Validating FM decisions with verifiable cost data

Validating FM Decisions with Verifiable Cost Data

Validating FM decisions with verifiable cost data is critical, yet rarely practiced.

While most facilities management professional are aware that detailed line-item cost data is required to achieve cost visibility and enable cost management, the dependence upon contractor or subcontractor estimates and/or historical data, and/or national average cost data and factoring remains the norm.   The net result is an average economic waste factor of 30%-40%+ for every repair, renovation, maintenance, or new build.

Locally researched granular construction task data that is both current, and organized using standard data architectures, provides the only way to enable cost management by…

  • Sharing a mutual understanding of technical, cost, and productivity information among internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams,
  • Improving and retaining domain knowledge, and
  • Quantifying decision-making.

Learn more today!

uniformat

masterformat

 

Validating FM decisions with verifiable cost data is critical to facilities sustainability and stewardship,

Why LEAN Construction Matters

FM Sustainability Regulation

January 2023 two climate requirements for new construction entered into force in the Building Regulations. If you are going to build a new heated building, you are responsible for complying with the requirements.

 

  1. The climate impacts of new construction must be documented with a climate calculation (i.e. a life cycle assessment, LCA) in connection with the completion notification of the construction
  2. New construction over 1000 m2 must comply with a limit value of 12.0 kg CO2 equivalent/m2/year.

 

Where is the United States?

 

via 4bt.us

 

 

Why LEAN Construction Matters

FM’s LACK OF A BoK

Facilities Management Lacks a Body of Knowledge

Facilities Management and the full AECOO community have a fundamental flaw that is solely responsible for rampant economic and environmental waste; the lack of body of knowledge (BOK or BoK), the complete set of concepts, terms and activities that make up a professional domain.

 

FM body of knowledge Contact to learn more…

 

 

 

#facilitiesmanagement #environmental #community #aecoo #lean #leanconstruction #tco #totalcostofownership

Why Technology Won't Help Construction or Facilities Management

Why Technology Won’t Help Construction or Facilities Management and their LEGACY OF WASTE

Technology Won’t Help Construction’s and Facilities Management’s Legacy of WASTE simply because technology simply automates existing processes.   ERP, CMMS, IWMS, even BIM have all FAILED to produce measurable improvement with respect to the ability to consistently deliver QUALITY repair, renovation, maintenance, or new builds ON TIME and ON BUDGET.  Thiis is a fact that few software vendors want you to know.

There’s no shortage of technology marketed to “help” AEC companies and real property, however, the void of leadership and accountability and the will to move beyond archaic, failed processes is overwhelming.  It’s time to map decision-making, and performance to value!

 

Organizations select software as a solution for one reason, it’s easy.  You pay for it and it gets delivered.  However, millions of dollars later, the result…. no significant improvement…  rarely get documented and the next newest tech is purchased… the cycle continues perpetually.

CMMS Technology FAILURE

 

I have been involved in technology my entire life… from robotics, weapons systems, voice/facial recognition, AI, and software.   I have founded multiple companies and even have US patents attributed to me.   Despite this, I can say that the benefit of technology lies in automating robust processes and ensuring their consistent and hopefully lower cost deployment.

That said, not a single public sector real property owner organization has deployed a robust process system wide that efficiently integrates internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams with a common data environment.  If they did, they could save 30%-40%+ over current cost for facilities repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds, serving their organizational mission and their communities in concert with their mission requirements.

Not Rocket Science

The most disturbing aspect is that any organization can optimize economic and environmental physical infrastructure management with the adoption of existing robust, programmatic processes.  The only barrier is the will to do so.

The AECOO sector (architecture, engineering, construction, owner, operator/operations) is clearly in need of disruption, however the catalyst will not be technology.   A focus upon pragmatic and practical processes applied to each and every project or workorder is the only way to leverage the knowledge and resources of internal and external teams.    The master builders of years gone by knew this, as did Henry Ford, and others.

All participants must adjust to new ways of working.  The hardest aspect is recognizing the need to do so.  Leadership’s role is to encourage, support, and yes, mandate internal and external teams to upend traditional practices and fully collaborate in a transparent manner on an early and ongoing basis.

