The project-delivery process begins when an owner articulates a need — a desired outcome, a set of values, and a series of constraints. The creative, collective mind of a design team communicates the need through words and illustrations to a builder who brings the concept to life. This collection of independent entities working together toward a common outcome epitomizes collaboration. High-functioning collaborative teams yield value for the owner while minimizing wasted effort — increasing the odds of success for all participants.

However, existing project delivery and contracting methods present barriers to collaborative behavior: individuals work in silos to optimize their own limited scope, inflexible line-item budgets stifle creative problem solving, and liability concerns prevent the free flow of information. Being pushed by current economic pressures and pulled by daily advances in technology, new ideas for delivering projects are coalescing into Integrated Project Delivery (IPD).

In a recent survey conducted by Structural Engineer (May 2009), 89 percent of respondents indicated that within 15 years, most of the AEC industry will be using IPD. With this in mind, it’s important to understand what IPD is, what IPD isn’t, and how it could affect our profession.

It’s about teamwork
The goals of a team using IPD are to align economic interests and to remove traditional barriers preventing collaboration. Although IPD is still in its infancy and consensus guidelines aren’t yet established, several common threads exist. Primary project participants — owner, architect, contractor, along with key subcontractors and consultants — establish a multi-party contractual relationship emphasizing shared risk and reward. A core leadership team makes the key project decisions. Early participation by key players, even prior to schematic design, allows for ongoing design-assist, project costing, and real value engineering to occur. Technology and team co-location help enable this collaborative behavior.

Given the still-evolving state of IPD, a number of uncertainties remain. Will professional fees increase as inefficiencies are eliminated or decrease as less effort is required? Will compensation timelines shift to accommodate more up-front effort? Since the current insurance model is not well suited for this type of risk distribution, how will this be adapted? While discussion often focuses on the distribution of profits or incentives, risk allocation may be the most critical issue. Without an equitable distribution of risk, old behaviors of self-preservation are sure to emerge. Team composition — both firms and individuals — becomes more critical than ever.

What now?
Collaboration between owners, architects, engineers, and contractors is not a new concept. Whether or not a utopian vision of flawless communication and teamwork is realized, it is clear that the status quo is on its way out. IPD presents a host of challenges for each member of the design team, but we believe that creative and flexible professionals will be rewarded.

Jim Jacobi, P.E., and Ryan Seckinger, P.E., LEED AP, are with Walter P Moore and can be reached at 800-364-7300.