IPD & BIM within the Construction Industry

MSc BIM and Digital Built Environments Module: Integrated BIM Projects

IPD & BIM within the Construction Industry

By Iftikhar Ismail Date: 11.05.2018

Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) defined by AIA/AIACC, 2007.

Page 2 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

Table of Contents

Page Number

1.0

Abbreviations

04

2.0

Abstract

06

3.0

IPD & BIM Definitions

07

4.0

Introduction

09

5.0

Literature Review

11

5.1

Introduction to Building Information Modelling (BIM)

11

5.2

BIM and Collaboration

12

5.3

The Benefits and Business Value of BIM

13

5.4

Challenges and Obstacles to BIM Adoption

15

6.0

Introduction to an IPD Approach to Construction

16

6.1

Characteristics of an IPD approach

16

6.2

Difference between Traditional Project Delivery and an IPD approach

17

6.3

9 Principles of an IPD approach to construction

19

6.4

Domains of an IPD approach to construction

22

6.5

Types of IPD Contractual Agreements

27

6.6

Enablers & Drivers for an IPD approach to construction

29

6.7

Barriers of IPD adoption within construction

30

7.0

Integration of IPD with Lean Construction

32

8.0

How BIM, Collaboration and IPD can work together

33

9.0

Research Methodology undertaken

34

10.0

Case Study 1 and lessons learned

35

11.0

Case Study 2 and lessons learned

37

12.0

Data Analysis findings

39

13.0

Conclusions & Recommendations

41

14.0

Limitations of research undertaken

42

15.0

Area for further research and investigation

42

16.0

Recommendations

42

17.0

Appendix A - List of Interview Questions & Participant Details

43

18.0

Appendix B - Summary & Comparison of Responses

46

19.0

Appendix C - Interviewee 1: Mac Muzvimwe

51

20.0

Appendix D - Interviewee 2: Marina Machado

55

21.0

Appendix E - IPD Interviewee Signed Consent Forms

57

22.0

Bibliography & References

60

Page 3 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

1.0

Abbreviations

AIM

Asset Information Model

AIR

Asset Information Requirements

BEP

BIM Execution Plan

BIM

Building Information Modelling

BIMM

Building Information Modelling & Management

BMS

Building Management System

BIP

BIM Implementation Plan

CAD

Computer Aided Design

CAFM

Computer Aided Facilities Management

CDE

Common Data Environment

CIC

CIC BIM Protocol

COBie

Construction Operations Building Information Exchange

EIR

Employers Information Requirements

GSL

Government Soft Landings

IFC

Industry Foundation Classes

IPD

Integrated Project Delivery

KPI

Key Performance Indicators

LOD

Level of Detail

LOI

Level of Information

MIDP

Master Information Delivery Plan

OIR

Organisational Information Requirements

PAS1192

Publicly Available Specification 1192 series

PIM

Project Information Model

PIP

Project Implementation Plan

PLQ

Plain Langage Questions

PM

Project Manager

PQQ

Pre-Qualification Questionnaire

RIBA

The Royal Institute of British Architects

RFI

Request For Information

ROI

Return on Investment

TIDP

Task Information Delivery Plan

TIM

Task Information Management (BRE)

WIP

Work In Progress

Page 4 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

Quote Ref: The NBS Guide to Collaborative Construction. (thenbs.com)

Page 5 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

2.0

Abstract

The purpose of this report is to understand the underlying philosophy with regards to an Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) approach to construction, with the focus on the concepts, principles, potentials and way forward for IPD within the current digital transformation of the UK construction industry.

This report examines a variety of approaches undertaken globally and examines IPD by acknowledging its impact on the construction industry alongside Building Information Modelling (BIM), whilst answering the following questions:

1. ‘What is an (IPD) Integrated approach to project delivery?’

2. ‘What are the main drivers and enablers and also challenges/barriers of an integrated approach to project delivery?’

3. ‘What is the potential and way forward for industry adoption of an integrated approach to project delivery within construction?’

4. In relation to the above, how is the BIM process pivotal to the development and transformation of an Integrated Project Delivery approach?