Optimizing workflows requires adoption of robust programmatic processes including integrated project delivery and LEAN job order contracting.  Each and every project and workorder, while unique, follows the same workflow within these and similar environments.   Both mandate collaboration and a common data environment (inclusive of locally researched granular unit price cost databases organized via industry standard data architectures) within a performance-based long-term multiparty agreement and associated operations manual/execution guide that focuses upon best value, mutually beneficial outcomes.

Prepare For the Disruption

What really needs to change?

  1. Decision-making
  2. Strategy
  3. People and Process
  4. Information
  5. Value

 

 

 

 

Understanding and defining robust workflows and standard operating procedures is the first step. Digitalization is secondary.

A Transformative Approach to Construction Project Management

A Transformative Approach to Construction Project Management

A Transformative Approach to Construction Project Management that enables the consistent delivery of quality outcomes on time and on budget has been available for decades.

Any real property owner with requisite leadership skills and the commitment to fundamental process change can mitigate the excessive financial and environmental waste endemic to the repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction of buildings and other forms of physical infrastructure.

First… forget all the misinformation about both BIM and LEAN construction.

BIM is a digitalization tool and a 3D rendering technology, not a facilities management solution.  While some, including myself hope that BIM will eventually describe tools, processes, and technologies that are facilitated by digital machine-readable documentation about a building, its performance, its planning, its construction, and later its operation, hope is all there is at this point.

LEAN construction is not the application and adaptation of the underlying concepts and principles of the Toyota Production System (TPS) to construction.  TPS is an approach to manufacturing and not particularly relevant to “construction”.  Secondly, much of what is inaccurately attributed to TPS, such as collaboration and leveraging the experience of those actually doing the work, focus upon outcomes and the customer, and continuous improvement had their origins back with Henry Ford, and even further back to the master builders in some cases.

Tools and support services are readily available to ensure consistent quality outcomes, on time and on budget for repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build projects.   Adopting a robust LEAN programmatic process facilitates a more integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery process that results in better quality buildings at lower cost and reduced project duration.

 

Reach out if you are ready for a change.

A Transformative Approach to Construction Project Management

A Transformative Approach to Construction Project Management

 

LEAN Construction and BIM are not the same

FACT CHECK: LEAN Construction and BIM are not the same

LEAN Construction and BIM are not the same.

 

LEAN Construction is a robust process that enables the integration and collaboration of internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams within a common, fully transparent environment, to consistently deliver quality repair, renovation, and new build project on time and on budget and to the mutual satisfaction of all participants and stakeholders.

BIM, Building Information Modeling, is the digitalization and 3D rendering of buildings or other forms of physical infrastructure.

It’s really that simple.

 

Learn more?

Understanding Efficient Facilities Stewardship

Understanding Efficient Facilities Stewardship – Unpeeling the ONION

Unpeeling the FM Onion is the first step to engaging in efficient facilities stewardship (consistent, quality, cost effective repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds).

It’s impossible to make something more efficient if you do not understand it.

Billions of dollars are wasted every year, as well as precious, nonrenewable natural resources, due to a fundamental lack of understanding of facilities stewardship as a holistic process.

Facilities management involves social (structure and people) and technical (technology and tasks) system components.  A robust process that integrates both 1.) provides realistic insight into quality, schedule, and cost outcomes and 2.0 determines overall the level of satisfaction for all participants and stakeholders.

The concept of the agile onion s (Costa et al., 2021) is based on the visibility of the power and the dynamic nature related to change, in which each layer corresponds to be considered one among the following, a methodology tool, a set of practices, principles, values, and eventually as a mindset.

The direct parallels to LEAN FM and associated robust integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery frameworks and solutions are demonstrated below.

 

Unpeeling the FM Onion

 

Why LEAN Construction Matters

STAKEHOLDER CONTINUOUS PARTICIPATION AND INVOLVEMENT – A Prerequisite for Efficient Facilities Management

Facilities management activities such as quality, on time and on budget repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction require STAKEHOLDER CONTINUOUS PARTICIPATION AND INVOLVEMENT.

