construction cost data

COST DATA INTELLIGENCE

Contact Us!
Improving JOC Programs

STRATEGIC PROCUREMENT / PROJECT DELIVERY

Objective, current, local market cost data

Contact Us!

REDUCE WASTE

Contact Us!
Construction Cost Books

ACCOUNTABILITY

Contact Us!
lifecycle FM

PROCESS MATTERS

Contact Us!
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…

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

#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)

2022 Facilities Maintenance Cost Data 1

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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…

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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

 

 

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

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.

Repair Renovation and Maintenance Practices, 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?

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Next Gen Cost Data

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.

 

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

  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?

Sample JOC Workflow2019

 

 

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…

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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.

Next Gen Cost Data

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

#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 estimating

 

reliable construction cost data

 

The Reality of Construction Cost Management Construction Cost Data Research 2 Construction Cost Data Methodology 1 Construction Cost Research Methodology The Reality of Construction Cost Management Construction Cost Reality

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 dataOperational Science and FMconsidering a job order contract

4BT LEAN Construction Delivery SolutionVisual Construction Managment LEAN

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

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

 

 

 

 

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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.

Excerpt From a Valid Construction Cost Estimate

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.

Excerpt From a Valid Construction Cost Estimate

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.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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.

LEAN Job Order Contracting Solution 2022

 

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/

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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 TruthPM sample Data

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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

 

 

 

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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.

Best Value Facilities Repair and Renovation Process

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

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

 

 

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

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.

Factors Impacting Construction Delivery

Manageable Factors Impacting Construction Delivery

Please add some content in your page.

STRATEGIC COOPERATION, & Construction Delivery

Key STRATEGIC COOPERATION Requirements for Efficient Facilities Management

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

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

Strategic CollaborationOPer

 

Operational Tools and Services

Job order contracting
 
The physics of efficient construction delivery

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

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

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

#1 Owner Leadership and Commitment

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

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

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

Owner Leadership and Commitment

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

Consistent Application of a Programmatic Framework for ALL “projects”

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

Focus upon mutually beneficial outcomes for all participants and stakeholders

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

 

Common data environment (CDE)

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

Excerpt From a Valid Construction Cost Estimate 1
Common Data Environment
The Physics of Efficient Construction Delivery
The Physics of Efficient Construction Delivery

 

The Physics of Efficient Construction Delivery

 

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us

knowledge-based Job Order Contracting

KNOWLEDGE-BASED Job Order Contracting FRAMEWORK

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

 

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

knowledge-based Job Order Contracting

www.4bt.us

job order contracting

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Unit Price Construction Cost Estimating

Unit Price Construction Cost Estimating

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

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

2022 Contstructon Cost Data Visibility 2

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

 

An actionable unit price cost database includes granular repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction tasks for the local market and includes labor, material, equipment, crew, and productivity information, per an associated unit of measure.  To mitigate variables, the unit price cost database should only reflect the direct costs of labor, material, and equipment, fringes, and insurance. for the local market.  Profit and overheads should be considered separately. Cost must be updated regularly.  At a minimum, the cost database should be updated annually, however, quarterly, and/or as needed is even better!  Locally researched construction cost data 2022 1

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

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

Unit Price Construction Cost Estimating

 

Sample cost data set

Unit Price Construction Cost Estimating

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

Unit Price Construction Cost Estimating

Contact Us
First
Last

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

 

 

preventive maintenance costs, preventive maintenance cost database

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

LEAN Job Order Contracting

preventive maintenance cost database

Contact Us
First
Last

 

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

Maximizing JOC Program Performance

Maximizing JOC Program Performance

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

Public Sector LEAN FM

Improving Construction Project Outcomes, Construction Project Outcomes

Improving Construction Project Outcomes

Improving Construction Project Delivery Outcomes

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

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

Project Delivery Success and Program Dependency

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

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

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

Time, Cost, and Risk Management

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

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

Tools and Services

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

Dod Real Property Management

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

Excerpt From a Valid Construction Cost Estimate

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

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

Learn more…

Contact Us
First
Last

 

Understanding the Value of JOB ORDER CONTRACTING

Understanding the Value of JOB ORDER CONTRACTING – JOC

Bridging the JOC Education/Training Gap

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

2022 LEAN JOB ORDER CONTRACTING for States Governments 1

Operational Science and FM

 

What you can do

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

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

Sample JOC Proposal

Excerpt From a Valid Construction Cost Estimate 1

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

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

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

Contact Us

Contact Us

First
Last

 

Construction Labor Costs and Categories

Construction Labor Costs and Categories – 2021 Review

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

 

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

Public Sector Efficient Physical Asset Management

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

 

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

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

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

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

Job Order Contracting Best Management Practices – Contractor Evaluation

Job Order Contracting Best Management Practices – Contractor Evaluation

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

 

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

Job order contractor evaluation

Learn more or get a price.

Why LEAN Construction Matters

U.S. Market Outlook – 2022 and Beyond

SUMMARY – Moderate Growth Anticipated for the next Decade

General Market

Q4 2021 – 6.9% annualized growth

2021 – 5.5% annual growth

Inflation – 6%-7%

Rising Interest Rates

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

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

Maintenance and Construction

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

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

The procurement model is broken.

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

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

Current procurement models are inefficient due to the following…

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

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

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

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

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

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

Construction Procurement
Elevating Procurement & Change Management

 

Robust, Readily Available Solutions

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

Procurement Process Change
Robust Process Drives Best Value

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

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

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

 

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

Contact to learn how to set up a pilot program!

 

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

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

Valid Construction Cost Estimate, Why LEAN Construction Matters

Valid Construction Cost Estimate Creation

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Valid Construction Cost Estimate

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

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

Valid Construction Cost Estimate

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

Learn more about….

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

2022 LEAN JOB ORDER CONTRACTING for States Governments

 

Job Order Contracting Best Management Practices

Job Order Contracting Best Management Practices

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

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

job order contracting best management practices

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

 

Learn more…

GREEN Facilities Management and Procurement Practices

GREEN Facilities Management and Procurement Practices

 

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

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

 

 

IPCC Climate Change

 

Green FM

Green Facilites Management

 

 

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

Learn more…

Locally Researched Detailed Construction Cost Database

Understanding the Value a Locally Researched Detailed Construction Cost Database

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

CREATION

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

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

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

Input prices:

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

Construction Cost Data
Construction Cost Data

VALUE

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

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

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

Construction Cost Changes
Construction Cost Changes

Learn more?

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

Carbon Modeling Tool – Facilities Lifecycle

Carbon modeling tool for the facilities capital delivery process.

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

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

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

Capital Carbon

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

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

·        Materials – delivery to site

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

·        Plant – delivery of plant from supplier to site

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

·        Site establishment – fuel/energy use during construction

·        Plant use – fuel use during construction

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

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

Lifecyle Carbon

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

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

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

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

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

·        Materials Waste –  transportation off-site of demolished materials

·        People – travel to/from site

·        Plant – transportation to/from site and fuel use

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

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

carbon tool

 

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

 

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

Construction Area Cost Factors

Area Cost Factors and Construction Cost Estimating

Should Areas Cost Factors be used for Construction Cost Estimating?

Time to ReTHINK, ReSHAPE, ReBUILD
 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References

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

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

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

 

f

 

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

Request full report….

 

 

 

–

BENEFIT from Job Order Contracting

How to BENEFIT from Job Order Contracting

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

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

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

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

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

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

BENEFIT from Job Order Contracting
BENEFIT from Job Order Contracting

 

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

 

 

A high performing, best value JOC Program should….

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

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

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

 

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

BEST VALUE Job Order Contracting Program

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

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

best value job order contract

PROCESS & DATA MINING

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

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

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

www.4bt.us

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

Underground utilities cost management

Underground Utilities- Inefficiencies and Damage – $100B Annually

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

Procurement

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

Why LEAN Construction Matters

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

LOCALLY RESEARCHED LINE-ITEM COST DATA IS CRITICAL TO PRODUCTIVITY

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

Dod Real Property Management

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

Learn more… www.4bt.us

Public Sector Construction Productivity, Unlock Public Sector Construction Productivity

Unlock Public Sector Construction Productivity – A White Paper

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

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

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

Here’s opportunity to do something different.

