Public procurement of construction services could be improved through the adoption of currently available best management practices.
While most organizations are aware of the rampant economic and environmental waste associated with construction, associate repair, renovation, and maintenance projects, focus continues be upon largely upon simply “getting project done”.
While there may be restrictions with respect to competitive, fixed price contracts there is a significant opportunity to better integrate planning, procurement, and project delivery teams and develop collaborative, transparent, and cost saving practices.
How
Organizational integration and alignment of cultural, professional, management, and commercial interests is also required, both internally and with construction services providers. Without out this, the vast majority of projects, approximately eighty percent or more (80%+) will continue to fail by being late, over budget, or viewed as not being satisfactorily completed by one or more parties.
- Multiparty Agreement
- Shared Financial Risk
and Reward - Early Involvement of All
Parties - Collaborative Decisionmaking
- Liability Waivers
- Fiscal Transparency
- Integrated Design
- Focus upon people, teams, and collaborative processes
- Leverage existing robust planning, procurement, and project delivery methods
- Engage all participants and stakeholders as early as possible in the overall process
- Use objective and granular local market construction task data for all projects.
- Ensure appropriate access to current information to all project participants and stakeholders
- Mandate introductory and ongoing training for all participants
- Owner leadership, capacity, and accountability
Primary Obstacles to Execution
- Lack of awareness/education
- Lack of real property owner leadership capacity, commitment, and accountability
- Internal resistance to change
The benefits of adopting improved construction services procurement practices
- Continuity of preferences and objectives throughout the planning, design, procurement and construction lifecycle
- 30%-40% cost savings
- Mutually beneficial long-term relationships with service providers
- Consistent delivery of on-time, on-budget projects
- Higher levels of quality
- Faster project delivery
- Significant reduction in the number of change orders
via Four BT, LLC – www.4bt.us
References:
AIA (2007). “Integrated Project Delivery: A Guide.” The American Institute of Architects
(AIA), Washington, DC
AGC (2010). Integrated Project Delivery for Public and Private Owners.
Ballard, G. (2008). ‘The Lean Project Delivery System”, Lean Construction Journal, 2008
Cohen, J. (2010). Integrated Project Delivery: Case Studies, American Institute of Architects (AIA), Washington, DC
Construction Users Roundtable (CURT). (2004). “Collaboration, Integrated Information and the Project Lifecycle in Building Design, Construction and Operation.”
Construction Users Roundtable (CURT). (2007).“Construction Strategy: CURT’s Path toward LEAN Project Delivery.”
Ballard, G., Kim, Y., Azari, R., and Cho, S. (2011). “Starting from Scratch: A New Project Delivery Paradigm.”, Research Report 271, Construction Industry Institute, Austin, Tx.
Kent, D. and Becerik-Gerber B. (2010). “Understanding Construction Industry Experience and Attitudes toward Integrated Project Delivery.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Kim, Y., and Dossick, C. (2011). “What Makes the Delivery of a Project Integrated? A Case Study of Children’s Hospital, Bellevue, WA.”, Lean Construction Journal
Lee, H.W., Anderson, S., Kim, Y., and Ballard, G. (2013). “Advancing the Impact of Education, Training, and Professional Experience on Integrated Project Delivery.”
Matthews, O., and Howell, G. A. (2005). “Integrated Project Delivery an Example of Relational Contracting.” Lean Construction Journal