Who are the stakeholders?   Owners, design-builders, building users…

Learn more?

Facilities STAKEHOLDER CONTINUOUS PARTICIPATION AND INVOLVEMENT

Facilities STAKEHOLDER CONTINUOUS PARTICIPATION AND INVOLVEMENT

Facilities STAKEHOLDER CONTINUOUS PARTICIPATION AND INVOLVEMENT

Facilities STAKEHOLDER CONTINUOUS PARTICIPATION AND INVOLVEMENT

Facilities STAKEHOLDER CONTINUOUS PARTICIPATION AND INVOLVEMENT

Mitigating Uncertainty in Facilities Repair

Mitigating Uncertainty in Facilities Repair, Renovation, Maintenance, and New Builds

Mitigating Uncertainty in Facilities Repair, Renovation, Maintenance, and New Builds is a proven way to reduce waste and consistently deliver quality outcomes on time and on budget.

un·cer·tain·ty -a lack of conviction or knowledge especially about an outcome or result.

Current actionable information and integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery teams are required to mitigate uncertainty.  An objective, introspective look at your organization will more than likely result in a clear need for fundamental change and change management.

A robust programmatic process applied to all projects by internal and external teams resolves the following issues endemic to traditional facilities management organizations.

  1. Incomplete, outdated, poorly organized, or improperly communicated information
  2. Team members not informed on an early and ongoing basis
  3. Poor team relationships
  4. Failure to leverage the knowledge of those doing the work
  5. Conflicting/competing demands or agendas
  6. Lack of compliance and/or oversight
  7. Inadequate or untimely decision-making
  8. Poorly defined/communicated scope of work

Solution

A robust programmatic process applied to all projects by all internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery team members produces a 30%-40% reduction in waste (due to inadequate cost visibility/management, rework/change orders).

A shift in focus from perceived “technology solutions” to a foundational change in day-to-day activities and relationships.

Fully transparent cost and scope of work definition supported by a granular, current, locally researched detailed unit price book, organized using a standard information architecture (i.e. CSI Masterfomat).

 

Requirements:

  • Owner leadership, commitment, and competency
  • Primary focus upon People, then Process, then Information, then Enabling Technology (will embedded Process)
  • Common data environment (CDE) – Common, shard glossary of terms and definitions, inclusive of a detailed, current, and objective locally researched unit price cost database with full labor, material, equipment, and productivity transparency.
  • Mandatory initial and ongoing training for all participants
  • Quantitative metrics
  • A written Operations Manual/Execution Guide as a component of a long-term multi-party contract
  • Mutual objective of best value, mutually beneficial outcomes
  • Enabling technology that embeds and support robust process

Mitigating Uncertainty in Facilities Repair, Renovation, Maintenance

Mitigating Uncertainty in Facilities Repair, Renovation, Maintenance

Why LEAN Construction Matters

Facilities Management & Uncertainty

Uncertainty –  The inability to foretell consequences or outcomes because of a lack knowledge or basis on
which to make any predictions

 

Uncertainty fuels risk, excessive costs, and project failure.

Many real property owners are reluctant or incapable of qualifying and quantifying uncertainty, resulting in financial and environmental waste.

Learn more about robust processes for managing uncertainty. 

 

 

Traditional Facilities Maintenance Approaches Are FAILING

Traditional Facilities Maintenance Approaches Are FAILING

Traditional Facilities Maintenance Approaches Are FAILING for several reasons…

  1. Most maintenance programs employed by facilities professionals are reactive.
  2. Predicting the cost to repair or replace equipment is beyond the capability of real property owners.
  3. Preventive maintenance programs lack both technical and cost visibility.
  4. 99.99% of CMMS implementations fail to manage costs.

CMMS Technology FAILURE

Preventive Maintenance Cost Database

 

BEHAVIORS drive Facilities Management Outcomes

BEHAVIORS drive Facilities Management Outcomes – Repair, Renovation, Maintenance, or New Builds

If only real properly owners understood that BEHAVIORS drive Facilities Management Outcomes – Repair, Renovation, Maintenance, or New Builds.

