, G. D., & Ellis, R. C. (2005). Main contractor experiences of partnering relationships on UK construction projects. Construction Management and Economics, 23(3), 317-325.
Wood, G., McDermott, P., & Swan, W. (2002). The ethical benefits of trust‐based partnering: the example of the construction industry. Business Ethics: A European Review, 11(1), 4- 13.
Wong, A. (1997). Partnering in construction industry: Hong Kong context. Total Quality
Management, 8(2-3), 324-327.
Wong, P. S. P., & Cheung, S. O. (2005). Structural equation model of trust and partnering success. Journal of Management in Engineering, 21(2), 70-80.
Wong, P. S., Cheung, S. O., & Ho, P. K. (2005). Contractor as trust initiator in construction partnering—Prisoner’s dilemma perspective. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 131(10), 1045-1053.
Yeomans, S. G., Bouchlaghem, N. M., & El-Hamalawi, A. (2006). An evaluation of current collaborative prototyping practices within the AEC industry. Automation in Construction, 15(2), 139-149.
Yeung, J. F., Chan, A. P., & Chan, D. W. (2008). Establishing quantitative indicators for measuring the partnering performance of construction projects in Hong Kong. Construction Management and Economics, 26(3), 277-301.
Yeung, J. F., Chan, A. P., & Chan, D. W. (2009). A computerized model for measuring and benchmarking the partnering performance of construction projects. Automation in Construction, 18(8), 1099-1113.
Yeung, J., Chan, A., & Chan, D. (2012). Defining relational contracting from the Wittgenstein family-resemblance philosophy. International Journal of Project Management, 30(2), 225-239.
Yeung, J. F., Chan, A. P., Chan, D. W., & Li, L. K. (2007). Development of a partnering performance index (PPI) for construction projects in Hong Kong: a Delphi study. Construction Management and Economics, 25(12), 1219-1237.
Zhang P.H., & Ng, F.F. (2013). Explaining Knowledge-Sharing Intention in Construction Teams in Hong Kong. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139(3), 280-293.
Zuo, J., Chan, A. P., Zhao, Z. Y., Zillante, G., & Xia, B. (2013). Supporting and impeding factors for
partnering in construction: a China study. Facilities, 31(11/12), 468-488.

& Construction Delivery, STRATEGIC COOPERATION

Key STRATEGIC COOPERATION Requirements for Efficient Facilities Management

Key STRATEGIC COOPERATION requirements for efficient Facilities Management and the associated numerous and ongoing repair, renovation, maintenance activities include a focus upon LEADERSHIP and COLLABORATION…. Strategic Collaboration.  This fact has been substantiated by quantitative evidence.

Unfortunately, the leadership and commitment required to implement CHANGE MANAGEMENT is a barrier for 99.9999% of organizations.   This is more difficult to absorb when both processes and tools exist to support the strategic behavior and operational process that enable significant gains in productivity, quality, cost savings, and overall satisfaction.

Strategic CollaborationOPer

 

Operational Tools and Services

Job order contracting
 
The physics of efficient construction delivery

The Physics of Efficient Construction Delivery – Improving Facilities Repair, Renovation, Maintenance, and New Builds

The physics of efficient construction delivery are not complex; however, they are incontrovertible.

The following 4 core elements are mandatory for the consistent achievement of quality repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds on time and on budget.   Consistent application virtually assures cost savings of 30%-40% as well as long-term mutually beneficial relationships between all participants and stakeholders.

#1 Owner Leadership and Commitment

#2 Consistent Application of a Programmatic Framework for ALL “projects”.

#3 Focus upon mutually beneficial outcomes for all participants and stakeholders.

#4 Common data environment (example: Locally researched granular construction cost data, organized by CSI Masterformat)

Owner Leadership and Commitment

Strategic collaboration has proven to be a fundamental requirement for achieving measurable productivity gains.  A prerequisite to enablement, however, is owner leadership.   Change management to address the fundamental evolution from traditional construction planning, procurement, and project delivery methods.   Change management requires owner leadership and commitment.  Without owner leadership and commitment, any expectation for measurable improvement in productivity and associated economic and environmental outcomes is foolhardy.   Owner leadership and commitment are the precursors to strategic collaboration, and strategic collaboration among all participants and stakeholders is a basic requirement.

Consistent Application of a Programmatic Framework for ALL “projects”

All the necessary tools and services to implement and manage a programmatic framework in support of strategic collaboration are readily available.  The processes and workflows are far from complex and can easily be tailored to any type or size of organization.

Focus upon mutually beneficial outcomes for all participants and stakeholders

A central aspect of strategic collaboration is the focus upon mutually beneficial outcomes for each participant.  While simple in theory, it requires the development of an environment in which all team members are encouraged to contribute to problem solving and decision-making.  Recognition of diverse talents and the fact that learning is constant, while a simple concept, requires constant effort for all participants, and leadership.

 

Common data environment (CDE)

A shared set of terms and definitions is needed to clearly communicate requirements through a project lifecycle, from concept through delivery and ongoing operations.  This aspect is far too often overlooked.  Terms should be industry standard, and defined in plain English, without the excessive use of acronyms or abbreviations.   A mandatory component is the use of a current, locally researched detailed line-item unit price book and/or database.   The database must represent and reflect both local market conditions and associated commercial construction methods.  The database serves multiple purposes.   It enables a clear, detailed Scope of Work (SOW) reflecting valid cost and technical requirements for all participants.   Cost visibility and transparency is enabled versus the traditional use of subcontractor quotes, historical cost data, or  “national average” cost database with or without localization or cost economic factoring.  When used within a robust programmatic planning, procurement, and project delivery framework, it serves to virtually eliminate costly change orders and legal disputes.

Common Data Environment
The Physics of Efficient Construction Delivery
The Physics of Efficient Construction Delivery

 

The Physics of Efficient Construction Delivery

 

via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us

knowledge-based Job Order Contracting

KNOWLEDGE-BASED Job Order Contracting FRAMEWORK

A knowledge-based Job Order Contracting framework enables owners to build capabilities, improve productivity, and consistently deliver quality outcomes on time and on budget.

 

  • Fully defined processes, workflows, roles, responsibilities, and deliverables
  • Common data environment, including current, detailed, locally researched unit price cost data
  • Collaborative, real-time technology enabling team access to current documentation and information
  • Global oversight with local, on-site empowerment
  • Fully compliant
  • Technical and cost visibility and transparency
  • Support for repair, renovation, scheduled, unscheduled, and preventive maintenance, and appropriate new construction
  • Fully scalable
  • Support services

knowledge-based Job Order Contracting

www.4bt.us

job order contracting

Unit Price Construction Cost Estimating

Unit Price Construction Cost Estimating

Unit price construction cost estimating is the foundation of every reliable cost determination prior to procurement.  Systems level estimating, historical data, assemblies, or square foot calculations should never be exclusively used to procure a repair, renovation, maintenance, or new build service.

Unit price construction cost estimating is the foundation of every reliable cost determination.