These questions are answered by examining and explaining the relationship between BIM and IPD within the construction industry. The report also undertakes a literature review using case studies from the US along with interviews with key industry professionals currently implementing IPD fully or partially within their current project workflows, with final recommendations for future studies and research.

The report also looks at the problems associated with using an IPD and BIM approach to construction with regards to significant resistance in adoption due mainly to the cultural change involved in its adoption. If we (the construction industry) can overcome these hurdles, then significant benefits can be realised by all stakeholders concerned. We must also keep in mind that an IPD approach to construction can be procured without the use of BIM, however BIM is viewed as the ‘catalyst’ in supporting an IPD approach. Although BIM is not IPD, it is the ‘collaborative’ approach which facilitates it.

Page 6 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

3.0

IPD & BIM Definitions

Before proceeding further into this report, we must first gain a basic understanding and appreciation of what IPD and BIM stand for, and this has been comprehensively explained by the following definition:

Integrated Project Delivery defined by AIA (2010) as: “IPD is a method of project delivery distinguished by a contractual arrangement among a minimum owner, constructor and design professional that aligns business interests of all parties. IPD motivates collaboration throughout the design and construction process, tying stakeholder success to project success, and embodies the following contractual and behavioural principles:

Contractual Principles: 

Key participants bound together as equals



Shared financial risk and reward based on project outcomes



Liability waivers between key participants



Fiscal transparency between key participants



Early involvement of key participants



Jointly developed project target criteria



Collaborative decision making

Behavioural Principles: 

Mutual respect and trust



Willingness to collaborate



Open Communication”

By the end of this report, it will become clear that there are very few ‘pure’ IPD projects that embody all IPD principles. The majority of people and/or organisations pursuing IPD are using bespoke (customised) IPD agreements, eg. by taking certain IPD principles and applying them on projects. This is mainly due to the need to eliminate certain aspects of liability or shared risk/reward – components previously defined as critical to achieving ‘pure’ IPD (AIA, 2012).

Page 7 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

Through the IPD case studies examined, we will find that they will not meet all of the contractual principles listed above, but they do meet all of the behavioural principles and thus offer an insight into the way IPD can be adapted to construction.

Building Information Modelling (BIM) defined by Autodesk, 2008 as: “BIM is an integrated process built on coordinated, reliable information about a project from design through construction and into operations. By adopting BIM, Architects, Engineers, Contractors and owners can easily create coordinated, digital design information and documentation, use that information to accurately visualise, simulate, and analyse performance, appearance and cost, and reliably deliver the project faster, more economically and with reduced environmental impact.”

Hence, from the Autodesk definition it can be seen that IPD (enabled by BIM) is based on a similar strategy: ie. cross-functional project teams collaborating on a building’s design, construction, and lifecycle management for optimised owner outcomes, by using collaborative, model-based technology as the ‘enabler’. This is in agreement with AIA who state:

“BIM was causing Architects to practice in more collaborative ways with designers, contractors and fabricators” (AIA, 2007).

Currently, the high adoption rates of BIM is a core enabler for the enhanced collaboration that IPD demands. IPD, like BIM and digital fabrication, is the result of a convergence of opportunities brought about by technology and business process innovation, and is inspired by the strong desire of the construction industry for more predictable, accurate and responsible results (Autodesk, 2008).

The above has been ‘fuelled’ by certain challenges and drivers for IPD. Some of these include: 

A shift toward globalised work processes



The need for increased productivity and low margins



The demand for sustainability



And, the increased complexity of buildings themselves.

Page 8 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

4.0

Introduction

The Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) sectors within construction are currently undergoing a radical paradigm shift by the implementation of new technologies and ways of working such as BIM and IPD. The combination of both BIM and IPD as a construction ‘enabler’ is being considered as a solution to delivering projects with greater efficiencies and certainty in terms of time, cost, speed, flexibility and sustainability.

IPD is currently being implemented in increasingly diverse settings, from the US to Europe, to the Middle East. By studying a range of case studies, we can better understand how IPD compares with Traditional Project Delivery methods for different projects and teams. An analysis of how IPD has been adapted and applied to each of the case studies demonstrates that IPD is a method that employs multiple strategies to achieve high performing, collaborative teams (AIA, 2012).