It’s the integration of People, Process, Information, and Technology, working together to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes that is the “simple” solution to the endemic environmental and economic waste plaguing the AECOO sector (architecture, engineering, construction, owner, operator/operations).

Solutions in the form of robust process frameworks, tools, and support solutions are readily available, but real property owner leadership, support, and accountability are prerequisites to implementation and major improvement from the status quo.

 

Why LEAN Construction Matters

Improving Facilities Management Outcomes REQUIRES LEADERSHIP

Leadership must be supportive and directly involved. LACK OF LEADERSHIP has led to rampant waste endemic to the AECOO sector (architecture, engineering, construction, owner, operator).

The FACT that real property owners have not taken responsibility for the DEVELOPMENT of their staff and external service providers has proven an impenetrable barrier to measurable improvement in economic and environmental outcomes.

LEADERS must ENABLE people doing the work to leverage their expertise to contribute to problem solving and continuously improve daily activities and processes.

It’s CRITCAL for people and organizations to understand that robust, integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery, so necessary for facilities management is not a project centric approach.  Measurable improvement requires a fundamental change in thinking and interacting with others daily. LEADERS must ENABLE people doing the work to leverage their expertise to contribute to problem solving and continuously improve daily activities and processes.

 

Why LEAN Construction Matters

Robust Facilities Sustainment Solution

A robust facilities sustainment solution is critical to any real property owner.

#1. A current real property inventory of all critical facilities systems – Foundations, Floors, Exterior Walls, Exterior Windows, Exterior Doors, Roof Coverings, Interior Construction, Casework, Doors, Partitions, Interior Windows, Stairs, Wall Finishes, Floor Finishes, Ceilings, Elevators/Lifts/Conveying Systems, Plumbing, Domestic Water Equipment, Sanitary Waste, Specialty Piping Systems, Gas Monitors, Flow Monitors, Liquid Oxygen Source, Evacuation Systems, Compressors, Compressed Air Systems, Plumbing Fixtures, Surgical Vacuum Systems, Dust Evacuation Systems, Energy Supply Systems, HVAC, Terminal and Package, Solar Energy Systems, Generators, Steam Distribution Systems, Cooling Systems, Distribution Systems, Energy Supply Systems, Heating Systems, Controls and Instrumentation, Fire Suppression Systems, Fire Detection and Alarm Systems, Standpipes, Electrical Service and Distribution, Lighting, Communications and Security Systems, Institutional Equipment, Landscaping and Sitework…. to name a few.

#2. Implement a robust physical asset facilities maintenance process integrating scheduled, unscheduled repairs, and preventive maintenance tasks.

#3. Validate costs and operations using a current, locally researched line-item maintenance and repair cost database for all tasks and associated frequencies.

#4. Build and support collaborative internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery terms.

#5. Monitor and continuously improve.

 

Why LEAN Construction Matters

All things JOC – Job Order Contracting

For All things JOC – Job Order Contracting click here….

Structuring a best value JOC Program requires far more than getting a certification, buying software, or hiring a ‘JOC consultant”.  

Few JOC Programs, especially within non-DOD Federal applications, are structured to provide BEST VALUE to Owners and Design-Builders.  They have been set up to simply procure construction/maintenance services faster, and in manner cases without traditional or proper oversight.  The net result, as shown by several independent third-party audits, has been problematic, including such poor outcomes as excessive costs, lack of cost transparency, and even fraud.

The benefits of a LEAN JOC Program are significant; however, owners must provide LEADERSHIP, COMMITMENT, and COMPETENCY.