Another requirement to enable cost visibility, transparency, and management is a locally researched line-item unit price book database, organized using CSI Masterformat.   The use of national average cost data and associated “location factors” and/or updating using “economic factors” cannot provide sufficient cost visibility and can easily result in variances of 30%-40%.

 

An actionable unit price cost database includes granular repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction tasks for the local market and includes labor, material, equipment, crew, and productivity information, per an associated unit of measure.  To mitigate variables, the unit price cost database should only reflect the direct costs of labor, material, and equipment, fringes, and insurance. for the local market.  Profit and overheads should be considered separately. Cost must be updated regularly.  At a minimum, the cost database should be updated annually, however, quarterly, and/or as needed is even better! 

A cost database of 40,000-line items is sufficient for any situation, rarely are more lines required.  Experience professional estimates select the appropriate line item and add the appropriate quantity per the associated unit of measure.  If a specialized line item is needed, the estimate can create a new one.

Cost databases for repair, renovation, and new construction are organized by CSI Masterformat as note, however, preventive maintenance cost database may use UNIFORMAT as shown below.

Unit Price Construction Cost Estimating

 

Unit Price Construction Cost Estimating

Line-item cost databases are available with associated enterprise technologies to expedite planning, procurement, and project delivery across disparate teams, departments, and knowledge domain.

Unit Price Construction Cost Estimating

Contact Us
First
Last

via Four BT, LLC – Robust construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions and locally researched cost data.

 

 

preventive maintenance cost database, preventive maintenance costs

LEAN Job Order Contracting – Getting the most out of available funds

Getting the most out of available funds requires LEAN Job Order Contracting.

LEAN Job Order Contracting is an indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity program in which the costs of the project are
based on a fixed price per item (per a locally researched detailed unit price book, without “assemblies” or “systems”) and the coefficient / adjustment factor submitted by the contractor for the
contract term.        Unlike traditional JOC or traditional design-bid-build, LEAN JOC is a collaborative process that focuses upon mutually beneficial outcomes for ALL participants and stakeholders.

Owners provide leadership and support within a LEAN JOC Program, without the problematic “filter” of a third party “JOC Consultant”.   Furthermore, LEAN JOC Programs can be implemented for 1/3 to 1/10 the cost of traditional JOC programs that require a percentage of construction value for JOC tools and support.

LEAN JOC Programs mitigate change order and/or “supplemental job order” (a fancy term for change orders), as Owners and Design-builders work directly together on an early and ongoing basis to create and agree upon a detailed Scope of Work and associated detailed line-item proposal and approved workorder.

This process virtually assures the consistent delivery of quality repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction projects on time and on budget.

Furthermore, locally researched unit price books are available for preventive maintenance also, complete with labor and material costs and a complete check list for each task!

 

LEAN Job Order Contracting

preventive maintenance cost database

Contact Us
First
Last

 

Four BT, LLC (4BT) – 4BT has experienced staff to assist any public sector organization in creating, improving, and managing any size or type of JOC Program.  Our robust processes and technology deliver a best value solution and a solid foundation for continuous improvement.   Training and support are central to our philosophy of improving the capabilities of our clients and partners and help to assure knowledge growth and retention.  4BT tools and services enable full JOC Program Management –  full program, contract, project, bid/proposal, and workorder tracking, cost estimate and bid/proposal development/review, independent government estimate (IGE) creation and automated comparison to contractor proposals, full document management (not simple file storage), workflow management complete with phases and forms, full reporting, scheduling and budget management, disadvantage business participation management, team management, location management, issues/task management, BIM integration, and more!
We know we have done our job when you no longer need costly on-site JOC consultants!

Maximizing JOC Program Performance

Maximizing JOC Program Performance

  • Road Map
  • JOC Program Planning – Tools and Services Evaluation and Selection (Unit Price Book, Services, Technology)
  • JOC Construction RFP Planning and Procurement – Program Contract Organization, Documents/Bid Packages/Forms/Checklists/Approvals, Roles in Construction Projects, and Contractor Selection
  • Program Portfolio Management
  • Contract Management
  • Multiple-Project Delivery Environment
  • Project/Workorder Bid and Proposal Management Processes
  • Work Order Management
  • Contractor/Subcontractor Management
  • Budget Tracking
  • Workflow Management
  • Project Changes
  • Claims and Disputes
  • Project Close-Out
  • Performance Monitoring
  • Continuous Improvement
    JOC Program Performanceconsidering a job order contract
  • Contact Us
    First
    Last

Construction Project Outcomes, Improving Construction Project Outcomes

Improving Construction Project Outcomes

Improving Construction Project Delivery Outcomes

Improving construction project outcomes is critical from both economic and environmental perspectives.

Efficient repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction of buildings, transportation systems, utilities, and bridges can become a reality with appropriate leadership focus.  Robust processes and tools are readily available to assure the delivery of quality projects on time and on budget.  Owner leadership and commitment to drive required process changes is “all” that is needed.

Project Delivery Success and Program Dependency

Achieving project delivery success requires the consistent application of robust programmatic processes that integrate teams and associated planning, procurement, and project delivery activities.

From a historical perspective, traditional methods such as design-bid-build and others have failed.

While any “project” is a temporary endeavor, all should adhere to core fundamentals and workflows.   It is the programmatic approach that enables management of diverse people and projects to produce technical or physical output to satisfy the requirements of all participants and stakeholders.

Time, Cost, and Risk Management

An overall early and ongoing collaborative focus upon mutually beneficial outcomes is central to project time, cost, and risk management.   Impacting variables include capability and capacity (leadership, trades, planners, engineers…), scheduling, location, complexity, and behaviors.

Assuming leadership and a capable team, behaviors are the most critical aspect impacting project outcomes.  That said it is the planning, procurement, and project delivery framework that impacts overall outcomes more than any other single element.  It is the defined programmatic approach that mandates behaviors, including levels of collaboration, roles, responsibilities, workflows, and deliverables.  All projects will have issues to overcome (weather, materials shortages, etc.).  Yet these types of issues can be mitigated with competent and capable leadership and teams.  Behaviors, however, presents a far more significant barrier.

Tools and Services

Tools and services are readily available to support optimal project delivery behaviors and delivering projects on schedule and on budget.

Dod Real Property Management

As noted, early and ongoing information sharing among participants is a fundamental requirement.  In this regard, the development of a detailed scope to work (SOW) that can be easily communicated and shared is needed as part of the procurement and project delivery phases.  A detailed, locally researched, detailed line-item cost database, organized using CSI Masterformat, provides cost and technical visibility and transparency.

With local market cost and productivity information, both budgetary and scheduling requirements can be determined.   The granularity of the data lets the planning and procurement preconstruction professional quantitatively and comprehensively compare bids without high administrative burden and easily pinpoint where there are gaps.

Remove as much risk as possible from your repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build projects.

Learn more…

Contact Us
First
Last

 

Understanding the Value of JOB ORDER CONTRACTING

Understanding the Value of JOB ORDER CONTRACTING – JOC

Bridging the JOC Education/Training Gap

Many owners simply view Job Order Contracting (JOC) as a means to speed the procurement of repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds that require minimum design.   The result is that most public sector organizations end up wasting millions of dollars and not receiving the benefits available Job Order Contracting – lower cost, higher quality, on time and on budget project outcomes.