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

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

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

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

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

Steps to consistent LEAN construction delivery success:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Contact us to discuss…

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

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

 

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

 

Typical JOC Process

Typical JOC Process

The Typical JOC Process:

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

 

Scoping

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

 

Proposal Preparation

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

Typical JOC Process

 

Contact for more… www.4bt.us

Why LEAN Construction Matters

Job Order Contracting Services via a Cooperative

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

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

job order contracting services
Job Order Contracting COOPERATIVE

 

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

Construction Cost Estimate Checklist, Construction Cost Estimates, How to Review Construction Cost Estimates

How to Review Construction Cost Estimates

Savvy owners and design builders know how review construction cost estimates.   The process is collaborative and involves cost estimators, facilities management, and procurement professionals.

Construction cost estimate review checklist:

[ ] The estimate assumptions and basis are appropriate.

[ ] The scope of work is sufficiently detailed to reflect the physical and functional requirements of the owner/client.

[ ] The estimate fully reflects the detailed scope of work (SOW) for the project on a line item basis using locally researched line item labor, material, and equipment costs and anticipated productivity.

[ ] Line items used and quantities are correct.

[ ] Unit rates are correct, and applied markups are appropriate, compliant with applicable regulations, and reasonable.

Learn more…. Set up an 15-minute introductory discussion…

 

A professional review of Construction Cost Estimates assures actionable information, as well as, technical and cost visibility.

construction cost estimate accuracy

Creating a JOC Coefficient

Creating a JOC Coefficient?

Creating a JOC coefficient is an important part of any Job Order Contract.  Contractors must evaluate multiple factors in addition to the associated use of their own capabilities and resources.

Specific instructions as to what may be included in a JOC coefficient should also be listed in detail in the associated Request of Proposals (RFP) for Job Order Contracting construction services.

Below is an example of such items.

Items included in a JOC coefficient (also known as a “Bid Factor”).

1. Labor (Both during Normal Work Hours and Outside of Normal Work Hours)
2. Materials
3. Equipment
4. Subcontractor costs
5. Subcontractor mark-ups
6. General / Prime Contractor Overhead
7. General / Prime Contractor Profit and risk
8. Payment Bond premium(s) (please note that Payment Bonds are required for task order
projects valued over $35K;
9. Social security contributions
10. General insurances
11. Workmen’s compensations insurance
12. State unemployment insurance
13. Federal unemployment insurance
14. Mobilization and demobilization costs
15. Site cleanup
16. Supervision
17. Quality control
18. Transportation of contractor’s personnel to, from, and within the job site
19. Shipping of all materials to the jobsite
20. Lodging and per-diem
21. Adjustment factors to account for small jobs
22. Incidental tools and equipment
23. Submittals
24. Job Order preparation costs
25. All contingencies
26. General Requirements (Division 01 – CSM Masterformat)
27. All requirements of the Contract
(Note: Quality, locally researched unit price books will already include social security contributions, general insurances, workmen’s compensations insurance, state unemployment insurance, and federal unemployment insurance.

Creating a JOC coefficient

 

Four BT, LLC – Robust, integrated JOC Solutions – www.4bt.us

Creating a JOC coefficient

 

 

 

Job Order Contracting is a LEAN Process

Job Order Contracting is a LEAN Process

Job Order Contracting is a LEAN process and should never be used to simply speed procurement or bypass critical assurances against improper practices.

Many public sector organizations don’t have a complete view of their JOC processes.  FIVE issues associated with inefficient and ineffective JOC PROCESSES.

  1. Higher Costs
  2. Less Organizational Efficiency
  3. Productivity Loss 
  4. Lack of Compliance
  5. Risk of Fraud

Unfortunately, many organizations within the State, County, and Municiple sectors have used job order contracting (JOC) improperly.  Government procurement and facilities management teams and their design-builders have not been working directly together in a collaborative, full transparent manner, to achieve mutually beneficial best value outcomes.   Instead, many organizations have elected to hire full time “JOC consultants” and pay excessive JOC administration fees in attempt to simply speed procurement and virtually outsource their facilities repair, renovation, maintenance, and construction requirements.

Outsourcing has no role in facilities management if built structures are critical to an organization’s mission.  Owners must provide leadership and support and be directly involved with their service providers.

 

Below are figures from a JOC Audit by a City Comptroller. It clearly shows issues that can arise from not implementing JOC properly.

how not to run a joc program
How NOT to run a JOC Program?
Job Order Contracting is a LEAN Process
Too Many JOC Consultants

 

Learn more about how to implement LEAN JOC and assure best management practices….

 

Job Order Contracting is a LEAN Process
Job Order Contracting is a LEAN Process

 

With owner leadership and support it is not hard to find and fix process issues.  Most savvy State, County, and Local Governments are currently revaluating their JOC Programs.

Why LEAN Construction Matters

Trends in Job Order Contract Process Improvement and Cost Management

Current trends in Job Order Contracting Process Improvement are enabling improved cost management.

 

  1. Collaborative planning, procurement, and project delivery teams
  2. Improve owner leadership and support
  3. Less dependence upon third party consultants
  4. No excessive fees for JOC products and services based upon a percentage of construction volume
  5. Mutually beneficial outcomes for owners and design-builders

Facilities Management Training Needed

via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us – Locally researched detailed line item construction cost data and integrated LEAN construction delivery solutions.

Why LEAN Construction Matters

How NOT to run a JOC Program

Sometimes it can be beneficial to look at how not to run JOC Program!

how not to run a joc program
How NOT to run a JOC Program – 1

How not to run a JOC Program - 2

(Graphics Source:  JOC Audit, City of Long Beach, City Auditor)

via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us – Locally researched detailed construction cost data and LEAN JOC Program solutions.

Facilities Sustainment

Facilities Sustainment – Public Sector

Most public sector agencies do not have an efficient facilities sustainment capability.

All the tools and support services are readily available to enable…

• Clearer roles and responsibilities for all participants and stakeholders

• Financial visibility and transparency

• Reduced administrative burden and cost

• Incentivizing all participants to use appropriately competent people

• Integrate planning, procurement, and project delivery to reduce costs, change orders, and project timelines

• Leverage actionable information to make better informed decisions.

 

Facilities Sustainment Facilities SustainmentFacilities Sustainment

Facilities Sustainment

 

Learn more?

Contact Us
First
Last

 

Public Sector Job Order Contracting

Public Sector Job Order Contracting – Increased levels of competence

Public sector Job Order Contracting is poised to reach a significantly higher level of performance via increased levels of competence combined with an integral set of innovative LEAN tools and services.

Increased levels of competence are integral to implementing changes that will result in 30%-40% cost savings supported by greater cost visibility and transparency and improved collaboration with design-builders.

Robust outcome-based processes and solution sets are now capable of driving high quality work, faster, at a lower cost, and with lower administrative burden.  The benefits, however, can only be achieved with competent actors with leadership skills capable of program level oversight.   Owners must assure that appropriate knowledge and experience is leveraged throughout all phases of repair, renovation, maintenance, and new builds.

 

Public Sector Job Order Contracting Public Sector Job Order Contracting Public Sector Job Order Contracting  Public Sector Job Order Contracting Public Sector Job Order Contracting

Contact to learn more…

Contact Us
First
Last

 

safety

Traditional construction procurement methods can endanger building safety

Traditional construction procurement methods can endanger building safety, while an integrated, less adversarial approach can consistently improve safety and quality, while significantly reducing cost and delivery time.

construction procurement methods

 

“The way in which procurement is often managed can reduce the likelihood that a building will be safe […] Issues at this stage, for example inadequate specification, focus on low cost or adversarial contracting, can make it difficult (and most likely, more expensive) to produce a safe building.”

-2017, Building a Safer Future, Independent Review of Building, Regulations and Fire Safety:
Interim Report

 

Traditional procurement methods are little more than a race to the bottom whereby the objectives of low price and fast delivery are the primary drivers.   Independent reviews have clearly stated that “The way in which procurement is often managed can reduce the likelihood that a building will be safe… Issues at this stage, for example inadequate specification, focus on low cost or adversarial contracting, can make it difficult (and most likely, more expensive) to produce a safe building.”

The public sector is wary of collaborative procurement, planning, and project delivery, as well as poorly informed on the topic.  The realization of the fact the owners, design-builders, and all other participants must share in risk and reward has been particularly difficult for public sector procurement professionals.