By comparing this set of projects of how they followed or adopted BIM and IPD, we can see how some aspects of IPD have greater impact than others. The degree to which projects implemented IPD strategies from contractual teams to management, social, environmental and technological strategies is documented in the chart below titled: “Degree of IPD” (AIA, 2012).

Image Ref: IPD Case Studies (AIA Minnesota, March 2012)

Page 9 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

Professional organisations such as The American Istitute of Architects (AIA) and The Associated General Contrcators of America (AGC) are supporting IPD advancement within construction by establishing national standards, guidelines and facilitating discussions that highlight successful IPD projects and also considers the obsticles to IPD adoption. There is a high degree of concern regarding risk in relation to IPD and the close partnership it neccessitates (AIA 2012), and the need for new legal frameworks to procure IPD approach to construction procurement. Many industry stakeholders feel that there is a real need in construction to improve better collaboration and information exchange to support IPD (AIA, 2012).

Since IPD is a relatively new delivery model for construction procurment, it is not surprising that IPD participants have had less project experience using IPD than with traditional or design-build delivery procurement methods. According to AIA (2012), project participants with even one or two IPD completed projects behind them can greatly influence the project team. For experienced teams, IPD continues to be fine tuned and adjusted to meet specific project and team needs.

By comparing case studies from AIA with projects documented in 2011-2017, we can see the rapid pace of change from using IPD. Sutter’s Fairfield Medical Office Building began in 2005 is considered one of the ‘first true’ IPD projects in the US, meeting challenges of creating new strategies for what was then a very new project delivery method. And in spite of many years of experience with collaborative or even integrated team delivery (usually in the form of traditional or design-build), IPD in it’s purest form required significant re-thinking of many core processes, such as sharing information and sharing risk, profits etc.

This report is structured into chapters based on the comparative analysis of the framework of an IPD approach. The first chapter gave an introduction to IPD, next followed by a literature review including the principles of IPD, benefits and challenges. The research methodology used focuses on the main objectives, data collation and interview process with an analysis of the data captured, analysed, and the views of the interviewed participants. The final chapters will consist of conclusions and recommendations drawn from the research and interviews, and which will include areas for further research and development. The Appendices at the rear of this report support the research undertaken, followed by a comprehensive bibliography.

Page 10 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

5.0

Literature Review

A background literature review was undertaken complementing a critical synthesis of core concepts and principles of BIM and IPD through various literature and case study analysis.

5.1

Introduction to Building Information Modelling (BIM)

BuildingSmart describe BIM as: “A digital representation of physical and functional characteristics of a facility, and a shared knowledge resource for information about a facility forming a reliable basis for decisions during its life-cycle, from conception to demolition.” (BuildingSmart Alliance, 2010).

BIM is the software tool and process for generating and managing building data during its complete lifecycle, from conceptual design through fabrication, construction, maintenance and operation of the building. Charles Hardy, Director of the GSA Office of Project Delivery said: “BIM is 10 percent technology and 90 percent sociology.” (Deutsch, 2011).

Image Ref: The actual reality and misperception of BIM (B. Deutsch, 2011)

Within the UK, BIM adoption was slow since its introduction in the 1980s, but in recent years, from around 2008, it has seen a rapid growth in adoption. According to a recent survey, the use of BIM within UK construction was found to be 35%, of which 60% were Architects, 40% Engineers and around 25% contractors (Bernstein, 2010). In the US, BIM adoption among Architects, Engineers and contractors has moved beyond the ‘early adopters’ stage. By 2009, more than 50% of each of these groups reported using BIM at moderate levels or higher (Young et al. 2009). The Sutter Medical Centre project has showed how BIM is essential in enabling the close collaboration needed in IPD construction projects.

Page 11 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

Image Ref: Sutter Medical Center Castro Valley (ref: Tekla.com) Hence, BIM is viewed globally as a powerful tool that can support IPD in construction as it can enable all project information to be contained in a single model data-base, from design and fabrication, project management, through to operations and maintenance.