 

What you can do

JOC is a process that integrates “construction” planning, procurement, and project delivery leveraging robust LEAN methods and workflows.

When used property it is a fantastic tool to develop rapidly develop unbelievably detailed and well communicated scopes of work (SOW) inclusive of labor, material, and equipment task that reflect the local market.   In fact, when implemented properly, subcontractor quotes can be validated within a JOC environment.

Sample JOC Proposal

While JOC can be superior to any other construction delivery method, including design-bid-build and design-build, the problem is that owners simply don’t understand that proper implementation requires fundamental change across all internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams.

Simply procuring services and tools from a “JOC consultant” will not yield the benefits of JOC.  In fact, if an owner pays a percentage of JOC construction value to a JOC consultant and doesn’t fundamentally alter behaviors and workflows, the result will be excessive administrative costs with little benefit.

Contact us if you and your team would benefit from change….

Contact Us

Contact Us

First
Last

 

Construction Labor Costs and Categories

Construction Labor Costs and Categories – 2021 Review

Occupation title (click on the occupation title to view an occupational profile) (Source: Business Employment Dynamics)
Construction and Extraction Occupations
First-Line Supervisors of Construction Trades and Extraction Workers Employment by Occupation
Construction Trades Workers
Boilermakers Data series Employment,
Brickmasons, Blockmasons, and Stonemasons 2021
Brickmasons and Blockmasons Carpenters 573,030
Stonemasons Construction laborers 821,380
Carpenters Construction managers 230,500
Carpet, Floor, and Tile Installers and Finishers Electricians 508,270
Floor Layers, Except Carpet, Wood, and Hard Tiles Operating engineers and other construction equipment operators 257,990
Floor Sanders and Finishers
Tile and Stone Setters
Cement Masons, Concrete Finishers, and Terrazzo Workers
Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers
Terrazzo Workers and Finishers
Construction Laborers
Construction Equipment Operators
Paving, Surfacing, and Tamping Equipment Operators
Pile Driver Operators
Operating Engineers and Other Construction Equipment Operators
Drywall Installers, Ceiling Tile Installers, and Tapers
Drywall and Ceiling Tile Installers
Tapers
Electricians
Glaziers
Insulation Workers
Insulation Workers, Floor, Ceiling, and Wall
Insulation Workers, Mechanical
Painters and Paperhangers
Painters, Construction and Maintenance
Pipelayers, Plumbers, Pipefitters, and Steamfitters
Pipelayers
Plumbers, Pipefitters, and Steamfitters
Plasterers and Stucco Masons
Reinforcing Iron and Rebar Workers
Roofers
Sheet Metal Workers
Structural Iron and Steel Workers
Solar Photovoltaic Installers
Helpers, Construction Trades
Helpers–Brickmasons, Blockmasons, Stonemasons, and Tile and Marble Setters
Helpers–Carpenters
Helpers–Electricians
Helpers–Painters, Paperhangers, Plasterers, and Stucco Masons
Helpers–Pipelayers, Plumbers, Pipefitters, and Steamfitters
Helpers, Construction Trades, All Other
Other Construction and Related Workers
Construction and Building Inspectors
Hazardous Materials Removal Workers
Miscellaneous Construction and Related Workers
Extraction Workers
Surface Mining Machine Operators and Earth Drillers
Excavating and Loading Machine and Dragline Operators, Surface Mining

 

Source – BLS, via Four BT, LLC – Robust, integrated, LEAN construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions.

Public Sector Efficient Physical Asset Management

6 Steps Towards Public Sector Efficient Physical Asset Management – Robust Process, Collaborative Teams Valid Data, & Enabling Technology

Public sector efficient physical asset management requires robust process, collaborative teams. valid data and enabling technology.

Moving beyond traditional methods that are responsible for rampant economic and environmental waste requires that public sector real property leadership focus upon forward thinking and change management.

Robust, integrated LEAN asset planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions are readily available to establish efficient physical asset life cycle management programs.   Their implementation, management, and continuous improvement requires the following.

  1. Owner leadership and commitment to a programmatic LEAN physical asset management approach
  2. Mandatory initial and ongoing training for all participants and stakeholders
  3. Long-term mutually beneficial relationships with suppliers supported by multiparty agreements and integral written operations manuals/execution manuals
  4. Common data environment, including detailed line item locally researched unit price construction cost data.6 Steps Towards Public Sector Efficient Physical Asset Management - Robust Process, Collaborative Teams Valid Data, & Enabling Technology
  5. Integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery processes and teams

    6 Steps Towards Public Sector Efficient Physical Asset Management - Robust Process, Collaborative Teams Valid Data, & Enabling Technology
    Process Drives Productivity
  6. Enabling technology embedding processes and workflows

 

Forward thinking, with a desire to be more proactive and efficient, leveraging current, actionable information and a concerted effort focused upon the consistent attainment of best value outcomes drive positive, measurable improvement.

Adopting proven LEAN strategies and processes enables better risk assessment, financial visibility and control, and superior implementation planning.  Incorporating mutually beneficial outcomes across all internal and external teams isn’t rocket science but is a novel strategy within most public sector organizations.  Equity, increasing efficiencies, securing appropriate resources, and preparing for adaptive management is simpler than one might expect.

 

 

via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us – Robust, integrated LEAN construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions.

Prioritize repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds, plan ahead, and operate with full cost and technical visibility to achieve desired goals

  • Plan
  • Assess
  • Identify and prioritize work
  • Develop detailed work scope and estimate
  • Procure
  • Execute
  • Close out
Job Order Contracting Best Management Practices - Contractor Evaluation

Job Order Contracting Best Management Practices – Contractor Evaluation

Job Order Contracting Best Management Practices – Contractor Evaluation

  1.  Did the Contractor respond to the request for a Joint Site Visit / Joint Scope Meeting (JSM) in a timely manner?
  2.  Contractor attend the JSM on time with appropriate personnel?
  3.  Did the Contractor collaborate to help refine/define a detailed Scope of Work (SOW)?
  4.  Did the Contractor thoroughly investigate the project/work order requirements?
  5.  Did the Contractor provide a detailed line-item proposal per schedule?
  6.  Was the bid package submitted complete?
  7.  Did the Contractor’s proposal accurately reflect the Scope of Work and RFP requirements?
  8.  Did the Contractor make proposal/work order revisions as directed and resubmit on time?
  9.  Did the Contractor adhere to the approved construction schedule?
  10.  Was project/work order properly supervised?
  11.  Did Contractor submit all requested submittals complete and on time?
  12.  Did Contractor comply with all the safety requirements for the project/work order?
  13.  Did Contractor comply with all permits?
  14.  Was the quality of construction and materials acceptable per defined requirements?
  15.  Did Contractor complete Owner’s punch list in a timely manner if needed?
  16.  Did the Contractor address change orders properly?
  17.  Did Contractor submit complete closeout package in a timely manner?