Robust, proven methods such as LEAN Job Order Contracting and Integrated Project Delivery can consistently deliver quality projects on time and on budget when appropriately implemented and management.  The integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery methods avoid these the pitfalls of traditional procurement by clearly defining roles, responsibilities, tools, and deliverables via written operations manuals/execution guides and associated long term contracts, early planning, and accurate information, inclusive of locally researched detailed line-item construction task data and costs, to reduce the potential for failures, errors, misunderstandings, and disputes.

construction procurement methods

Case studies have clearly demonstrated how collaborative procurement can lead to safer, better- quality outcomes, reducing risks and improving value on public sector and private sector construction projects.

construction procurement methods

The role of public sector procurement professionals must include working together with in-house facilities management and design-builder teams throughout the planning, procurement, and project delivery phases.

While technology should not be a driver, embedding these new LEAN methods into web technology can significantly reduce deployment costs, improve consistency, and aid in management, continuous improvement, and compliance.

All the tools and services are readily available to leverage, as soon as public sector leadership and procurement professionals are ready to mitigate the safety issues associated with traditional procurement methods, not to mention rampant economic and environmental waste.

Feel free to contact me for more information.

Remember…Traditional construction procurement methods can endanger building safety!

 

Fundamental change is now required across the public sector to put effective systems in place that ensure buildings and other forms of physical infrastructure are built and maintained so that they are safe for use initially and for decades after the original construction. The mindset
of doing things as cheaply as possible and passing responsibility for problems and shortcomings to the next people in the job must end.

We all must focus on doing the right things because it is our responsibility to be stewards of the structures and the environment.

 

• regulation • guidance • roles and responsibilities • competence; • process • compliance • quality 

 

  1. Are the means for assessing and ensuring appropriate levels of competence clear and adequate?
  2. Is clarity of roles and responsibilities sufficient?
  3. Are there adequate means of compliance assurance, and redress for non-compliance?

 

Understanding LEAN Job Order Contracting

Understanding LEAN Job Order Contracting

Why is understanding LEAN Job Order Contracting important to every public sector real property owner?

Effective management of owner/supplier relationships is the key to achieving and maintaining best value repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build outcomes.  LEAN Job Ordering is the only proven method of achievement.

Public sector procurement professionals need to demonstrate transparency in decision-making and equal treatment of potential suppliers if there is to be any improvement in built environment repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build outcomes.

The simple fact is that Job Order Contracting is poorly understood, and traditional deployments have been far from uniform and have not delivered anticipated outcomes.   In fact, many JOC Programs have led to less motivation on the part of design-builders to truly work toward mutually beneficial outcomes and “gaming the system” is not unheard of.

Learn more…

 

Why LEAN Construction Matters

DoD Real Property Management Failures

The lack of continuous competent leadership is the root cause of environmental and economic woes impacting the DoD’s real property portfolio and its mission.

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/2022/02/01/nearly-a-third-of-defense-department-structures-have-exceeded-their-lifespan/

The DoD has NEVER implemented a robust, system-wide process to monitor and manage planning, procurement, and project delivery for repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction.  It short, there is a basic lack of management as well as very little financial visibility and transparency.

The DOD has at least a $137 billion deferred maintenance backlog.   The DOD fails to have accurate maintenance cost estimates and cannot efficiently allocate available funding to conduct adequate maintenance.   The DOD’s failure to implement a sustainment management system remains an unacceptable reality.

 

Tools and support services are readily available to support efficient facilities planning, procurement, and project delivery to enable asset life-cycle total cost of ownership management.  The missing link is the lack of leadership commitment to do so.

Dod Real Property Management
DoD Real Property Management Lacks Purpose and Leadership

 

Public Sector LEAN Job Order Contracting

Public Sector LEAN Job Order Contracting

Public Sector LEAN Job Order Contracting provides significant benefits over both traditional project delivery methods and commodity JOC solutions.

 

Public Sector LEAN Job Order Contracting

 

The only Knowledge-based JOC Program Information Management System

Four BT, LLC (4BT) is redefining how public sector organizations plan, procure, and execute facilities repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction projects.

Discover how 4BT’s robust LEAN programmatic process, embedded in easy-to-use cloud solutions empower organizations to consistently complete quality projects on-time and on-budget, with full financial visibility and compliance.

4BT’s OpenJOC(TM) 4BT-PEP solution is a game changer and proven way to mitigate economic and environmental waste, while also reducing administrative burden and cost.

Public sector organizations that have migrated to LEAN Job Order Contracting have reduced JOC administration costs by 75% and increased productivity 3x!

Contact us to learn more about why 4BT’s clients and partners have successfully migrated to LEAN Job Order Contracting.

 

Why LEAN Construction Matters

Considering a Job Order Contract?

Here are a few items for review when organizations are considering a job order contract or hoping to improve one.

 

1. Assure JOC program processes and structure mutually benefit your organization and awarded JOC contractors and can be implemented without the need for paid on-site “JOC consultant”.

2. Prequalify potential JOC contractors. Prequalification should consider past performance working, experience, as well as being licensed and registered.

3. Contracts and individual Projects/Work Orders within JOC should have established dollar limits.

4. During the selection of JOC contractors through a RFQ (Request for Qualifications) process, establish an evaluation committee to evaluate qualifications based only on criteria specified in the RFQ and assign qualifications scores to each contractor.

5. Develop written policies and procedures to prevent conflicts of interest for evaluation committee members, as well as any JOC Program participants and stakeholders.

6. All prequalified contractors invited to bid should submit sealed bids based on one or more adjustment factors / coefficients to the unit prices listed in the approved JOC unit price book (UPB).

7. The approved JOC unit price book should be locally researched and organized using CSI Masterformat.  Factors should NOT be used for localization or annual updating of the unit price book (i.e. no use of economic cost factors).

8. Contract terms for prequalified contractors should not exceed 12 months, with the option of extending or renewing for two more 12-month periods, up to a maximum of five years.

8.  Require awarded JOC contractors to perform work themselves and allow subcontractors only on a preapproved/per project/work order basis.

9. Establish a process to prequalify all subcontractors, requiring them at a minimum to be licensed, insured, and have sufficient relevant experience. All subcontractors used by the primary contractor must be prequalified and approved.

10. Any JOC consulting firms hired should not be associated with approving construction projects/work orders if they can benefit from the activity, i.e. the consultant is being paid a percentage of total construction value.

11. Assure all the organizations JOC project managers work directly for the organization, and or are working solely in the interests of the ogranization.

12.  When JOC contractors bid on a JOC project, utilize a set of documents including a unit price catalog and pre-established unit prices, designated forms, and any other information necessary to describe the scope of work for the project/work order in detail.  Any architect, engineer or consultant retained by the organization to assist in these areas should not be eligible to participate in the bid, or as noted, in the approval process.

13. Obtain an independent estimate for each JOC project, of for each project over an established dollar value and compare that to the contractor’s to ensure proposed prices are not unreasonable or undesirable.   At the very least assure every project/work order is reviewed by an independent party for JOC Program compliance.

14. Before initiating a project through the JOC program, determine if it will result in savings over traditional/other procurement methods.

15. Non-catalog items should not exceed 10% of the total project cost estimate. Require the contractor to provide three written quotes for all non-catalog items.

16. Certify that each project/work order is completed to the organization’s expectations and track all related key performance indicators. Develop a formalized reporting process (project status, timeline, budgets, issues, etc.) that will provide JOC program management and with a critical status of program operations. This includes proper reporting controls to monitor spending authority. This will create a level of oversight and accountability at all levels of the program.

considering a job order contract

considering a job order contract

 

Improving facilities management outcomes

Building Trust & Connection are CRITICAL to improving Facilities Management Outcomes

Improving facilities management outcomes requires building trust & connection.

Real property owners and FMers must become trusted partners with service providers (architects, engineers, and builders) and their building user customers.

This requires solid leadership both internally and externally with a focus upon long-term, relationship and mutually beneficial outcomes.

While many, if not most organizations may claim these as current practices, their current processes, and workflows prove otherwise.

Repair, renovation, maintenance and new build planning, procurement, and project delivery professionals and associated processes operate independently. This is further complicated by the fact that service partners also generally operate in silos, each with its own goals and information environments.

An integrated approach, with all parties focusing upon shared best value outcomes, is a sustainable and advantageous environment for everyone.

All the tools and support services are readily available to enable LEAN facilities/built environment life-cycle management. The real barriers are lack of leadership and enablement.

Anyone ready to change…. Let’s talk.