5.2

BIM and Collaboration

Collaboration is about working together as a team to understand the task and collaborating to realise or achieve a goal, in turn leading to an increase in quality and productivity. And BIM facilitates this collaboration throughout the project lifecycle by offering new methods for collaboration. Earlier collaboration between Architect, Contractor and other design disciplines will be needed, as knowledge provided by specialists is of more use during the design phase. The growing use of IPD delivery for buildings and other types of structures reflects the strong benefits of integrated collaborative teams using BIM and IPD construction techniques to manage the design and construction process (Eastman et al. 2011).

IPD contracting arrangements that require and facilitate good collaboration will provide greater advantages to owners when BIM is used, as BIM encourages the integration of construction knowledge earlier in the design process. Integrated design teams capable of coordinating all phases of the design and incorporating construction knowledge from the outset will benefit the most (Eastman et al. 2011).

Page 12 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

5.3

The Benefits and Business Value of BIM

BIM is seen as a fast growing process in the construction industry throughout the world, driven by major public and private, as well as government owners who want to industrialise its benefits faster, more certain project delivery and more reliable cost and quality. BIM mandates by US and UK governments have helped achieve many costs benefits and project goals (McGraw Hill, 2014).

Eastman et al. (2011) lists some of the core benefits of BIM as: (I)

(II)

(III)

(IV)

Preconstruction Benefits to Owner: 

Concept, Feasibility, and Design Benefits



Increased Building Performance and Quality



Improved Collaboration using Integrated Project Delivery (IPD)

Design Benefits: 

Earlier and more Accurate Visualisations of a Design



Automatic Low-Level Corrections when Changes are Made to Design



Generation of Accurate and Consistent 2D Drawings at any Stage of Design



Earlier Collaboration of Multiple Design Disciplines



Easy Verification of Consistency to the Design Intent



Extraction of Cost Estimates during the Design Stage



Improvements in Energy Efficiency and Sustainability

Construction and Fabrication Benefits 

Use of Design Model as Basis for Fabricated Components



Quick Reaction to Design Changes



Discovery of Design Errors and Omissions before Construction



Synchronisation of Design and Construction Planning (4D BIM)



Better implementation of Lean Construction Techniques



Synchronisation of Procurement with Design and Construction

Post Construction Benefits 

Improved Commissioning and Handover of Facility Information



Better Management and Operation of Facilities



Integration with Facility Operation and Management Systems

A survey conducted by McGraw Hill Construction showed a positive Return on Investment (ROI) by three-quarters of companies in the construction industry on the investment in their BIM program.

Page 13 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

McGraw Hill (2014) stated: “Financial metrics, such as reduced cost, higher profitability and higher productivity, are generally considered the most important category of ROI using BIM, followed by metrics related to the project delivery process, such as RFIs, fewer unplanned changes, higher customer satisfaction and less disruption in project process.”

A further 60% of contractors expressed their interest in collaborative BIM and the enhancement of visualisation using BIM are the most important factors of ROI in BIM. The McGraw Hill Survey (2014) reported the following benefits by contractors:

 BIM usage on construction projects reduces errors and omissions. It is key to reducing rework and overall construction costs of projects.  BIM improves better collaboration with owners and design firms, with the main benefits being greater integration between team members.  Contractors expect percentage of work involving BIM will increase by 50% on average.  BIM ROI increases directly with a contractor’s level of BIM engagement, represented by its BIM experience, skill level and commitment to doing a high percentage of its work in BIM.