 

Via Four BT, LLC – Innovative, compliant, and best value job order contracting solutions.

Job order contractor evaluation

Learn more or get a price.

Why LEAN Construction Matters

U.S. Market Outlook – 2022 and Beyond

SUMMARY – Moderate Growth Anticipated for the next Decade

General Market

Q4 2021 – 6.9% annualized growth

2021 – 5.5% annual growth

Inflation – 6%-7%

Rising Interest Rates

Construction Sector
2022 Commerical Construction Market Outlook
  • Continued supply chain disruption and sourcing challenges
  • Delivery time and profit margin volatility
  • Labor shortages
  • Commodity cost volatility

via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us – Integrated robust construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions.

Maintenance and Construction

Improving the PROCUREMENT MODEL for Facilities Repair, Renovation, Maintenance and Construction

Real property owners, architects, engineers, builders, and other stakeholders have long realized the construction industry and the life-cycle management of built environment have proven wasteful.

The procurement model is broken.

Over 80% of projects in the Federal, County, State, and Local Government sector are being delivered late, over-budget and/or not completed per requirements.

Multiple independent studies have demonstrated the above.   Many have also attributed these poor outcomes to the widespread use of traditional procurement models, resulting in up to 98% of project over budget by over 30%, and approximately 80% completed late.

Current procurement models are inefficient due to the following…

#1.  Disparate, nonintegrated planning, procurement, and project delivery teams and processes.

#2.  Lack of accountability and poor training of public sector procurement professionals.

#3.  Poor leadership across the public sector with respect to facilities/built environment asset life-cycle management.

Most procurement professionals are primarily concerned about finalizing a procurement and “clearly their desk” than assuring best value.  They have been forced into this by the leadership.  Leadership that has failed to establish and support LEAN, integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery methods and properly support and manage internal and external teams.

Solutions readily exist to resolve the ramp levels of economic and environmental waste that has existed for decades.   Unfortunately, there has been no catalyst of driving event to force change.    Even the fact the buildings are responsible for 30%+ of greenhouse gases and carbon impact doesn’t seem to matter, not does the 30%-40% waste of taxpayer dollars, amounting to billions.

There is a window of opportunity for owners, design firms, engineering, and builders to truly collaborate a leverage robust LEAN, integrate planning, procurement, and project delivery methods such as LEAN Job Order Contracting and Integrated Project Delivery, and operate in a manner compatible with a sustainable future, but it is rapidly closing. create a built environment for the future.

Construction Procurement
Elevating Procurement & Change Management

 

Robust, Readily Available Solutions

Early and ongoing collaboration among planning, procurement, and project delivery teams, supported by robust programmatic processes and a common data environment have been proven capable to consistently deliver Quality repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction project ON TIME and ON BUDGET.

Procurement Process Change
Robust Process Drives Best Value

Procurement professionals play a larger role along with earlier involvement with all relevant stakeholders.  They must, in fact, be directly involved with ALL the numerous and ongoing projects throughout their life cycles.  This will require additional training and the support of new tools and processes to ease administrative burden and assure full compliance.

While a select few procurement professionals have begun to adopt these new models, they are not fully supported by leadership on an organization-wide basis.  For example, not a single federal sector department or agency has required the use of locally researched detailed line-item construction data for all projects.   Instead, they continue to use poor approximations of costs such as historical data and/or average costs and cost factoring.

Improving Construction Procurement
A Detailed Scope of Work and Locally Researched Construction Cost Data are Critical Components

 

It’s time to enable procurement professionals to be involved with and play a continuous management role in life-cycle asset management and achieve significantly improved outcomes.

Contact to learn how to set up a pilot program!

 

Capable Governance – Process Integration – Common Data Environment – Enabling Collaborative Technology

via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us – Integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions for the built environment

Valid Construction Cost Estimate, Why LEAN Construction Matters

Valid Construction Cost Estimate Creation

Valid construction cost estimate creation is the goal of every professional estimator.

Any professional construction cost estimator worth their salt will not talk about “accuracy”.    In fact, it may be best to avoid any person or vendor that makes claims about the accuracy of their estimate or cost information.    The reason is simple, an estimate, by nature, is an approximation.  Furthermore, measuring accuracy is impossible as there is no datum.  Using the final construction cost, for example, is just plain silly as there are far too many variables involved in the outcome.

Nonetheless validity of a construction cost estimate is critical to cost management.

Definition of VALIDITY – the quality of being logically or factually sound; soundness or cogency; the state of being legally or officially binding or acceptable.

A construction cost estimate is the summation of individual, granular cost elements, using established methods and valid data, to approximate the future costs of an activity, based on what is known today.

The management of a cost estimate involves updating costs with current data as it becomes available and revising the estimate to reflect changes.

Generating and managing valid, verifiable construction cost estimates is a critical, but rarely properly performed, capability for real property owners, architects, engineers, builders. and oversight groups.

Valid Construction Cost Estimate

A locally researched, granular, detailed line-item unit price book (UPB) is a valuable tool for creating a valid construction cost estimate.   The collaborative use of a locally researched UPB on an early and ongoing basis also aids in the creation of a detailed, well-communicated Scope of Work (SOW).

Final procurement of any repair, renovation, maintenance, or new build service should always involve review of a detailed line time construction cost estimate and quantities.

Valid Construction Cost Estimate

via Four BT, LLC www.4bt.us – Integrated construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions.

Learn more about….

  • Ineffective leadership and construction management
  • Estimating approaches and methods
  • Cost data development, usage, and maintenance
  • Detailed SOW creations
  • LEAN planning, procurement, and project delivery methods
  • Impacts of owner leadership, capability, and optimism
  • Roles and responsibilities
  • Common data environment
  • Ineffective cost management
  • Command and control issues
  • Limiting administrative burden and overhead
  • Improving productivity
public sector procurement and facilities management

A Sustainable Facilities Repair, Renovation, Maintenance, and New Build Strategy

Implementing and maintaining a sustainable facilities repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build strategy is now easier than ever.

Savvy public sector procurement and facilities management professionals understand the need to integrate planning, procurement, and project delivery teams and processes to achieve best value outcomes.

Implementing a collaborative, transparent programmatic framework for all facilities requirements yields a sustainable environment that maximizes available resources.

The process is simpler than you might think.   Tools, training, and support services are readily available to provide full financial and technical visibility and transparency on an early and ongoing basis for all team members.

 

#1 Adopt proven LEAN planning, procurement, and project delivery methods throughout your organizations. (Examples LEAN Job Order Contracting and Integrated Project Delivery)

#2 Assure internal and partner planning, procurement, and project delivery teams are operating within the same collaborative environment and leveraging common data, including a locally researched detailed line-item cost data base.

 

#3 Mandate collaboration and early and ongoing training for all participants and stakeholders.

 

#4 Focus on providing leadership, enabling those doing the work to improve processes, and long-term, performance-based mutually beneficial relationships.

 

via Four BT, LLC – Robust, integrated construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions.