Click here, or contact us, to begin to learn…

  1.  What is a LEAN JOC Program
  2.  How measure success (From Owner and Design-builder perspectives)
  3.  How to integrate internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams
  4.  How to create an RFP for JOC software and support services (JOC Vendors)
  5.  How to create an RFP for JOC contractors
  6.  How to evaluate JOC vendors
  7.  How to evaluate JOC contractors
  8.  When to set up a JOC Program
  9.  How to evaluate if a project is suitable for JOC
  10.  The importance of locally researched cost data versus using factors or economic indexes
  11.  How to evaluate a JOC Unit Price Book (UPB)
  12.  How to line-time estimate
  13.  How to evaluate contractor proposals
  14.  How to create an independent government estimate (IGE) in JOC
  15.  How to compare an IGE to a Contractor estimate
  16.  How to “negotiate” with a Contractor
  17.  When to use a JOC Cooperative
  18.  JOC quantitative metrics / key performance indicators (KPIs)
  19.  JOC Lessons learned
  20.  ….

Primary Lesson for FMers and Real Property Owners

Primary Lesson for FMers and Real Property Owners

Primary Lesson for FMers and Real Property Owners…

The consistent delivery of quality repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build projects on time and on budget is quite simple.

Unfortunately achieving “simple” requires a lot of thinking and hard work, not to mention political will.

4BT.US

Why LEAN Construction Matters

A Relationship-based Approach to Sustainable Facilities Management

A Relationship-based Approach to Sustainable Facilities Management is needed to meet current and emerging economic and environmental requirements.

Traditional methods for planning, procuring, and delivery repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction are incapable of consistently delivery of quality outcomes on time and on time.

Internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams need to be integrated on an early and ongoing basis with a robust programmatic framework.  Existing tools and support services to mitigate waste/rework and enable consistent quality outcomes on time and on budget are readily available.

Contractual collaboration commitment from all parties

Realistic, valid cost and technical requirement planning

Initial and ongoing training

Quantitative metrics

Empowerment of those doing the work

 

How can you integrate internal and external teams?

The solution is to improve technical and cost transparency early in the planning phase and maintain communication and collaboration throughout the project lifecycle.

While there is a lot of talk about centralizing information, data must be current and actionable, as well as in a common format that everyone can easily understand.  Be honest, is this the case in all your projects?

While the below list looks impossible to achieve, it’s really not.  Reach out to see how…

  • Proven Cost Control Solution
  • Activity Dashboard
  • Asset/Component Management
  • Automated Estimate Comparison
  • Bid Management
  • BIM Model Integration, Information Viewing/Access
  • Building/Site/Location Management
  • Budget and Estimate versus Actual and Committed Budget Tracking
  • Change Order Management
  • Collaboration Tools
  • Contract Management
  • Contractor Management
  • Contractor Proposal/Bid Management
  • Credentials/License Management
  • Data Export & Reporting – CSV, PDF, Full Data Dumps, Summary and Detailed Proposal Reports
  • Document Management – Full check-in/check-out and changes management
  • Estimating – Rapidly Search, Access, Select Unit Price Book Line Items, Build Estimates, Copy/Paste Estimates
  • Forms Integration and Approval Workflow Tracking
  • Internal Messaging and System Notifications
  • Issues Management
  • Subcontractor Management, including MBE/WBE Tracking and Management
  • Mobile Access
  • Notes @ Line-Item Level and Higher Levels
  • On-line Collaborative Proposal Review
  • Program Management
  • Project Management
  • Project Tracking
  • Proposals/Quotes/Estimates
  • Quantitative Performance Metrics/Reporting & Statistics
  • Location Management
  • Stage and Status Tracking – Dates, Durations, # of Proposal Iterations, etc.
  • Task Management
  • Team Management
  • Unit Price Book Management
  • Workflows and Workflow Management, include Approvals and Forms
  • Work Order Management

Best Value / LEAN Construction and LEAN Production

Best Value / LEAN Construction and LEAN Production are NOT the Same

Best Value / LEAN Construction and LEAN Production are not the same.

Best value / Lean construction is an integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery process that uses robust workflows, a common data environment, and collaborative teams to increase productivity, profits, and innovation in the industry.  The terms “Best Value” and “LEAN” can be used interchangeably.

Lean production is a philosophy targeting and improving flow and reducing waste.

As there are multiple forms and deployments of each, differentiation between and among the two can be difficult.