Image Ref: Business Value of BIM for Construction in Major Global Markets (McGraw Hill Construction Report, 2014)

Page 14 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

5.4

Challenges and Obstacles to BIM Adoption

The BIM Handbook (Eastman et al. 2011) lists some of the most common challenges and obstacles to BIM adoption. Some of these include: 

Resistance to change and implementing new technologies



Getting people to understand the potential and value of BIM



Legal changes to documentation, ownership and production



Adapting existing design-bid-build processes to new workflows



Changes in practice and use of information



Resistance to collaboration within a team environment



Finding employees with knowledge and expertise of BIM



Lack of knowledge of using BIM applications and tools efficiently

Steps that can be considered to overcome these obstacles may include: 

Assigning top-level management responsibility for developing a BIM implementation plan



Create an internal team of key managers responsible for implementing the plan



Start by using BIM on one or two smaller projects and tracking progress using KPIs



Use initial results from KPIs to educate and guide continued adoption of BIM and training



Extend the use of BIM to new projects and begin working with external teams



Periodically re-plan the BIM implementation process to reflect the benefits and problems observed thus far, and set new goals for performance, time and cost.

Technology

Process & Procedures

Cultural Change The Challenges Image Ref: Key Challenges in Implementing a BIM Strategy (B. Kumar)

Page 15 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

6.0

Introduction to an IPD Approach to Construction

Practices for IPD are new and can seem difficult at first, as they require different attitudes, skills and behaviours. In IPD, companies become business partners rather than entities. People stop working in silos and exchange information frequently instead of periodically. This accelerates as experts learn they can trust each other, which in turn makes it possible for them to truly collaborate. Everyone on an integrated team commits to working in this way, to give it their best and it is only appropriate and necessary that this commitment extends to sharing risk of failure and rewards for performance.

All partners whether they are owner, designer, or contractor know that they can only succeed or fall short together. In this way an IPD agreement goes a long way to solving the motivational problem that plagues well-intentioned efforts to improve performance (Fischer et al. 2017).

6.1

Characteristics of an IPD approach

According to AIA’s Integrated Project Delivery: A Guide (2007), the characteristics of IPD include: 

Highly Collaborative Process that spans the building design, construction and handover



Open information shared amongst project stakeholders



Value-based decision making



Leveraging early contributions of individual expertise



Team success tied to project success, with shared risks and rewards



Full utilisation of technological capabilities and support.

Image Ref: http://www.hammondandcompany.com/integrated-project-deliver/

Page 16 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

6.2

Difference between Traditional project delivery and an IPD approach

Traditionally the AEC industry employs a standard project delivery method like design-build, designbid-build and construction management at risk. Many industry professionals are against this traditional project delivery due to cost overruns of projects and low quality. The AEC industry is fragmented, inefficient and adversarial because in the standard method of delivery each project team is responsible for its own work and attempts to maximise their individual profit based on their expertise. And IPD is a new project delivery method that addresses the problems of inefficiency, and adversarial relations in the AEC industry (Gerber et al. 2011).

The figure below compares Traditional Project Delivery with Integrated Project Delivery.

Image Ref: Taking a Closer Look at Integrated Project Delivery, by Patrick Luu. (https://uscad.com/blog/integrated-project-delivery)

Introduced in the Construction User’s Roundtable’s “Collaboration, Integrated Information and the Project Lifecycle in building Design and Construction and Operations”, the MacLeamy Curve (see image next page) illustrates the concept of making design decisions earlier in the project when opportunity to influence positive outcomes is maximised and the cost of changes minimised, especially as regards the designer and consultant roles (AIA, 2007).

Page 17 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

Image Image Ref: Collaborating to Increase Value and Efficiency, While Reducing Waste The MacLeamy Curve (vjscozzariandsons.com)

The figures above shows that in the traditional process, contractors do not come aboard a project until the design is substantially complete, but by this time sub-contractors struggle to make sense of the design, make it buildable and try to compensate for its limitations. In contrast, integrated design and delivery processes allows contractors to join the construction teams at an early stage of design, allowing them to develop their understanding of the client’s needs and how it will be satisfied with the designers and are able to develop a cost-effective production process alongside the design (Ballard and Pasquire, 2010).

In regards to Traditional Contracting, Fisher et al. (2017) states: “If traditional project delivery approaches and contracts are supposed to provide cost and schedule certainty, quality, all without waste, then how do we explain the cost and schedule overruns, litigation and claims, and the estimates of waste in traditional contracts?”.

Therefore reasons to pursue an IPD approach to construction over traditional contracts include:      

Traditional Contracts create an inherently antagonistic environment.