 

Job Order Contracting Best Management Practices

Job Order Contracting Best Management Practices

Job Order Contracting best management practices should be applied throughout the life cycle of every program, contract, project, estimate, and work order.

  • Owner establishes a LEAN Job Order Program and selects vendors via a full and open best value procurement process:
    Minimum and maximum quantities or dollar values for annual construction and individual projects. A writtesn= operations manual as part of the contract detailing all roles, responsibilities, and requirements including but not limited to workflows, phases, and time, statements of work requirements, locally researched current and actionable cost data, specifications, or other descriptions that reasonably describe work requirements, forms, ordering procedures; and selection criteria used to provide awardees a fair opportunity to be considered.
  • During planning, procurement, and facilities professionals should work together to develop a clear
    statement of work (SOW).
  • Request a joint site visit to enable the development of detailed SOW and to provide sufficient information for the design builder to develop a detailed line-item proposals.
  • Owners should continuously seek design/builder and building user input to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the ordering process.
  • Owner reviews the contractor’s proposals and accepts or notes issues and requests changes or additional information.
  • Owner accepts the proposal and issues a Notice to Proceed (NTP) or rejects the proposal.
  • Use a locally researched unit price book (UPB) to assure cost visibility and validity and collaborative technology to lower administrative burden as well as assure compliance.
  • Adhere to all preestablished timelines and formats and cost limitations
  • Require initial and ongoing training for ALL participants to assure adequate knowledge to operate withing a dynamic interactive environment.
  • Use simplified procedures and supporting technologies and documentation when issuing orders under multiple award contracts.
  • Establish and maintain a performance-based work environment with all work being fixed price.
  • Maintain good communications between planning, procurement, and project delivery teams throughout the project lifecycle.
  • Assure ALL projects follow the same program methodology.
  • Enable all participants to discuss administrative and technical matters and suggest improvements.
job order contracting
Locally Researched Construction Cost Data

job order contracting best management practices

via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us – Robust LEAN construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions.

 

Learn more…

GREEN Facilities Management and Procurement Practices

GREEN Facilities Management and Procurement Practices

 

Planning, construction, and renovation to create more resilient and environmentally compatible buildings minimize costs and save lives.

  1. Disasters caused $210 billion worth of damage around the world in 2020 – a significant increase on 2019’s figure of $166 billion.
  2. Rebuilding after a disaster has become prohibitively expensive

 

 

 

Green FM

Green Facilites Management

 

 

Via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us – Integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions for the built environment.

Learn more…

Locally Researched Detailed Construction Cost Database

Understanding the Value a Locally Researched Detailed Construction Cost Database

Understanding the value of a locally researched detailed construction cost database is important to any real property owner, architect, engineer, or builder.

CREATION

A significant amount of time and experience is needed to develop a verifiable unit price cost database that reflected local market conditions and can be easily used and maintained.   The process is complex and involves significant deep and breadth of knowledge and capability, including cost research, cost engineering, data architecture and database expertise, and an understanding of repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction techniques, materials, and equipment.

An actionable local market detailed line-item unit price cost database (UPB), unlike national average cost database, assures a clear understanding of local market costs and conditions and the diversity of trades and associated costs for “fringes”.  Construction techniques commonly used for each type of construction activity are carefully considered as well as associated productivity.

A fuller understanding of locally researched detailed construction cost data BEFORE procurement and project execution best communicates a shared understanding of the required Detailed Scope of Work, and plays a critical role in mitigating change orders, disputes, and cost overruns.

Input prices:

Labor • Surveys local labor markets as well as the most current local federal and state labor data.
Materials • Surveys of commodities, local building materials supply, and building product manufacturers.
Equipment • Surveys construction equipment rental rates, operating costs, and transportation costs.

Construction Cost Data
Construction Cost Data

VALUE

When integrated with robust LEAN planning, procurement, and project delivery mechanisms and solid teaming arrangements, a locally researched cost database has proven to consistently deliver quality projects of all types, on time and on budget.

On a detailed line-time locally researched construction cost data based can prove the specification of the hundreds, if not thousands of detailed tasks and associated component of labor, material, and equipment, for a typical repair, renovation, and new build activity.

It is important to recognize the importance of detailed line item UPBs and furthermore that 1.) not all UPBs provide the same value, and 2.) national average cost databases do not provide the equivalent cost representation whether “location indexes” or “location factors” are used.

Construction Cost Changes
Construction Cost Changes

Learn more?

Carbon Modeling Tool, Carbon Modeling Tool - Facilities Lifecycle, Facilities Lifecycle

Carbon Modeling Tool – Facilities Lifecycle

Carbon modeling tool for the facilities capital delivery process.

  •  Assess carbon over the whole life of constructed assets
  •  Align carbon and costs
  •  Develop carbon options
  •  Capture data and monitor carbon targets
  •  40% reduction in construction carbon emissions
Components The two components of the Carbon Planning Tool are:

·        Carbon Modelling Tool – top-down whole life carbon assessment and optioneering, used during the project appraisal phase to enable quick and simple carbon assessment to inform the solution selection process. LINK

·        Carbon Calculator – detailed bottom-up whole life carbon assessment, incrementally built up during the delivery phase, following selection of a preferred project solution option. The final Carbon Calculator assessment is used to create data points in the carbon models within the Carbon Modelling Tool. LINK
 The construction carbon modeling tools estimates emissions from a variety of sources covering the whole life of a project. These emissions sources are described below, and are split into capital carbon (which occurs, at the time of project implementation – most often the construction of the project, which is known as the first intervention), and lifecycle carbon (which occurs over the asset’s lifetime, which is 100 years within ERIC).

Capital Carbon

Category Description
Materials Carbon associated with materials used for the project, including extraction, processing, manufacture and distribution – this is also known as cradle to gate embodied carbon.

This step excludes carbon associated with the installation and use of the materials during the construction process, which should be fully captured in the Installation section. However for several earthworks materials, some construction processes may be included in the emissions factor applied (where noted in descriptions).
Transport Carbon associated with the transportation of resources. Three subcategories are assessed:

·        Materials – delivery to site

·        People – travel associated with both contractor and non-contractor personnel to site

·        Plant – delivery of plant from supplier to site

Carbon associated with the manufacture, servicing and repair of plant is not included within the calculator.
Installation Carbon associated with the construction process. Three subcategories are assessed:

·        Site establishment – fuel/energy use during construction

·        Plant use – fuel use during construction

·        Waste – transportation off-site to dispose of excess materials and other construction process waste such as arising from the site.

Carbon associated with the final disposal of waste is not included within the calculator.