The goal and focus of best value / lean construction is to achieve and support the best possible combination of price, technical outcomes, and teams for a specific project or program.

Relationship management, and early and ongoing information sharing among all participants, as well as a well define common data environment (CDE) are a few of several foundational elements.

Robust tools and support services exist to enable best value / LEAN construction and the mitigation of antagonistic relationships and fragmentation so common among traditional methods.

Learn more?

he ONLY Construction Integrated Project Delivery Solution

OpenBUILD(TM) The ONLY Construction Integrated Project Delivery Solution with Locally Researched Cost Visibility

OpenBUILD(TM) is The ONLY Construction Integrated Project Delivery Solution with Locally Researched Cost Visibility with Program Management, Contract Management, Proposal/Bid/Estimate Management, Workorder Management  , Project Management, Document Management, Team Management, Issues/Task Management, Workflow Management, and BIM integration.

 

You might think that with industries’ worst record of accomplishment, that the AECOO and Facilites Management Sector, would be focused upon cost management.   The opposite is true. 

What's wrong with LEAN Construction
Poor Awareness and Education is the Norm

You might think that with industries’ worst track record (77% of construction projects late, 52%+ of projects requiring change orders/rework, 98% of construction projects over budget more than 30%) that the AECOO and Facilites Management Sector, spanning real property owners, design-builders, and oversight groups, would be focused upon cost management.   The opposite is true.  Ninety-nine percent of all these players do not rely upon objective locally researched detailed line-item cost databases.

Sustainable facilities repair, renovation, maintenance, of new construction is virtually impossible with both locally researched, current, and actionable construction in combination with a robust, integrated framework integrating internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery.

BIM, 5S, Takt time, Poka-Yoke, Kaizen, blackbelt, …  All have their role as tools, learnings, and or philosophies, but NONE are solutions.

Will things change?  Probably not.

All the tools and support systems are readily available…. as to political will, not so much.

Learn more?

Most common Facilities Management and AECO (Architecture, Engineering, Construction, and Operation) failure points:

  1. No real property owner leadership, commitment, and/or competency
  2. Lack of integrated, collaborative planning, procurement, and project delivery teams
  3. Lack of transparency and accountability in the public sector
  4. Zero verifiable cost information
  5. Home grown project management and cost management systems, or outdated legacy systems
  6. Limited visibility into portfolio conditions, requirements, or priorities

    Common FCA Failure Points
    Common FCA Failure Points
  7. Poor decision-making processes
  8. Command and control management versus collaborative empowerment and enabling decision-making by those doing the work
EDERAL BUILDING PERFORMANCE STANDARD

Too little, too late?  FEDERAL BUILDING PERFORMANCE STANDARD December 2022

Too little, too late?  FEDERAL BUILDING PERFORMANCE STANDARD December 2022

 

Today the Biden-Harris Administration announced the first-ever Federal Building Performance Standard, setting an ambitious goal to cut energy use and electrify equipment and appliances in 30 percent of the building space owned by the Federal government by 2030. Today’s actions are the latest step forward in pursuit of President Biden’s goal of achieving net-zero emissions in all Federal buildings by 2045.

Key Actions

+ Build for net-zero emissions.
+ Implement the Federal Building Performance Standards to drive emission reductions in existing buildings.
+ Increase energy and water efficiency.
+ Reduce waste, minimize use of toxic and hazardous chemicals, and drive markets for recycled products.
+ Achieve higher levels of sustainability in owned and leased buildings.
+ Leverage private sector investment.
+ Address equity.
+ Drive sustainable and equitable siting.
+ Establish the Net-Zero Emissions Buildings Federal Leaders Working Group to drive strategy and implementation.

Read more…

Why LEAN Construction Matters

PROVEN FORMULA FOR EFFICIENT FACILITIES Repair, Renovation, Maintenance, and New Construction

PROVEN FORMULA FOR EFFICIENT FACILITIES Repair, Renovation, Maintenance, and New Construction

Robust Process Integration + Common Shared Cost/Technical Information + Supporting Tech = Measurably Improved Cost Management

Integrating People, Process, Information, and Technology with proven industry best practices and organization-specific requirements into a proven cost management solution.  Create estimates, deploy project workflows and controls, inclusive of timelines, approval stages, appropriate information access, and more.