 

www.4bt.us

Improving facilities management outcomes

16 Things Every Contractor Should Know When Bidding a Job Order Contract, ISO 55000, ISO 55001

GAO Report on Need for Federal Sector FM Standards and ISO 55000

Key Elements of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 55000 Standards

(Source-GAO Summary of Key Elements of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 55000 Standards-GAO-19-57)

ISO 55000 Section Key elements

Establishing context of the organization

• Align the organization’s asset management system to its organizational objectives given the
organization’s purpose, needs, and requirements
• Ensure that the organization’s asset management strategy and criteria for asset management decision making address external and internal stakeholder requirements and expectations
• Determine the scope of the asset management system, considering, among other things, the organization’s objectives, asset portfolio, and structure
• Establish, implement, maintain, and continually improve an asset management system, including a strategic asset management plan that documents how the system supports organizational objectives

Promoting leadership

• Demonstrate leadership commitment to the asset management system
• Establish an asset management policy to guide the organization’s management strategy, set
asset management objectives and govern asset management activities including a commitment to satisfy applicable requirements and continually improve the asset management system
• Ensure that the responsibilities and authorities for asset management are assigned and communicated within the organization

Developing support

• Identify and determine strategies for addressing risks and opportunities related to the
organization’s assets and the asset management system’s ability to achieve the organizational objectives
• Develop asset management objectives while considering organizational objectives and requirements the organization faces from stakeholders, laws and regulations, and financial constraints
• Integrate achieving asset management objectives into other organizational-planning activities including finances, human resources, and other support functions
• Develop a strategic asset management plan that documents how the organization plans to achieve its asset management objectives including its method and criteria for decision making and prioritization, and the processes to be employed to management assets

Operations

• Determine and provide for the resources needed to establish, implement, maintain, and continually improve the asset management system
• Identify the skills necessary for the different personnel roles in the asset management system and ensure that the persons used in those roles have the appropriate competencies, education, training, and experience
• Implement strategies and establish requirements to ensure and evaluate that employees are aware of the asset management policy and the contribution of their work activities to the asset management system’s success
• Determine the need for internal and external communication relevant to the asset management system in order to enable effective decision making and stakeholder engagement
• Determine information and data requirements needed to support effective asset management including quality, attribute, collection, analysis, and evaluation requirements
• Document and control information required to ensure the effectiveness of the asset management system and compliance with applicable laws, regulations and policies governing the organization and its asset management system
• Plan, implement and control the processes needed to implement its asset management system
• Monitor performance of the asset management system including anticipating changes in performance and mitigating adverse effects
• Manage risks associated with outsourcing activities related to the asset management system including determining, evaluating and establishing governance over outsourced activities

Performance evaluation

• Determine what aspects of the asset management system need to be monitored and measured, determine how this monitoring and measurement will take place, and report on the performance of the asset management system
• Establish an internal audit program to conduct audits at planned intervals to determine compliance of the asset management system with the organization’s own requirements and the ISO standard
• Establish management reviews, at planned intervals, of the organization’s asset management system to ensure its continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness

Improvement

• Establish processes to identify non-conformities within the asset management system, identify root-causes, and implement remedies or corrective actions based on evaluation of these non- conformities
• Establish processes using results of internal audits and management reviews to proactively identify failures in the asset management system and evaluate the need for preventative action
• Continually improve the suitability, adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s assets, asset management strategy, and asset management system

 

Note: The ISO 55000 standards are made up of three documents collectively referred to as “ISO 55000.”  The table summarized the requirements against which organizations are measured when pursuing certification, which are contained within the document officially known as ISO 55001.

 

Via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us

Improving Public Sector Contruction Productivity

GAO Report on Federal Facilities Management

Federal REAL PROPERTY OWNERS Could Benefit from Additional Information on Leading Practices

The GAO has been issuing reports for decades concerning the next for ALL federal agencies to improve their facilities management practices.  While the same can be said for ALL State, County, and Local Government and other public sector organizations, the GAO’s focus is federal.

 

The GAO reviewed the asset management practices of six federal agencies:

  1. the U.S. Coast Guard (Coast Guard);
  2. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps);
  3. General Services Administration (GSA);
  4. National Park Service (Park Service);
  5. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA); and
  6. U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service).

While each of the six federal-agency frameworks GAO reviewed included some of the key characteristics associated with known best management practices (see below), none had all, and none had a robust, organization-wide deployment or management ability.

A

 

Federal departments and agencies should be required to have a comprehensive approach to asset management that incorporates strategic planning, capital planning, and operations, or maintaining leadership support, promoting a collaborative organizational culture, and evaluating and improving asset management practices.

Without a more comprehensive approach, as described above, federal agencies do not have the knowledge needed to maximize the
value of their limited resources.   The reality is that financial visibility is limited at best and transparency simply not there.

 

Contact me for the full report.

via www.4bt.us

Improving Public Sector Contruction Productivity

 

Uncategorized

LEAN Facilities Management Processes

 

“Some changes are so slow that you don’t notice, others are so fast that they don’t notice you”.

Ashleigh Brilliant

 

 
 

LEAN Construction Delivery and supporting cloud-based technology is gradually transforming how we do business on a day-to-day basis.

  1. Change your relationships
  2. Change how you create, share, & reuse information
  3. Change your outcomes

Those who seize the opportunity of change taking place will survive, evolve, thrive.

LEAN collaborative construction delivery, a common data environment, and supporting cloud-based technology profoundly change:

  1. the teams work, and relationships between clients, vendors, and stakeholders,
  2. how people and organizations are measured and compensated,
  3. the tools that are used,
  4. our work lives.

The role of LEAN Construction Delivery (through its key players: architects, engineers, surveyors, builders, managers, owners) is to support communication and cooperation, and drive optimal project outcomes on a consistent based using a robust, core programmatic process.

Technology should NEVER be the driver for decision-making.  Focus upon technology is a costly distraction.  Every organization must first assure a sound programmatic process that is alignment with its overall mission.

Take BIM for example, or more specifically the “M”.   For the most part the “M for Modeling” and 3D visualization has been the sole focus and driver as opposed to the   “M” for management.  The latter has been neglected.   Process should ALWAYS be the primary focus, and that’s exactly where LEAN comes into play.

Technology itself should be neutral but can, if effectively used to enable people accomplish their objectives more efficiently, support lower cost, consistent deployment of robust organizational processes, activities, and goals.

LEAN processes and principles t create a requisite environment of trust, transparency and accountability among all participants and stakeholders to achieve common. mutually beneficial goals.

The 4BT OpenJOCTM and OpenCostTM platforms support just that.

For example, open job order contacting, supported within the OpenJOC platform, can consistently delivery 90% or more of all repairs, renovation, maintenance, sustainability, and minor new construction projects on-time, on-budget, and to everyone’s satisfaction.  This is unheard of, and certainly not the case for the vast majority of AECOO community practitioners (architects, engineers, contractors, owners, operators/operations).

The 4BT-CE Building in Cloud system supports and embeds LEAN processes and shares and manages actionable information to drive better decision-making, compliance, and best value outcomes.

4BT-CE Building in the Cloud is accessible using a PC, or Tablet.

 

Why LEAN Construction Matters

How LEAN Job Order Contacting could improve facilities repair, renovation, and maintenance efficiencies

LEAN Job Order Contacting provides tangible benefits over both traditional JOC implementation and repair, renovation, and maintenance practices.

Public sector facilities management and procurement professionals face significant challenges as the pressure to “do more with less” continues to mount.

Solutions must be simple to use, compliant, and provide measurable gains in productivity.

Unfortunately, most current JOC Programs fail to embed LEAN processes and come with excessive costs for implementation and use.  In many cases, they even require an on-site “JOC consultant” for ongoing operations.

Contact us for an introductory discussion to learn more.  www.4bt.us

Improving Public Sector Contruction Productivity
LEAN Drive Consistent High Performance
Efficient Facility Systems Service Life Management, Facility Systems Service Life

Facility Systems Service Life

A thorough understanding of facilities system service life is critical to efficient life-cycle asset management of any real property portfolio.  Request the full list here.

acility Systems Service Life

Design and build costs represent only a fraction of the total cost of a building.  Efficient management of routine and preventive maintenance, as well as repairs, renovations, and adaptations is critical to any organization.  Life-safety, financial stability, environmental impact, and the ability to support the organizational mission are all dependent upon efficient life-cycle management of the built environment.