Lifecyle Carbon

Category Description
Operational carbon Carbon associated with the ongoing operation of each asset/sub-asset. Four subcategories are assessed:

·        Use – use/manning of assets, based on travel to/from the site

·        Maintenance – planned maintenance activities, based on an assessment of travel to/from the site and use of plant and materials where required

·        Repair – an assessment of unplanned repair activities, based on an assessment of travel to/from the site and use of plant and materials where required

·        Energy – power consumption
Refurbishment carbon Carbon associated with interventions at the end of an asset/sub-asset’s useful life that extend the useful life.
Replacement carbon Carbon associated with re-building an asset/sub-asset at the end of it’s useful (or if refurbished, extended useful) life.
Demolition carbon Carbon associated with the demolition of life-expired asset/sub-assets. Three subcategories are assessed:

·        Materials Waste –  transportation off-site of demolished materials

·        People – travel to/from site

·        Plant – transportation to/from site and fuel use

Carbon associated with the final disposal of waste is not included within the calculator.
Residual carbon The carbon emissions associated with assets that extend beyond the 100-year project lifespan. The residual carbon is presented and subtracted from the whole life carbon total to produce a total net emissions figure for the project.

Figure below outlines the options available to estimate the capital carbon emissions for earth used

carbon tool

 

(Source of above – Whole Life (Construction) Carbon Planning Tool, Instruction: LIT 14284                                                                      Published: 02/09/2021)

 

via Four BT, LLC, www.4bt.us – Integrated construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions that drive consistent best value outcomes.

Construction Area Cost Factors

Area Cost Factors and Construction Cost Estimating

Should Areas Cost Factors be used for Construction Cost Estimating?

Time to ReTHINK, ReSHAPE, ReBUILD
 

There are multiple False Assumptions associated with Area Cost Factors. As a result, more than 40 years after the introduction of area cost factors (ACFs), the federal government and most other public sector facilities owners are no closer to its goals of having construction cost estimates match actual construction costs, or properly adjusting for regional (location based) variances.

Definition of Area Factor – A multiplicative value used to reflect relative geographical cost differentials. They are used in the development of construction cost budgets and project estimates.

The use of area cost factors (ACFs) for capital planning budgeting or estimates for construction repair, renovation, and new build projects remains a fundamentally flawed approach.  Examples of areas cost factors and economic factors include, RS Means City Cost Cost Index, ENR, GSA, and DoD Area Cost Factors.  It’s been over 40 years since ACFs and the computerized use of ACFs have been introduced, and their initial concept and their use remains a significant barrier to construction cost visibility and transparency.  ACFs have proven to be flawed, and not capable of reliable providing valid estimations of construction costs for specific locations.

There is overwhelming statistical significance and audit reporting that the cost estimates used to for physical infrastructure decision-making are highly and systematically misleading. The result is the misuse of billions of dollars.

ACFs, and other forms of location factors, cost indices have been evaluated by several independent sources and through actual practices and proven not to be capable of providing a workable budget and/or reasonable estimate for repair, renovation, or new build construction projects.

Area cost factors (ACFs) are typically used to adjust national average cost data, and/or historical costs to a particular location, or to use a previously developed cost estimate for a different location.   The use a single factor to adjust ­all costs in an estimate which discounts the different impacts that local and regional markets have on labor, material, equipment, and productivity. Errors in estimation caused using these adjustment factors result in a corresponding cumulative impact on the overall error of estimates. Area Cost Factor assumptions erroneously posit that productivity is constant for all locations. In fact, many data publishers make the disclaimer that “productivity is not considered” in their location factors.  Similarly, applying a cost index to labor is a poor practice as labor costs vary widely by trade. Currently available cost factors are simply incapable of accurately representing local market factors and costs.  Variances in labor, material, equipment, productivity, and means and methods cannot be accounted for by simply using a cost factor.  Indeed, using cost factors result in errors of -25+% to +40%” at best and 150% to 6x at worst depending upon their specific application.

The net effect of using ACFs is lack of confidence among both the user base, and those responsible for obtaining and approving sustainment and new construction funding. Significant government overpayments on both large capital projects and the numerous on-going repair, renovation, and maintenance projects remain the norm.

Real property owners would be far better served using verifiable and current locally researched detailed line-item construction cost data for all construction related planning, procurement, and project delivery activities. Furthermore, adoption of best value LEAN construction planning, procurement, and project delivery would not only provide higher cost visibility and transparency, but also assure the consistent delivery of quality of sustainment and new construction projects on-time and on-budget. T

DOD and congressional decision-makers may not have reliable estimates to inform their decisions regarding appropriations and the oversight of projects. – GAO

References

  • 1981, NBSIR 81-2250 Estimating Area Cost Factors for Military Construction Projects: A Computerized Approach
  • 1985, Cost overruns in public projects.
  • 1990, Military Planning and Design Funding Requirements, Report AROIRI
  • 2016, Investigation in Construction Cost Estimation Using Monte Carlo Simulation AFIT Scholar J.D Bucholtz
  • 2016, Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity project selection framework using stochastic techniques
  • 2018, Correlation between cost growth and procurement methods on USACE construction projects
  • 2018, Action Needed to Increase the Reliability of Construction Cost Estimates, Defense Infrastructure, GAO-18-101 The Chapter 5 paper presents a statistical analysis on the performance of twelve existing
LEAN Job Order Contracting

Acquisition Research: Creating Synergy for Informed Change – Federal Contracting Officers – The Need for Improved Expertise

“Contracting officers need improved expertise in both understanding and conducting price/cost analysis. The current gap in knowledge contributes to agencies missing cost saving opportunities as well as ventures to improve acquisition outcomes.
Exercising appropriate price analysis methods that come from adequate price analysis guidance and training would address this gap.”   – 14th Annual Acquisition Symposium

 

f

 

  • “A number of contract files that we reviewed did not demonstrate that prices paid were reasonable due to inadequate FAR price analysis methods.”
  • “…it appears that contracting personnel do not know how to appropriately perform and document price analysis.”
  • “In particular, two types of price analysis—references to market research and IGCEs—were performed and documented incorrectly more than 50% of the time.”
  • “Previous price documentations were unjustified 43% of the time and 40% of price competition was found to be inadequate.”
  • “Lack of justification in estimating the labor rates as follows:
     Statements that historical rates were used without reference to any contract or data in file to back it up.
     Escalation rates were applied to future years with no reference to the source of the escalation rate.
     One escalation factor used was simply based on a quote in the DoD COTR handbook that stated “escalation between 2 and 3% is generally considered reasonable.”
     IGCE creator used rates from a schedule with similar job titles, not similar services.
     Unusual quantitative method used to determine an acceptable range of labor rates. Estimator took 4 quotes, averaged them, and then created a range by adding 20% to the average price, and subtracting 20% from the average price. No details why estimator used a +/- 20%. Made the range too large and not useful.
     Only provided an estimated total dollar amount without a breakdown of labor mix, hours, or rates.”
  • “Though an IGCE was substantiated and could be used in justifying the reasonableness of the offered price, it had not been used. In the pricing memo, the IGCE is incorrectly stated as RS Means.”
  • “Examples of the incomplete comparison with IGCE or use of unreliable IGCEs found in the file reviews:
     Though a construction contract used RS Means to substantiate the IGCE, the winning price came in at $265k versus the IGCE estimate of $452K. The winning price only represents 58% of the IGCE. No documentation in the file justified why the IGCE was so high, despite plenty of offers alongside the winning price to justify the lower price.

Request full report….