Put an end to poor traditional planning, cost estimating, procurement, and project delivery practices!

Manage costs of all types: Effort (labor, crews, timelines), quantities, materials, and equipment. Create verifiable cost requirements and performance baselines based upon current, locally researched, granular line-time cost data.

  1. 84% gain in higher-quality construction

  2. 41%-74% reduction in project schedules

  3. 43%-77% increase in productivity

  4. An 80% improvement in customer satisfaction

Exclusively from 4BT! (Four BT, LLC) – www.4bt.us

1) Specify and fully communicate tasks, processes, and costs among internal and external teams.

2) Empower those on-site who are doing the work.

3) Assure full visibility at all levels…. Program, Project, Estimate, Document, Work Order, Owner, Contractor Subcontractor

4) Manage all changes and approvals before moving to the next phase/stage

5) Measure performance – KPIs

6) Continuously Improve

7) Enable real-time information availability and sharing with collaborative cloud technology

 

Lower costs, smaller bureaucracies, and prescient leaders have helped them respond nimbly to both infrastructural and cultural changes.

Why LEAN Construction Matters

Physical Asset Management Optimization: People, Processes, Information, and Technology

Physical asset management optimization requires the integration of People, Processes, Information, and Technology.

People come first.  Integrating internal and external Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery Team under supportive and committed leadership is step one.  Any failure in this area severely restricts any subsequent efforts or investments made to achieve significant improvements in efficiency.

Robust Processes. Leverage of existing and emerging robust processes such as lifecycle asset total cost of ownership management, integrated project delivery, and LEAN job order contracting.  A robust process, implemented as an integrated solution, and continuously monitored and improved upon is the goal of every real property owner, facilities management professional, and their partnered design-builders.

Information.  Actionable, current information that supports decision-making.  Information must be clearly presented using common terms and definitions.  Tasks presented in terms of a standardized and locally researched granular unit price book, organized by CSI Masterformat.

Technology. Technology supporting a shared, sole source of truth with full version control.

 

  • Overcome poor data quality
  • Establish trust in your information
  • Set quantitative performance targets and manage workflows and initiatives
  • Engage everyone in a culture of continuous improvement 

 

 

 

 

 

Objective and Defensible Facility Conditions Assessment

Objective and Defensible Facility Conditions Assessment – Critical, but rarely practiced

An objective and defensible facilities conditions assessment is critical to efficient management of any facilities portfolio.  Unfortunately, the data obtained in most assessments collected or represented in a manner to enable confidence in associated costs for deferred maintenance requirement, or ot allow for integration into efficient, robust, and integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery activities.

The below graphic represents common failure points associated with traditional FCA’s/

Objective and Defensible Facility Conditions Assessment

Learn more?

Why Job Order Contracting was developed

Why Job Order Contracting was developed

Why Job Order Contracting was developed.

Job Order Contracting (JOC), an alternative to the sealed bid method of procuring facility construction and repair services, was developed by the Federal Government in the 1980s to reduce the processing time and administrative effort required for smaller construction jobs (Source).

That said, JOC has evolved significantly since its early beginnings and many users and vendors have not kept pace.  As a result, there are now many ways JOC contracts are procured and administered.

While JOC was developed to speed procurement, it should never be solely for that purpose, especially to the detriment of robust procurement oversight.

When properly implemented and managed, JOC Programs can now 1.) Reduce overall project costs, 2.) Improve quality, 3.) Assure cost visibility, 4.) Enable cost management, 5.) Shorten overall project delivery times, and 6.) Improve overall satisfaction levels of all participants and stakeholders.

Due to the need for negotiations on individual projects and work orders and the lack of a defined scope of work at the beginning of the contract, a robust, collaborative partnering process must be established and maintained for internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams.