Facility Systems Service Life

Facility Systems Service Life

 

Harness the POWER of Locally Researched Granular Cost Data

Harness the POWER of Locally Researched Granular Cost Data

Owners, designers, engineers, builders, and facilities managers can harness the POWER of Locally Researched Granular Construction Cost Data

Harness the power of verifiable local construction cost data

“Data-driven” repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build planning, procurement, and project delivery drive huge benefits. In short, the results are consistent delivery of quality projects on time and on budget, when linked with robust LEAN processes.

Call for a quick 15-minute introductory discussion on how to leverage locally researched unit price cost data to make faster, smarter, and more efficient decisions.

Beware, you will have to reimagine your traditional relationships and workflows in a way that leverages data and programmatic LEAN methods to yield 3X productivity gains and significant cost savings.

Locally researched construction cost data 2021

Why LEAN Construction Matters, Public Sector Construction and FM Grade F

Public Sector Construction and FM Grade F for Cost Management – A Bizarre and Unaccountable Lack of Accurate Information

The reason Public Sector Construction and FM Grade F for Cost Management is simple… the lack of owner leadership and competency.  The net result has been a continuing decades old legacy of environmental and economic waste.  The public sector could easily save 30%-40% of its budgets in this area with the basic implementation of robust, integrate planning, procurement, and project delivery methods.

Multiple studies by industry and the GAO note that over 80% of the failures in public sector facilities repair, renovation, and new builds are due to owner lack of effective leadership.  Studies in the area date back to 1969, and yet there has been virtually no improvement.

More than half the time wasted during construction, the study teams have found, is attributable to poor management practices.

By common consensus and every available measure, the United States no longer gets its money’s worth in construction, the nation’s largest industry. Since the closing years of the Sixties, productivity in construction has been declining at a rate many industry leaders find appalling. 

SUMMARY REPORT OF THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRYCOST EFFECTIVENESS PROJECT, 1983

Until owner leadership mandates strategic cooperation and associated core LEAN processes, including the use of locally researched detailed unit price cost data, public sector facilities management will remain in the dark ages.

For example, in 1969 many became concerned about the escalating costs of construction.  By 1972, a Business Roundtable was created, and the Roundtable’s Construction Committee carries on the work which began in 1969.

The resulting Construction Industry Cost Effectiveness Project outlined the need for quality, efficiency, productivity, and cost-effectiveness in the industry, and steps for achievement.  While the depth, breadth, and intensity which produced this report was noteworthy, forward progress remains unattainable and so, the abysmal record of public sector FM continues to this day,

Efficient management of buildings and other forms of physical infrastructure is critical to the economy and the environment as a whole and therefore to everybody.  The build environment impacts costs, prices, international competitiveness, and our safety.  Yet these vital resources remain poorly managed and repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build dollars are not being used effectively.

To claim that inefficiency is not due to owners, but the result of all participants such as architects, engineers, and builders, fails to recognize a simple truth…. owners are responsible for their buildings/physical infrastructure and pay the bills.

      Shortcomings of Management 1The Heavy Costs Of Poor Safety Performance 2 The Perverse Effect Of Scheduled Overtime 3 Under trained Foremen And Demotivated Workers 4 Pinching Pennies On Training And Education 5 Cold Shoulder For Improved Technology 6 Modern Management Systems: A Little-Used Tool

SUMMARY REPORT OF THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRYCOST EFFECTIVENESS PROJECT, 1983

 

Improving Public Sector Contruction Productivity

 

Path to Improvement

  1. Measure productivity
  2. Adopt and implement robust LEAN, integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery processes
  3. Assure cost visibility and transparency – Require locally researched detailed unit price cost data
  4. Mandatory initial and ongoing training for ALL participants on LEAN processes
  5. Embed processes into collaborative technology

 

 

Learn more?  Request an introductory call.

Why LEAN Construction Matters

Facilities Preventive Maintenance

Facilities Preventive Maintenance requires the following information to minimize downtime and unscheduled maintenance and repairs.