 

 

 

–

BENEFIT from Job Order Contracting

How to BENEFIT from Job Order Contracting

The first step in learning how to benefit from Job Order Contracting (JOC) is to understand the following facts:

#1 Not all JOC Programs, “JOC Consultants”, JOC vendors are the same.

#2 Paying a Percentage of JOC construction volume will always cost your organization more.

#3 A full time “JOC consultant” should never be used as there is no need for the cost, and the practice distances the owner from the design-builder. and does little to build internal knowledge and capabilities.  Third parties should only be used to provide software, unit price cost data, and appropriate services such as training and auditing.

#4 JOC should NEVER be used to simply speed the procurement of repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction project.  Used to its full benefit, JOC is a LEAN integrate project delivery method.  JOC can integrate siloed planning, procurement, and project delivery teams and processes to maximize productivity and drive down total costs %20-30%.

#5 Always use locally researched detailed line-item construction cost data to support your JOC Program.  DO NOT use location factors or economic factors for developing or updating the unit price book (UPB).

BENEFIT from Job Order Contracting
BENEFIT from Job Order Contracting

 

Reach and contact us if it’s time to maximize the benefits from your JOC Program… or if you are just setting up JOC for the first time!

 

 

A high performing, best value JOC Program should….

• Reduce or eliminate traditional procurement inefficiencies including administrative burden, project delivery times, and total costs.

• Integrate planning, procurement, and project delivery for all internal and external participants in a collaborative, consistent manner.

• Create a fully transparent (full cost and technical visibility) and competitive environment throughout the planning through execution lifecycle

 

via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us – Integrated LEAN construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions that work!
BEST VALUE Job Order Contracting Program

BEST VALUE Job Order Contracting Program

Powerful, yet easy-to-use job order contracting services and tools that simplify the JOC process and support best value repair, renovation, and new construction outcomes.

JOC Construction Best Management Practices
• JOC Procurement Processes
• JOC Contracts and Compliance Considerations
• JOC Cost Estimating
• JOC Program Design, Implementation, Operations and Management

best value job order contract

PROCESS & DATA MINING

Public sector procurement and facilities management professionals are re-evaluating their Job Order Contracting and capital planning processes, and setting ambitious process improvement goals
It’s not just about cost savings but delivering the best value possible in concert with fiduciary requirements.

  • Increase productivity
  • Reduce costs
  • Improve satisfaction
  • Assure compliance

96% – Percent of Satisfactory Projects
87% – Percent of JOC Projects Completed on Time
91% – Percent of JOC Projects Completed on Budget 

www.4bt.us

If you think it would be beneficial to speak, book 15-minute introductory discussion.  Set up a 15-minute introductory call.

Underground utilities cost management

Underground Utilities- Inefficiencies and Damage – $100B Annually

America’s underground utilities, equally as important as buildings and other structures, are mismanaged and a major source of economic waste.  The net cost is approximately $100B+ annually.

The primary issues, which could be easily resolved with appropriate leadership and commitment, are …

  1. Lack of integrated LEAN planning, procurement, and project delivery process deployment.
  2. Failure to use locally researched detailed unit price repair, renovation, maintenance, and construction task data, inclusive of labor, material, equipment, and productivity.

Put more simply, the direct costs and indirect costs of sending crews to repair damaged pipes, cables, pumps, switchgear, etc. are not being managed properly.

Our health, safety, and security, as well as economy is depended upon underground utilities as well as buildings, airports, mass transit, ports, dams, and roadways.

 

www.4bt.us – Integrated LEAN planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions, including locally researched cost data.

 

Why LEAN Construction Matters

WHY LOCALLY RESEARCHED LINE-ITEM COST DATA IS CRITICAL TO PRODUCTIVITY

LOCALLY RESEARCHED LINE-ITEM COST DATA IS CRITICAL TO PRODUCTIVITY

• Reliable, shared source of truth of both cost and scope of work
• Financial visibility and transparency
• Lower risk

Dod Real Property Management

It’s really that simple.   Without a shared locally researched cost knowledgebase, and an associated robust, integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery process it’s virtually impossible to consistently deliver quality repair, renovation, maintenance, or new builds on-time and on-budget.

Learn more… www.4bt.us

Public Sector Construction Productivity, Unlock Public Sector Construction Productivity

Unlock Public Sector Construction Productivity – A White Paper

Unlock Public Sector Construction Productivity[1]  with Proven Strategies: A White Paper

Improving Public Sector Construction
First, a few things to consider.

  1. Software is never going to be able to deliver a solution for your organization without addressing fundamental issues first.  Take BIM for example.  It has done virtually nothing to measurably impact the repair, renovation, maintenance, and construction of the built environment.  It has neither reduced economic nor environmental waste.  Software is only useful if it is based upon a robust strategy, supported by robust processes and workflows that maximize leverage of internal and external resources via collaboration and common mutually beneficial goals.
  2. Your most value asset is your people and your partners.  Provide the leadership and tools needed to empower your staff and external partners to solve problems themselves and achieve best value outcomes.
  3. The risk of change is high, however, not pursuing fundamental change is potentially catastrophic.

Here’s opportunity to do something different.

Robust tools and processes have existing for decades that can assure quality repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds are consistent delivered on-time and on-budget.   Two of these solutions are Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and Job Order Contracting (JOC).  Many instances of their deployment, however have not achieved anticipated results.   Both IPD and JOC are not the issue, but rather the implementing organization and/or service provider have been the cause of “failure”.

Let’s focus on JOC.  Internal and independent audits have found that many Job Order Contracting deployments have unfortunately degraded into a simple means of speeding procurement and also carry excessive administration costs tied to a percentage of construction costs.  Some have suffered from the excessive use of consultants, while others have failure to abide by fundamental procedures and implement appropriate safeguards against waste and even fraud.

LEAN Job Order Contracting is now available.   As the name implied,  this programmatic uses LEAN principles as a foundation.  Furthermore, focus is placed upon empowering owners and their awarded JOC contractors to build and retain LEAN knowledge and capabilities and to be self sufficient.  There are no “JOC administrative fees” based upon total JOC construction value, but rather simple software subscriptions and training costs.

LEAN Job Order Contracting includes the following elements:
• Comprehensive, verifiable, locally researched unit price cost data (no use of location or economic factors) with line-item modifiers, separate demolition line items, and  and task descriptions written in plain English without the excessive use of acronyms or abbreviations.
• Local prevailing wage rates or Davis-Bacon as required
• Long-term Mutually Beneficial Relationships
• Powerful, Easy-to-Use, Collaborative Technology that simplifies the JOC Process
• World-class Training and Support for Owners, Design-Builders, Trades
• Fully Compliant
• KPIs Supporting Continuous Improvement
• Faster, Higher Quality, and Lower Cost Project Delivery
• Integrated Project Planning, Procurement, and Delivery
• Complete Workflow Management and Reporting, including Forms, Approvals, and Timing
• At a Glance Budget Visibility – Committed/In Process, Available, Expended
• Tracking of MBE/WBE/HUBZONE Goals
• Multi-level, Multi-format Training – On-site, Remote, and Self-paced Tutorials – Intro, Advanced, Refresher
• Common Source of Truth
• Full Document Management with check-in/check-out and version control), not simple file sharing/access
• Collaborative Proposal Reviews and Automated Estimate Comparison (fully auditable verification of all line items, pricing, and quantities)

If you can’t describe what you are doing as a process, you don’t know what you’re doing.
-W. Edwards Deming

Steps to consistent LEAN construction delivery success:

1. Assure your project planning, procurement, and delivery initiative will have a financial benefit.
2. Empower an internal champion to own the initiative.
3. Build a cross functional team with clear responsibilities to produce quality, efficient outcomes.
4. Align requirements to desired solution.
5. Provide adequate governance and continuously improve over time.

