Construction Today - November/December 2012 - (Page 78)

Institutional By Patricia A. Harris THE ABCS OF IPD S chool construction projects can be complicated building endeavors – not only because the construction itself may be difficult, but because of the efforts required to get the shovel in the ground. In academic construction, planning requires the buy-in of an extraordinary number of constituencies, from the board of trustees to school administrators and faculty to students and parents. The process may be political, negotiated or truly collaborative, but it is rare that there is an independent decision-maker. Because schools often operate within a team decision-making framework, both with regard to construction projects and other decisions, they are the perfect candidates to take advantage of the benefits of integrated project delivery, a project management and delivery system that is premised on collaboration among three key participants –the owner, architect, and contractor. In a traditional design/bid/build project, the owner engages the architect to develop plans and then hires a contractor separately to construct the project. Because the design professional and the contractor contracts directly with the owner, each perceives its primary relationship to be with the owner rather than to the project itself, and each participant invariably ends up protecting its “turf.” We see these turf wars manifest as litigation or, more specifically, claims of design errors and omissions, delays and construction defects. Owners, at a minimum, experience change orders and scheduling delays. In contrast, IPD fosters a collaborative relationships among owner, architect, contractor and other key project participants at the outset of the project. The goals of IPD are to minimize overall project cost and maximize that the project will be completed on time. IPD has evolved as a viable delivery method due to advancements in industry practice, including technology such as BIM and principles of lean construction. IPD projects are differentiated from traditional design and construction projects in three areas: the financial relationships among project participants; legal obligations and responsibilities of the participants; and management processes. Financial Relationships The paramount theme of IPD projects is shared rewards and risks. Financial incentives and deterrents are a motivation for the owner, 78 CONSTRUCTION-TODAY.COM NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2012 http://www.CONSTRUCTION-TODAY.COM

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Construction Today - November/December 2012

Construction Today - November/December 2012
Construction Law
Best Practices
Hurricane Sandy
Marketing Strategies
Holcim (US) Inc.
Tampa Tank Inc./Florida Structural Steel
Rockwell Group
IVM Construction Inc.
Millennium Partners – Millennium Place
Paradigm Cos.
W.G. Yates Construction
Regalia Beach Developers LLC – Regalia
Marlyn Development and S.L. Nusbaum Realty – Heritage Forest Apartments
Chas Roberts Air Conditioning
Bellini Williams Island
Beal|Derkenne Construction – The Hub
Cedar Siding Inc.
Nibbi Bros. – Hunters View Phase 1
EllisDon Corp. – Surrey Memorial Hospital Critical Care
Turner Construction – Martin Army Community Hospital
U.S. General Services Administration/VCC – FBI Field Building
The Hayner Hoyt Corp.
Paric Corp.
Rotondo Weirich Enterprises Inc.
Advocate Christ Medical Center and Pepper Construction – Outpatient Pavilion expansion
Shawnee Mission Medical Center – United Excel – Birth Center
National Lutheran Communities & Services – The Village at Rockville/ARCH Consultants Ltd.
Harold O'Shea Builders – Springfield Clinic First North
Dewberry/Okland Construction – Western Regional Medical Center Addition
Kohler Ronan LLC
Graber Post Buildings Inc.
Tooz Construction Inc.
Bombardier Learjet – Facility Expansion
Rock Gaming LLC – Horseshoe Casino Cincinnati
Demar Plumbing Corp.
Metrolina Greenhouse
Rommel Cos.
W.G. Tomko Incorporated Contractors
Continental Contractors
Reliable Contracting Co. Inc.
Graham Construction and Engineering – Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade
J.R. Filanc Construction Co. Inc.
Pulice Construction Inc. – I-10 Prince Road
Ames-Granite – US 36
Tomar Construction
E.E. Cruz/Tully – Bronx-Whitestone Bridge Queens approach
TL Wallace Construction Inc.
CARCON Industries and STL Engineering
Last Look

Construction Today - November/December 2012