Early and ongoing communications are critical to the JOC process to focus parties on a successful, mutually beneficial outcome.  A key element in the communications process is a locally researched detailed line-item unit price book.  The use of national average price books, area cost factors, city cost indexes, or economic indexes, or assemblies, do not provide sufficient technical or cost information to drive best value outcomes.

Significant research has been conducted on the effectiveness of partnering and locally researched granular cost data to enhance the value and success of JOC Programs from both owner and contractor perspectives.  These studies have reviewed construction performance, administrative support, the owner-contractor relationship, and the participants’ satisfaction with the contract.

Learn more about best value JOC solutions and practices…

www.4bt.us

masterformat construction cost estimating

better incorporate cost data into capital facility planning

How to better incorporate cost data into capital facility planning

Improving capital facility planning requires the integration of robust, local market cost information.

Far too often, real property portfolio owners rely upon tools that use national average cost data and location factors, as well as other forms of area cost factoring and economic indexes to budget repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build projects.

 

improve facilities capital planning

Traditional Facilities Construction Cost Management Failure

Traditional Facilities Construction Cost Management Failure – Repair, Reno, Maintenance, and New Builds

Traditional construction cost management remains problematic for most real property owners.

construction cost management
Traditional Construction Cost Management Failure

 

I just read a “study” on the “Current State of Cost Management Capabilities” that clearly reveals the lack of awareness, education, and capability relative to this critically important practice area.

The recently published survey of 243 owners (122 public, 121 private), 240 general contractors and 241 specialty trade
contractors, noted the following….

Less than 24% of respondents said that their organization was capable of the following.

1. I can accurately assess risk related to any changes, billing, or performance issues.
2. I can dynamically track every dollar in my budget and forecast critical costs with real time data from the field, while staying in sync with the accounting system.
3. I can easily uncover cost details and create comprehensive financial reports from a single source of truth.
4. I can leverage data from previous projects to benchmark cost performance and improve future cost estimates.
5. I can manage collaborative workflows and centralize communication across our office, field, clients, contractors and/or vendors to reduce project/payment delays.
6. I know where we are making or losing money on a project or across my portfolio, at any given moment.
7. My company’s cost management capabilities create a competitive advantage for us.
8. My company’s change management process is streamlined from start to finish.

Is there a single Public Sector organization that can claim verifiable construction cost management capability?

Facilities and other physical infrastructure construction, repair, renovation, or maintenance cost management is impossible without the following basics.

  1. Integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery internal and external teams, working with a collaborative framework with defined workflows and centralized communication.
  2. A locally researched, granular line-item construction cost database that is current.
  3. Mandatory initial and ongoing training for ALL participants and stakeholders
  4. Quantitative performance metrics
  5. Regular third-party audits

 

 

Solutions are readily available…. Learn more?

Why LEAN Construction Matters

What’s WRONG with LEAN Construction?

The below diagram clearly shows what’s wrong with LEAN construction.

What's wrong with LEAN Construction

(Source: 2014, Wandahl, S. Lean Construction with or without Lean – Challenges of Implementing Lean Construction

Learn more?

Real Property Owner's Guide

A Real Property Owner’s Guide to Improving Construction Productivity

A Real Property Owner’s Guide to Improving Construction Productivity

Measurable improvement in facilities repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build efficiency involves strengthening the focus on implementation.  A critical aspect involves balancing standardization of activities and information with empowering those doing the work on site.

Proven Solutions

All robust solutions require implementing a “true North”.  This involves creating a guideline that takes an organization through a required change management process and established a foundation of valid, actionable information.

The guideline comes in the form of an Operations Manual/Execution Guide as a component of a long-term multiparty agreement between owners and design-builders.  From a required information standpoint, a locally researched detailed unit price book, organized by standards data architecture (i.e. CSI Masterformat) is mandatory to ensure cost and technical visibility and transparency.

Real Property Owner's Guide

 

All the tools and support services needed for any organization to consistently deliver quality projects on time and on budget are readily available.  The only proven processes to date are integrated project delivery (IPD) and LEAN job order contracting (JOC).  Both, however, are leveraged to their full capabilities due to poor domain formal and professional education.

 

 

 

–

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.