by Jeffrey C Kadlowec, Registered Architect

The design and construction industry continues to suffer from low productivity and poor performance at a growing cost to owners and investors [1]. Much of this due to inadequate project management and lack of formal communication, leading to misunderstanding and adversarial relationships between team members. Adopting a more collaborative approach and utilizing the integrated project delivery (IPD) system in design-build (DB) multi-party agreements will result in greater project success and increased profitability for all stakeholders.

Cost overruns of 50% – 100% are common in large-scale projects, with some even exceeding twice the original estimates [1]. Creating fully integrated and collaborative teams with shared risk-reward has been suggested by industry analysts to transform the working environment. This requires fundamental changes in project delivery and presents new challenges for stakeholders. The principles of IPD represent prescribed strategies for breaking the failing cycle and transforming the industry at its core.

Several principles comprise the IPD: 1) emphasis on teamwork, 2) mutually beneficial agreements, 3) open communication, 4) creativity and innovation, 5) leadership and organization, 6) planning and time management, and 7) communication and technology [2]. Early collaboration between designers and contractors with shared risk and reward is the key to project success. This alternate delivery method has many advantages over traditional approaches including speed of production, improved performance, fewer change orders, and increases in quality of work. These factors combine to achieve greater profitability for all stakeholders.

Building Information Modeling (BIM) allows for the creation of a shared and centralized knowledge resource that contains the design and operational data for a project [3]. The purpose of BIM is to compile all the data previously scattered across multiple documents into a complete virtual construction model. Eliminating the need to constantly regather and reformat information across the segmented working environment saves time and provides key parties a better platform for communication and collaboration. With earlier involvement between designers, consultants, contractors, and suppliers, they are able to achieve project goals of schedule, cost, quality and sustainability [3].

Project teams are composed of many stakeholders including the owners, architects, engineers, general contractors, sub-contractors, suppliers, and manufacturers. With a larger number of participants, the more important it is to optimize cooperation between them [4]. Problems in communication lead to divisions that increase duration and cost. Early involvement of key participants becomes essential in more complex project. The contributions of individuals with greater expertise can guide teams with principles of trust, transparency, collaboration, information sharing creating an environment of shared risk and reward, value-based decisions, and full utilization of technology [4]. There is an inverse relation between project cost and design changes, with initial decision having major impacts and late changes being extremely costly. One advantage of IPD is identifying errors and conflicts to introduce correction and solutions at earlier stages.

IPD has attracted growing interest by the construction industry and related academia, but has yet to gain widespread acceptance in architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) [5]. Several factors exist that prevent public and private owners from adopting IPD, such as legal barriers, government laws, lack of knowledge, absence of trust, and insufficient evidence of the return on investment. Changing the culture of project delivery will require a transition period as challenges remain toward overcoming constraints and achieve positive outcomes. With the traditional project delivery system underachieving industry-wide [6] and based on years of research into new technologies, focusing on DB methods, implementing BIM, and utilizing IPD will essential to future profitability and project success.

References
[1] Ashcraft, Howard. (2022). Transforming project delivery: integrated project delivery. Oxford Review of Economic Policy. 38. 369-384. 10.1093/oxrep/grac001.
[2] Shadhar, Alaa & Mahjoob, Ahmed & Mahmood, Buroog. (2022). Comparing Between Traditional and Integrated Project Delivery Systems Attributes for Optimizing Project Performance. 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2014897/v1.
[3] Trach, Roman & Połoński, Mieczysław & Petro, Hrytsiuk. (2019). Modelling of Efficiency Evaluation of Traditional Project Delivery Methods and Integrated Project Delivery (IPD). IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. 471. 112043. 10.1088/1757-899X/471/11/112043.
[4] Buk’hail, Rudhab & Al-Sabah, Ruqaya. (2022). Exploring the Barriers to Implementing the Integrated Project Delivery Method. Journal of King Saud University – Engineering Sciences. 10.1016/j.jksues.2022.04.003.
[5] Muianga, Elisa & Granja, Ariovaldo & Picchi, Flavio & Formoso, Carlos. (2023). Evolutionary model for gradual transition to Integrated Project Delivery (IPD). 38. 144. 10.7764/RIC.00058.21.
[6] Mohamed Salleh, Rozana & Mustaffa, Nur & Abdul Rahiman, Nafisah & Tajul Ariffin, Hamizah Liyana & Othman, Norazam. (2019). The Propensity of Building Information Modelling and Integrated Project Delivery in Building Construction Project. International Journal of Built Environment and Sustainability. 6. 83-90. 10.11113/ijbes.v6.n1-2.386.