cooling gbedd5083b 1920

  • Installed model and features of each system.
  • Manufacturer’s schedule for routine preventive maintenance, inspections, condition monitoring (predictive tests) and adjustments required to ensure proper and economical operation and to minimize repairs. Provide instructions stating when the systems should be retested. Provide manufacturer’s projection of preventive maintenance workhours on a daily, weekly, monthly, and annual basis including craft requirements by type of craft. For periodic calibrations, provide manufacturer’s specified frequency and procedures for each separate operation.  Define the anticipated time required to perform each of each test (workhours), test apparatus, number of personnel identified by responsibility, and a testing validation procedure permitting the record operation capability requirements within the schedule. Provide a remarks column for the testing validation procedure referencing operating limits of time, pressure, temperature, volume, voltage, current, acceleration, velocity, alignment, calibration, adjustments, cleaning, or special system notes. Delineate procedures for preventive maintenance, inspection, adjustment, lubrication and cleaning necessary to minimize repairs. Repair requirements must inform operators how to check out, troubleshoot, repair, and replace components of the system. Include electrical and mechanical schematics and diagrams and diagnostic techniques necessary to enable operation and troubleshooting of the system after acceptance.
  • Include potential environmental and indoor air quality impacts of recommended maintenance procedures and materials
  • Lubrication Data-Include the following preventive maintenance lubrication data, in addition to instructions for lubrication required, including a table showing recommended lubricants for specific temperature ranges and applications, charts with a schematic diagram of the equipment showing lubrication points, recommended types and grades of lubricants, and capacities, lubrication Schedule showing service interval frequency.
  • Cleaning Recommendations-Provide environmentally preferable cleaning recommendations. Provide the manufacturer’s recommended procedures and instructions for correcting problems and making repairs for the installed model and features of each system. Include potential environmental and indoor air quality impacts of recommended maintenance procedures and materials
  • Troubleshooting Guides and Diagnostic Techniques-Provide step-by-step procedures to promptly isolate the cause of typical malfunctions. Describe clearly why the checkout is performed and what conditions are to be sought. Identify tests or inspections and test equipment required to determine whether parts and equipment may be reused or require replacement
  • Wiring Diagrams and Control Diagrams-Provide point-to-point drawings of wiring and control circuits including factory-field interfaces. Provide a complete and accurate depiction of the actual job specific wiring and control work. On diagrams, number electrical and electronic wiring and pneumatic control tubing and the terminals for each type, identical to actual installation configuration and numbering.
  • Repair Procedures-Provide instructions and a list of tools required to repair or restore the product or equipment to proper condition or operating standards.
  • Removal and Replacement Instructions-Provide step-by-step procedures and a list of required tools and supplies for removal, replacement, disassembly, and assembly of components, assemblies, subassemblies, accessories, and attachments. Provide tolerances, dimensions, settings, and adjustments required. Use a combination of text and illustrations.
  • Spare Parts and Supply Lists-Provide lists of spare parts and supplies required for repair to ensure continued service or operation without unreasonable delays. Special consideration is required for facilities at remote locations. List spare parts and supplies that have a long lead-time to obtain.
  • Repair Work-Hours-Provide manufacturer’s projection of repair workhours including requirements by type of craft. Identify, and tabulate separately, repair that requires the equipment manufacturer to complete or to participate
  • Real Property Equipment-Provide a list of installed equipment -information usually listed on manufacturer’s name plate, include, as applicable, the following for each piece of equipment installed: description of item, location (by room number), model number, serial number, capacity, name and address of manufacturer, name and address of equipment supplier, condition, spare parts list, manufacturer’s catalog, and warranty.
  • Warranty Information-List and explain the various warranties and clearly identify the servicing and technical precautions prescribed by the manufacturers or contract documents to keep warranties in force. Include warranty information for primary components of the system. Provide copies of warranties.
  • Extended Warranty Information-List all warranties for products, equipment, components, and sub-components whose duration exceeds one year. For each warranty listed, indicate the applicable specification section, duration, start date, end date, and the point of contact for warranty fulfillment. Also, list or reference the specific operation and maintenance procedures that must be performed to keep the warranty valid. Provide copies of warranties.
  • Personnel Training Requirements-Provide information available from the manufacturers that is needed for use in training designated personnel to properly operate and maintain the equipment and systems.
  • Testing Equipment and Special Tool Information-Include information on test equipment required to perform specified tests and on special tools needed for the operation, maintenance, and repair of components. Provide final set points.
  • Testing and Performance Data-Include completed prefunctional checklists, functional performance test forms, and monitoring reports. Include recommended schedule for retesting and blank test forms. Provide final set points.
  • Field Test Reports and Manufacturer’s Field Reports-Provide a copy of Field Test Reports and Manufacturer’s Field Reports submittals documented with the required approval.
  • Contractor Information-Provide a list that includes the name, address, and telephone number of the General Contractor and each Subcontractor who installed the product or equipment, or system. For each item, also provide the name address and telephone number of the manufacturer’s representative and service organization that can provide replacements most convenient to the project site. Provide the name, address, and telephone number of the product, equipment, and system manufacturers
  • SCHEDULE OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE DATA PACKAGES- The type of O&M data needed for any product, system, or piece of equipment depends upon the complexity of that item. If not, specify the appropriate Data Package number in the technical section using the Data Package Number from the choices 1 through 5 as follows: below. Data Package 1 is typically used for architectural items requiring simple but specific maintenance and replacement; for example, acoustical ceiling, floor tile or carpeting system. Data Package 2 is used for an item that is less simple; for example, an item having a motor and some sequence of operation such as a refrigerated drinking fountain. Data Package 3 is used for a complex piece of equipment, having a specific troubleshooting sequence, but one which does not require an operator on watch, for example, HVAC temperature controls. Data Package 4 is used for an extremely complex piece of equipment, having an extensive sequence of operation, a complex troubleshooting sequence and one requiring frequent operator attention; at least for start-up and shutdown. Examples of this case would be small boilers and small diesel generator sets. Data Package 5 is used for electrical equipment, components or systems on which wiring, and control diagrams are needed for operation, maintenance or repair. Examples of this case are 400 Hz frequency converters, annunciator panels and cathodic protection systems.
  • Provide the O&M data packages specified in individual technical sections. The information required in each type of data package follows:
    • Data Package 1 a. Safety precautions and hazards b. cleaning recommendations c. Maintenance and repair procedures d. Warranty information e. Extended warranty information f. Contractor information g. Spare parts and supply list
    • Data Package 2 a. Safety precautions and hazards b. Normal operations c. Environmental conditions Lubrication data e. Preventive maintenance plan, schedule, and procedures cleaning recommendations g. Maintenance and repair procedures h. Removal and replacement instructions i. Spare parts and supply list j. Parts identification k. Warranty information l. Extended warranty information m. Contractor information
    • Data Package 3 a. Safety precautions and hazards b. Operator prestart c. Startup, shutdown, and post-shutdown procedures d. Normal operations e. Emergency operations f. Environmental conditions g. Operating log h. Lubrication data i. Preventive maintenance plan, schedule, and procedures j. cleaning recommendations k. Troubleshooting guides and diagnostic techniques l. Wiring diagrams and control diagrams m. Maintenance and repair procedures n. Removal and replacement instructions o. Spare parts and supply list p. Product submittal data q. O&M submittal data r. Parts identifications. Warranty information t. Extended warranty information u. Testing equipment and special tool information v. Testing and performance data w. Contractor information x. Field test reports
    • Data Package 4 a. Safety precautions and hazards b. Operator prestart c. Startup, shutdown, and post-shutdown procedures d. Normal operations e. Emergency operations f. Operator service requirements g. Environmental conditions h. Operating log i. Lubrication data j. Preventive maintenance plan, schedule, and procedures k. Cleaning recommendations l. Troubleshooting guides and diagnostic techniques m. Wiring diagrams and control diagrams n. Repair procedures o. Removal and replacement instructions p. Spare parts and supply list>q. Repair work-hours r. Product submittal data s. O&M submittal data t. Parts identification u. Warranty information v. Extended warranty information w. Personnel training requirements x. Testing equipment and special tool information y. Testing and performance data z. Contractor information . Field test reports
    • Data Package 5 a. Safety precautions and hazards b. Operator prestart c. Start-up, shutdown, and post-shutdown procedures d. Normal operations e. Environmental conditions f. Preventive maintenance plan, schedule, and procedures g. Troubleshooting guides and diagnostic techniques h. Wiring and control diagrams i. Maintenance and repair procedures j. Removal and replacement instructions k. Spare parts and supply list l. Product submittal data m. Manufacturer’s instructions n. O&M submittal data o. Parts identification<p. Testing equipment and special tool information q. Warranty information r. Extended warranty information s. Testing and performance data t. Contractor information u. Field test reports v. Additional requirements for HVAC control systems
Facilities Operations and Maintenance Data Package

Facilities Operations and Maintenance Data Package

What should be in a Facilities Operations and Maintenance Data Package?Operations and Maintenance Plan

  • Safety precautions and hazards
  • Cleaning recommendations
  • Maintenance and repair procedures
  • Warranty information
  • Extended warranty information
  • Contractor information
  • Spare parts and supply list
  • Environmental conditions
  • Lubrication data
  • Preventive maintenance plan, schedule, and procedures
  • Removal and replacement instructions
  • Parts identification
  • Operator prestart
  • Startup, shutdown, and post-shutdown procedures
  • Normal operations
  • Emergency operations
  • Operating log
  • Troubleshooting guides and diagnostic techniques
  • Wiring diagrams and control diagrams
  • Testing equipment and special tool information
  • Testing and performance data
  • Field test reports
  • Operator service requirements
  • Repair workhours
Efficient FM Ecosystem

Creating an Efficient FM Ecosystem – Key to Owner/Design-builder Alignment

Creating an efficient FM ecosystem is critical to fostering owner and design/builder alignment.

Make critical physical infrastructure improvements that
benefit generations to come.

Efficient FM Ecosystem

 

  1. Adopt a robust enterprise strategy
    • Don’t “reinvent the wheel”, take advantage of current available LEAN integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery tools for all repair, renovation, maintenance, and new build requirements (examples: Integrated project delivery and LEAN job order contracting)
  2. Continuously build and retain knowledge
    • Lasting progressive change comes from people within the organization who buy into and carry out needed reforms.  Training and education must be continuous, and empower participants to innovate and scale up ideas
  3. Common Data Environment
    • Define glossary of terms and definitions
    • Locally researched detailed unit price book organized using CSI Masterformat
  4. Leverage collaborative technology
    • Embed adopted processes into technology
    • End reliance upon spreadsheets, paper files, and emails
  5. Focus best value outcomes from functional, environmental, and economic perspectives

 

Learn more?  Set up a quick 15-minute exploratory call.

 

lean job order contracting

via 4BT.us

Construction Spending for Public and Private Sectors

Construction Spending for Public and Private Sectors

Construction Spending for Public and Private Sectors

via Four BT, LLC – Proven LEAN construction delivery solutions including locally researched granular unit price line-item databases, integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery, support services, and collaborative technology.  www.4bt.us

Construction Spending for Public and Private Sectors

Construction Change Orders Are Due to Poor Information

Eighty percent of Construction Change Orders Are Due to Poor Information

It’s not surprising that eighty percent of construction change orders are due to poor information early in the process.

LEAN construction planning, procurement, and project delivery is the only way to consistently minimize the number and impact of change orders.

With processes such as integrated project delivery, IPD, and LEAN job order contracting owners and design-builders receive the following benefits:

  • Early and ongoing information sharing
  • Cost visibility and transparency (via locally researched detailed line-item construction cost data)
  • Defining roles and responsibility leading to mutually beneficial outcomes
  • Full compliance and traceability

Learn more?

Operational Science and FM

facilities preventive maintenance, Public Sector Facilities Preventive Maintenance

Public Sector Facilities Preventive Maintenance – Financial and Technical/Financial Visibility Criticality

Public sector facilities preventive maintenance is critical to efficient facilities management, however, rarely performed with financial and technical visibility and transparency.

 

What is it?

Preventive maintenance (PM): The systematic and cyclic check, inspection, and correction of minor deficiencies, as well as reporting of deficiencies beyond the scope of preventive maintenance.  PM may include the minor accomplishment of maintenance and repair.

How is it typically done?

Most, if not all, public sector real property owners have extraordinarily little visibility into facilities preventive maintenance costs or granular associated task line times.

For example, owners may require a preventive maintenance activity and an associate cost from a contractor.  This cost is general provided as a lump sum, for example “XX day inspection and maintenance of 60 ton chiller- $XXXXX.XX dollars”.   The only source of cost information is from the service provider.    Then net result is that owners are paying 30%-40% more than needed.