Most public sector organizations skip step #1 and rush to procurement and support their facilities management needs with software solutions  with qualitative evaluations provided by marketers such as… “This is really innovative” …. Or “This will reduce risk” … instead of stating and assuring a clear, quantitative financial benefit, and thus they miss a massive opportunity.

While the procurement and build phase gets the most attention form public sector owners, a project’s success is determined before actual procurement.   Preconstruction is where owners organizations can best identify opportunities to improve overall outcomes. Research has shown an average cost saving of 20% can be achieved by applying a consistent robust programmatic process throughout all phases, beginning with planning.

Clear, concise communication from the very beginning among participants, and building a strong foundation in the form of an initial and detailed scope of work (SOW), mitigates the potential for catastrophic project failures down the road. The time and energy invested in developing and deploying a strategic, organization-wide  program-centric LEAN process unlocks opens the door to increasing the overall efficiency avoids issues during the build phase.

Putting preconstruction planning into action
Here is a proven process to optimize your preconstruction process and set all future repair, renovation, and new build projects up for success.

1. Audit your current process
Audit your current preconstruction process and perform a gap analysis identify areas of weakness. Whether you assume to an effective process in place and perhaps not everyone is using it effectively, or you know you don’t have a defined consistent, and well communicated process, it’s important to start from a known baseline. A complete view of your current preconstruction process as it exists is needed to set the stage for optimization and/or complete change.

2. Find the right collaboration tools
The only proven method of setting up any type of construction project up for success is to get all project participants and stakeholders on the same page, early on in the process. Furthermore, the only tools available to consistently accomplish goal are support the integration of  planning, procurement, and project delivery teams.
A written Operations Manual and/or Execution Guide is also needed.  This document, as part of the Contract, details all phases, requirements, roles and responsibilities, and workflows from initial planning through procurement, project delivery, close-out, and the warranty period.
All integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery frameworks share several core components. One of these is common data environment (CDE) in which information is clearly communicated in a standardized, easily understood and accessible manner. A CDE supports the creation of a verifiable detailed work scope (SOW). A component of a CDE specific to cost visibility is a locally researched detailed line-item unit price book (UPB). A UPB provides a powerful tool for an owner to validate contractor and subcontractor quotes as well as assure a common understanding of the detailed SOW. Lump sum quotes from general contractors and/or subs provide relatively little value with respect to technical or cost visibility.

3. Procurement
Once a single source of truth is available to all participants and stakeholders via the above, the traditional problems and inefficiencies cause by siloed data sets are virtually eliminated and the process can proceed to the procurement phase.
Integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery methods also have the benefit of establishing long-term relationships between owners and service providers as well as expediting quality project delivery.  For LEAN JOC, a process can be procured and begun in weeks. The process simply requires the owner to set up a joint site visit to enable the owner and the contractor to share requirements and enable the creation of a detailed cost proposal.

4. Remove manual processes wherever possible
While “process is king”, technology does play a key role. The role of technology is to simplify processes and help to support consistent and lower cost deployment of processes. If the process is “right” and continuously monitored and improved upon, technology is simply an enabler, allowing internal and external teams to increase efficiency by automating tedious, manual processes. Furthermore, delays and errors caused by emails, spreadsheets, or file folders are minimized.

5. Build trust and strengthen relationships
Whether you’re an owner, general contractor, or subcontractor, positive long-term working relationships that are rooted in trust and communication are a necessary to increasing productivity.   LEAN processes can support development and growth of these relationships.
80-90% of projects fail by being late, over budget, or otherwise complete to the dissatisfaction of one or more team members. Robust LEAN programmatic processes and tools can get that down to 10% or lower!  With appropriate process deployment and management, loweing administration costs 75% and increased productivity 3X is a real possibility.

Contact us to discuss…

  • A process to assure alignment of your internal and external teams and maximized productivity.
  • How integrated platforms compare to traditional, siloed processes and the advantages you can expect to achieve.
  • How to better connect teams from planning, to procurement and throughout project delivery.
  • How an integrated platform exposes teams to critical information they can leverage for increased project success.

48% of rework is due to poor project data and miscommunication – 2018 Construction Disconnected, FMI)’

 

 

[1] We’ve had success with a wide range of federal, state, county and local government departments and agencies including universities, secondary schools, public works, joint bases, hospitals, and others.  Our clients have reduced administration costs by 75% and improved achieved 3X productivity gains.

 

via Four BT, LLC – Integrated LEAN planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions for the public sector.

 

 

 

 

Typical JOC Process

Typical JOC Process

The Typical JOC Process:

  • Confirm Project is Suitable for JOC
  • Request for Proposal / Site Visit
  • Scoping / Joint Site Visit
  • Contractor Proposal  Preparation and Submission
  • Owner/Client Proposal Review
  • Proposal Acceptance/Rejection
  • Owner/Client Notice to Proceed to Contractor
  • Preconstruction Kick-off Meeting
  • Construction Performed
  • Regular Updates and Inspections
  • Final Inspection
  • Close Out
  • Warranty Period

 

Scoping

  • Visit the jobsite and document conditions
  • Establish project goals
  • Determine if design services are required
  • Define building systems and quality of materials
  • Identify client’s responsibilities
  • Determine project schedule and major milestones
  • Identify safety, security and hazardous material issues

 

Proposal Preparation

  • Select construction task from approved UPB (unit price book) – Use a locally researched unit price book (DO NOT USE LOCATION FACTORS or ECONOMIC FACTORS)
  • Contractor
  • Contractor determines and submits line items and quantities for the project based on scope. (Owner may prepare an internal estimate (Internal Government Estimate (IGE), based upon regulations.)
  • For UPB pricing, the line items are totaled and the JOC coefficient/factor is applied
  • Contractor send proposal to owner/client for review

Typical JOC Process

 

Contact for more… www.4bt.us

Why LEAN Construction Matters

Job Order Contracting Services via a Cooperative

Ordering Job Order Contracting Services via a Cooperative requires adequate market research on the part of public sector organizations.  Many cooperatives are managed by private corporations and charge excessive fees to contractors and/or owners.

Best management practice would be to use JOC Cooperative Programs that charge 2% of less of construction value.  Furthermore, select a JOC Program that is fully managed by a government entity.

job order contracting services
Job Order Contracting COOPERATIVE

 

via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us – LEAN, integrated construction planning, procurement, and project delivery solutions.