“Motivation and Means: How and Why IPD and Lean Lead to Success”, co-sponsored by the Integrated Project Delivery Alliance, explodes several myths about Lean and IPD.
Myth #1: Delivery matters less than choosing the right people; behaviors can’t be dictated by a contract. You won’t get the A Team every time, but you can still foster positive behavior, says principal author Renée Cheng, PhD, AIA, Professor, School of Architecture, University of Minnesota. Think through which players you want on your team, how to create the right culture, and how to get rid of nonperformers.
Myth #2: IPD contracts are too complicated, Lean tools are too rigid. IPD and Lean are “a lot more flexible than people think,” says Cheng. Investing the time up front for designing your IPD and Lean procedures can pay off in huge ROI. Teams also vary in how they use IPD and Lean. It’s not as rigid as commonly believed, she says.
Myth #3: IPD only works on large complex healthcare projects. Teams new to IPD and Lean are at a disadvantage. Cheng says there’s no evidence that small projects cannot benefit from using an IPD and Lean. Moreover, you can have a team that’s new to IPD, or one that has half its team members experienced in IPD and Lean, and both can still work, she says.
Myth #4: Owners aren’t getting best value; or, owners are getting value but the team is not making a profit. Cheng says it’s hard to get at “pure results” for owners because “it usually depends on how well the owner sets the cost and schedule targets.” The research did show that 100% of owners in the study said their IPD/Lean projects met or exceeded expectations.
In terms of meeting schedule, some teams were just a bit over, a number were under. Similarly, with regard to budgets, one project team went over, some were at budget, a number were under.
As for profitability, Cheng says some project teams have reported making 20-30% more in an IPD than under a non-IPD. “I did see teams working collectively with the owner to determine a target cost, and this drove the original allowable cost way below market, and the profit was distributed.”
Myth #5: IPD and IPD-lite are essentially the same; financial incentives and release of liability are no big deal. Cheng says the behavior is “strikingly different” between those who have skin in the game and those who do not. “Those in the signatory pool behave much more collaboratively, there’s a lot more fluidity in how they’re willing to trade scope, and they’re much more willing to call out behavior that’s not productive.”
Finally, there’s a lot more “fun and enjoyment” in true IPD projects, says Cheng—“a lot more time being spent on positive things. It’s very positive and collaborative.”
Related Stories
| Nov 2, 2010
Wind Power, Windy City-style
Building-integrated wind turbines lend a futuristic look to a parking structure in Chicago’s trendy River North neighborhood. Only time will tell how much power the wind devices will generate.
| Nov 2, 2010
Energy Analysis No Longer a Luxury
Back in the halcyon days of 2006, energy analysis of building design and performance was a luxury. Sure, many forward-thinking AEC firms ran their designs through services such as Autodesk’s Green Building Studio and IES’s Virtual Environment, and some facility managers used Honeywell’s Energy Manager and other monitoring software. Today, however, knowing exactly how much energy your building will produce and use is survival of the fittest as energy costs and green design requirements demand precision.
| Nov 2, 2010
Yudelson: ‘If It Doesn’t Perform, It Can’t Be Green’
Jerry Yudelson, prolific author and veteran green building expert, challenges Building Teams to think big when it comes to controlling energy use and reducing carbon emissions in buildings.
| Nov 2, 2010
Historic changes to commercial building energy codes drive energy efficiency, emissions reductions
Revisions to the commercial section of the 2012 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) represent the largest single-step efficiency increase in the history of the national, model energy. The changes mean that new and renovated buildings constructed in jurisdictions that follow the 2012 IECC will use 30% less energy than those built to current standards.
| Nov 1, 2010
Sustainable, mixed-income housing to revitalize community
The $41 million Arlington Grove mixed-use development in St. Louis is viewed as a major step in revitalizing the community. Developed by McCormack Baron Salazar with KAI Design & Build (architect, MEP, GC), the project will add 112 new and renovated mixed-income rental units (market rate, low-income, and public housing) totaling 162,000 sf, plus 5,000 sf of commercial/retail space.
| Nov 1, 2010
John Pearce: First thing I tell designers: Do your homework!
John Pearce, FAIA, University Architect at Duke University, Durham, N.C., tells BD+C’s Robert Cassidy about the school’s construction plans and sustainability efforts, how to land work at Duke, and why he’s proceeding with caution when it comes to BIM.
| Nov 1, 2010
Vancouver’s former Olympic Village shoots for Gold
The first tenants of the Millennium Water development in Vancouver, B.C., were Olympic athletes competing in the 2010 Winter Games. Now the former Olympic Village, located on a 17-acre brownfield site, is being transformed into a residential neighborhood targeting LEED ND Gold. The buildings are expected to consume 30-70% less energy than comparable structures.
| Oct 27, 2010
Grid-neutral education complex to serve students, community
MVE Institutional designed the Downtown Educational Complex in Oakland, Calif., to serve as an educational facility, community center, and grid-neutral green building. The 123,000-sf complex, now under construction on a 5.5-acre site in the city’s Lake Merritt neighborhood, will be built in two phases, the first expected to be completed in spring 2012 and the second in fall 2014.
| Oct 21, 2010
GSA confirms new LEED Gold requirement
The General Services Administration has increased its sustainability requirements and now mandates LEED Gold for its projects.