What if?

What if each building system component where not only identified and associated with the following information, but also linked to an associated detailed and locally researched unit price book with associated labor, material, equipment costs and productivity information?

  • Building component system or type of building equipment group, i.e. Electrical (ELEC), Heating Ventilation, Air Conditioning (HVAC)
  • Type of equipment, i.e. Chiller, Transformer…
  • Further definition of equipment by number
  • Frequency and the specific list of detailed maintenance tasks to be performed
  • Line items detailing each associated individual task and cost component

Example – 80 Ton Centrifugal Chiller – Preventive Maintenance

1. Lubricate drive couplings.
2. Check and correct alignment of drive couplings.
3. Lubricate motor bearings (non-hermetic)
4. Lightly lubricate vane control linkage bearings, ball joints and pivot points. DO
NOT LUBRICATE the shaft of the vane operator.
5. Remove refrigerant in accordance with manufacturer’s instructions. Sample
test the refrigerant and oil to verify compliance with the Air Conditioning and
Refrigeration Institute standards.
6. Perform spectro-chemical analysis of compressor oil annually to determine
bearing conditions and replacing them, as necessary.
7. As oil testing indicates drain and replace oil in compressor oil reservoir
including filters, strainers, and traps. Manufacturers typically recommended that oil should be changed after the first year of operation and every five years thereafter.
8. Review the Material Data Safety Sheets (MSDS) for proper disposal of used oil. If appropriate, recycle oil at an authorized station.
9. Change the oil filter, clean strainer.
10. Drain and replace oil in purge compressor.
11. Drain and replace oil in purge gearbox.
12. Change refrigerant filter/drier on cooling line to motor (hermetic). Check moisture indicator sight glass and if moisture present find source of water leak.
13. Clean all water strainers in the system.
14. Inspect relief valves and piping. Check for valve for corrosion or foreign material and replace valves. Valves are safety devices for equipment and personnel, DO NOT attempt to repair or recondition. Increase valve inspection frequency if equipment is installed in a corrosive environment.
15. Check pressure and temperature transducers against gage on both the oil, refrigerant and water side systems.
16. Inspect evaporator and condenser tubes.
a. Evaporator tubes should be inspected and cleaned of scale. Inspect
and clean temperature sensors and flow switches.
b. Condenser tubes should be inspected and cleaned. Condenser
tubes from open tower systems may have contamination or hard
scale.
c. Excessive corrosion, scaling, erosion and algae typically indicate
improper or lack of an adequate water treatment program. Consult
water treatment standard for proper procedures.
17. Test for leaks per manufacturer’s instructions. Refrigerant leak detection can be conducted with an electronic halide leak detector, ultrasonic leak detectors or a soap bubble solution will be used along with dry nitrogen to pressurize chiller. If leaks are not able to be stopped or corrected, report leak status to supervisor.
18. Pull vacuum on refrigeration machine in accordance with manufacturer’s instructions. Add refrigerant as required per specifications.
19. Megger compressor and oil pump motors and record readings.
20. Check dash pot oil in main starter.
21. Tighten all starter, control panel, motor terminals, overloads, and oil heater eads, etc. Loose connections can cause voltage spikes and overheating leading to malfunctions and failures.
22. Check all contacts for wear, pitting, etc.
23. Check and calibrate overloads, record trip amps and trip times.
24. Check and calibrate safety controls.
25. Clean up the work area. Properly recycle or dispose of materials in accordance with environmental regulations.

 

Set up a 15-min introductory call…

Get in touch…

 

job order contracting lessons

Improve Job Order Contracting with 4BT

Improve Job Order Contracting with 4BT

If you are a public organization using JOC, it may be time to rethink, rebuild, and improve Job Order Contracting Program with 4BT.

 

LEAN Job Order Contracting, exclusively provided by 4BT, delivers best value via locally researched unit price cost data, LEAN process integration, enabling collaborative technology, and support services with the LOWEST IMPLEMENTATION and JOC ADMINISTATION COSTS.

In addition to being the lowest cost solution, so more of your dollars go to actual construction, you get unique capabilities to assure efficient JOC Program setup and management, as well as build and retain internal knowledge and capabilities.

Please contact me at your earliest convenience to learn how you save up to 10x on your JOC Program costs, while assuring complete financial visibility, transparency, and compliance.   Our clients have also increased productivity 3x!

  • Foster greater transparency
  • Enable better informed decision-making
  • Cost savings opportunities
  • Current, locally researched, verifiable, granular repair, renovation, and new build cost data
  • Mitigate waste, abuse, and fraud
  • Simplify JOC
  • Do more work with less!

Set up a 15-minute introductory call.

 

 

Improve Job Order Contracting with 4BT
Improve Job Order Contracting with 4BT

4BT OpenJOC(TM} Knowledge-based JOC Information Management Solution

Program Management and Work Visibility
• Central Workforce Database
• Program Management
• Contract Management
• Proposal Management
• Project Management
• Work Order Management
• Coefficient Management
• Team Management
• Contractor/Trades Management
• MBE/WBE Participation Tracking
• Real-time Proposal Review
• System Messaging
• Dashboard
• Full Data Export
• Access Control
• Real-time Alerts for unauthorized access or key person on-site
• Mass Text Messaging…. And much more.

LEAN Job Order Contracting - What Public Sector Facilities Professionals Need to Know

LEAN Job Order Contracting – What Public Sector Facilities Professionals Need to Know

It’s critical to take the time to monitor and improve your Job Order Contracting processes as they are not as you think they might be.

 

Job Order Contracting (JOC) has been distorted into a way to simply speed the procurement of repair, renovation, and new build construction, bypassing procurement rigors and doing little to assure mutually beneficial benefit to owners and design-builder or overall efficiency.   Costs of JOC administration have also skyrocketed to 3% to 10%+ of construction value.

What LEAN Job Order Contracting?

LEAN Job Order Contracting is a series of actions repeated in a progression from a defined or recognized ‘start’ to a defined or recognized ‘finish’, to establish and maintain a commonly understood flow that allows all type of construction tasks to be completed as efficiently and consistently as possible.

All the tools and support services to implement and manage LEAN Job Order Contracting for any public sector organization are now available within the 4BT-PEP JOC Knowledge-based Information Management System.   Each step of a robust process assures consistent on-time, on-budget, quality construction delivery and is maintained with a digital footprint.

Benefits of LEAN Job Order Contracting include…

  1. Objective fact-based insights and decision-support
  2. Faster, cheaper, and more verifiable other approaches
  3. Enhanced owner and design-builder capabilities
  4. Full financial and technical visibility and transparency
  5. 100% real-time view of all you JOC Programs, Contracts, Projects, Proposals, Estimates
  6. Quantification of impacts
  7. Alignment of planning, procurement, and project delivery and teams
  8. Outcomes your organization cares about.
Learn more?   Schedule a 15-minute introductory call, or visit www.4bt.us

job order contracting solutions

Job Order Contracting Program Checklist

  1. Do you have a written JOC Operations Manual or JOC Execution Guide?
  2. Have you selected JOC contractors based upon BEST VALUE?
  3. Do you manage your JOC Program directly versus outsource management to a JOC Consultant?
  4. Is your JOC Program audited regularly by an independent third party?
  5. Does your technical team (engineering/facilities management) and procurement team review detailed line-item estimate prepared by your JOC contractor(s)?
  6. Can you automatically compare two estimates (government and contractor) and show differences in seconds?
  7. Do you prepare a detailed line item estimate in-house for JOC projects over a set dollar threshold?
  8. Are you using a locally researched Open Unit Price Book, complete with labor, equipment, and material details, and provided from a source INDEPENDENT of anyone involved in managing your JOC, AND not using a national average price book and location factors?
  9. Are you using a cloud-based system, specifically designed for JOC?
  10. Does your JOC software calculate non-pre-priced items in dollars and percentage for each JOC project?
  11. Can all participants view CURRENT information in real-time?
  12. Cam your JOC software view and access Revit drawings, images, documents, etc.?
  13. Is your JOC Program based upon LEAN collaborative construction delivery principles?
  14. Does your JOC Program equally support owners AND contractors to deliver win-win results?

If you answered “NO” to any of the above…. it’s time to talk!

Why LEAN Construction Matters

JOC Procedures

JOC PROCEDURES FOR ORDERING WORK  lean job order contracting

 

Initiation of a Job Order

  1. Contract Administrator notifies the Contractor of a Project, schedules a Joint Scope Meeting, and issues a Notice of Joint Scope Meeting. Contractor attends the Joint Scope Meeting with owner JOC Project Manager and discusses, at a minimum:
    1. general Scope of the Work (SOW) to be performed,
    2. alternatives for performing the work and value engineering,
    3. access to the site and protocols,
    4. hours of operation,
    5. staging area and areas that are off-limits,
    6. requirements for documentation – technical data, samples, BIM models, drawings,
    7. requirements for professional services, sketches, drawings, and specifications,
    8. construction duration, due date for Detailed Scope of Work and contractor’s line-item proposal,
    9. presence of hazardous materials,
    10. applicable Federal, County, State, and/or local regulations, requirements.

Request for Proposal

  1. Contract Administrator issues a Request for Proposal (RFP) to JOC contractor (alternately process can require contractor to submit a draft detailed SOW for owner review prior to issuance of RFP).  Proposal form contractor is due within established timeline.
  2. Contractor prepares/updates Detailed Scope of Work referencing any sketches, drawings, photographs, and specifications required to document accurately the work to be accomplished and prepares a detailed line-item proposal of the planned work activity using the current unit price book (UPB).  It is the Contractor’s responsibility to include the necessary line-items and quantities in the Proposal and apply the appropriate Adjustment Factor(s) prior to delivering it to the Owner. Both Owner and Contractor review proposal based upon the detailed SOW.  If the Contractor requires additional information to clarify the Detailed Scope of Work before preparing the Job Order Proposal, the Contractor will make such request so that the Job Order Proposal can be submitted on time.  Contractor proposal is prepared and submitted with the JOC System and includes:
    1. Line-items for all require construction task as selected from the UPB, and associated quantities
    2. Any required documentation and/or forms
    3. Any associated subcontractor information
    4. Schedule
    5. Justification for any non-pre-priced line items
    6. Totals, without and with associated adjustment factor/JOC coefficient, and totals of priced and non-pre-priced line-items
  3. Owner reviews and approves/rejects Contractor’s proposal.  The Owner evaluates the entire Contractor’s Proposal and compare these with the Detailed Scope of Work and the Owner’s estimate if completed and/or otherwise determines the reasonableness of approach, including the appropriateness of the line-items and quantities proposed.  The Owner’s review includes the pre-priced Tasks, quantities, adjustment factors/co-efficients, and non-pre-priced tasks. If rejected, the owner can discuss modifications required for a new proposal with the Contractor.

Execution

  1. Owner issues a Notice to Proceed
  2. Contractor set up a kick-off meeting and mobilizes
  3. Owner regularly inspects the site
  4. Contractor issues a notification of substantial completion and submits appropriate documentation for project close-out
  5. Owner conducts final inspection and issues final notice of substantial completion (or owner creates a checklist of items required for completion)

Note:  Change orders should be mitigated via the job order process, however, an owner-defined process within the contractor outlines how changes in the Detailed Scope of Work are to be handled, such as by adding to, changing, or deleting from the Detailed Scope of Work, by issuing a Supplemental Job Order or a Change Order.  All Supplemental Job Orders follow the same workflow and procedures as the original work order.

JOC PROCEDURES
JOC PROCEDURES FOR ORDERING WORK

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Glossary

Adjustment Factor:  Approved factor/JOC co-efficient for the associated work order/project and contract.

Change Order (CO): Any subsequent change in the work to the initial construction job order/workorder proposal as accepted which has been subsequently authorized by the Owner and issued to the Contractor.

JOC Administrator / Procurement Officer: Procurement professional of record for the government entity, responsible for Job Order Contract administration.

Non-Prepriced Line-item (NPP): A line-time cost/task not found in the current unit price book, but within a JOC proposal.  A limit of 10% of the total cost of a proposal is imposed within Job Order Contracts and contracts must supply associated required support information, such as independent quotes for the item(s).

Pre-priced Line-item/Task: A line-time found within the current and approve unit price book for the associated work-order/project

Task Order, Job Order: Individual projects/work orders performed under the umbrella procurement.

Unit Price Book (UPB):  A web or server-based compilation of detailed construction task listings with pre-set prices individual line-items for each unit of work (unit price) establishing the basis of each job order/work order/project assignment.

 

“Culture change requires company leaders who lead by example. It is impossible to push cultural change if toxicity, noncompliance, and distrust remain at the top. Additionally, leaders need strong personal values, such as humility and accountability, to support the values of their organization and drive change.

Lastly, change involves processes and measurement. Without measuring change, how does one know if the team is moving forward? Agree on what a ‘good’ culture looks and feels like, then determine the KPIs by which it will be measured.” 

  • Nathan C. Wood

 

4BT Logo www.4bt.us

 

Innovative construction capital delivery

Innovative Construction Capital Delivery for Public Sector Owners

Innovative construction capital delivery for public sector owners can consistently enable quality, on-time, on-budget and fully compliant repair, renovation, maintenance, sustainability, and new build outcomes.

Enhancements to locally researched construction cost data and the integration with robust, proven LEAN planning, procurement, and project delivery processes, supported by collaborative cloud technology can enable any public sector owner to deploy efficient, streamlined capabilities and measurably improved outcomes with complete cost visibility and transparency.

85% of all construction projects are over-budget, late, and/or poorly completed.  This results in a waste of public funds of 30%-40%+, or billions annually.   

Minimizing risk through cost certainty and a fully communicated and detailed work scope are critical to every repair, renovation, and new build.  Consistent achievement of both on organization-wide basis requires; 1.) integrating People, Process, Information, and Technology using a common data environment (locally researched detailed unit line-item cost data, organized by CSI Masterformat), 2.)  owner leadership and support, and 3.) leverage of core LEAN principles.

Public sector owner and design-builders working collaborative toward well-defined, mutually beneficial goals…. what a concept!

  • Deliver 90%+ of ALL projects on-time, on-budget, and in a quality manner
  • Full technical and financial visibility and transparency
  • Continuous improvement

For more information, just ask.

 

Innovative construction capital delivery
Innovative Construction Capital Delivery Solution

Construction rework costs $625 Billion annually.

 

Just 31% of all projects came within 10% of budget within the past three years.

Primary Causes of Construction Failures

  1. Lack of competent, consistent, owner leadership
  2. Failure to implement integrated robust LEAN construction planning, procurement, and project delivery methods

These failure points result in…

  1. Poorly developed and poorly communicated Scope of Work
  2. Inadequate and unsupportable construction cost estimates
  3. Serious project planning, procurement, and project management errors and associated requirements for change orders
  4. Inappropriate project delivery team composition
Innovative Construction Capital Delivery
Where is YOUR organization?

References:

  1. International Journal of Innovation, Management, and Technology
  2. Dodge Data & Analytics
  3. McKinsey & Company “Imagining Construction’s Digital Future”
  4. Carnegie Mellon Research
  5. KPMG Global Construction Survey
Why LEAN Construction Matters

How to Use Job Order Contracting – 4 Steps

How to use job order contracting is an important lesson for all public sector facilities operations and management professionals.

#1 Job Order Contracting (JOC) is suitable for a wide range of facilities and horizonal physical infrastructure  construction projects, including repairs, renovations, maintenance, sustainment, and new construction.  (Note: New construction is best limited to “minor” new construction requiring minimal design.)

#2 Maximum benefit for JOC can attained when it is used a a method to integrate “construction” planning, procurement, and project delivery incorporating robust LEAN practices to reach best value outcomes for all participants and stakeholders.

#3 Direct collaboration between owner and design-builder teams is a principle of JOC.  Using an intermediary, such as a “JOC consultant” is a good method for some owners “stand up” a JOC project is they lack internal skills/capabilities, however, the long term impact is excessive JOC administration cost and loss of critical knowledge and inability to achieve maximum JOC benefit.

#4 Independent third-party JOC program audits and monitoring of key performance indicators (KPIs) are needed to further assure JOC program efficiency, compliance, and continuous improvement.

In summary, JOC can consistently drive quality, on-time, on-budget outcomes with maximum efficiency if implemented and managed properly.  Never use JOC to simply “speed procurement” or approve projects that otherwise would not be approved via traditional procurement oversight.  And never pay a percentage of construction value for JOC services or a “JOC consultant”.

via www.4bt.us

job order contracting lessons

job order contracting solutions