Traditional contracts are based on a piece-work business model.

Traditional contracts rigidly divide work based on traditional roles.

Traditional contracts constrain communication to specific and inefficient paths.

Collaboration without an IPD agreement can increase risk.

Traditional contracts reward individuals, not group performance.

Page 18 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

6.3

9 Principles of an IPD approach to Construction

The AIA Integrated Project Deliver: A Guide (2007) states:

“IPD is built on collaboration, which in turn is built on trust. Effectively structured, trust-based collaboration encourages parties to focus on project outcomes rather than their individual goals.

Without trust-based collaboration, IPD will falter and participants will remain in the adverse and antagonistic relationships that plague the construction industry today. Thus achieving the benefits of IPD requires that all participants embrace the Nine Principles of Integrated Project Delivery.”

Image Ref: The NBS Guide to Collaborative Construction. (thenbs.com)

The AIA (California Council, 2007) provides nine principles of IPD that aim at delivering a project with enhanced collaboration and inter-party trust, and these are:

1. Mutual Trust and Respect The values of collaboration and commitment to working as an integrated team are understood by the owner, designer, consultants, contractor and sub-contractors.

2. Mutual Benefit and Reward Everyone benefits as the IPD compensation structure recognises and rewards early involvement. Compensation is based on the value added by each party and rewards “what’s best for project”, such as providing incentives tied to achieving project goals and outcomes.

Page 19 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

3. Collaborative Innovation and Decision Making In IPD projects innovation is stimulated when ideas are freely exchanged amongst all parties.

And these ideas are judged on their merits and not on the status or role of the author. Key ideas and decisions are evaluated within the project team and agreed upon unanimously.

4. Early Involvements of Key Participants Key ‘players’ are involved from the earliest possible moment, hence decision making is vastly improved by the collective knowledge and expertise of the group. And this is most powerful at the early stages of the project where informed decisions have the greatest effect.

5. Early Goal Definition Project goals and objectives are developed early, and agreed by all participants. All input by the parties is valued and this is the greatest driver of the IPD approach, where key decisions made during the early stages have the greatest impact on the success of the project.

6. Intensified Planning The IPD approach to construction recognises that increased effort in Planning at the start of the project will result in increased efficiency and savings during the project. This greatly improves the design, streamlining and shortening the more expensive construction element.

7. Open Communication IPD’s focus on team performance is based on open, direct and honest communication amongst all stakeholders on the project. Disputes are recognised as and when they occur and clear responsibilities are defined from the beginning in a no-blame culture allowing for a quick resolution to problems identified.

8. Appropriate Technology Appropriate technologies are agreed from the beginning by all project stakeholders to allow maximum functionality in terms of interoperability and open standards, as transparent data exchanges are essential in supporting IPD. Any technology which is compliant with Open Standards best enables communications among participants.

9. Organization and Leadership The project team using IPD are seen as an organisation in its own right, where participants are committed to the same goals and values. All roles are clearly defined, where team

Page 20 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

leadership is undertaken by those most capable with regards to specific work, competence and services. Usually design professionals and contractors will lead within their own area of expertise with support from the entire team, however specific roles are determined on a project-by-project basis (AIA, 2007).

Image Ref: Collaborating to Increase Value and Efficiency, While Reducing Waste (vjscozzariandsons.com)

To implement these principles, not only does the concept of differing organisational goals need to be broken down, but a system needs to be created where all parties interests and risks are shared and associated with the outcome of the project.

Page 21 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

6.4

Domains of an IPD approach to construction

Thomsen (2011) states that all construction project delivery methods have three basic domains from which they operate, and these are: 

The Project Organisation



The Projects Operating System



The Commercial Terms that bind all project participants

He states that traditional project delivery methods offers solutions in each of these domains, and continually produce results that disappoint client/owners, whereas IPD seeks to resolve the issues within each of these domains. Each is discussed below.

PROJECT ORGANISATION The traditional construction project is organised into 3 ‘camps’ with diverse interests: Owner, Designer and Contractor, and as a result these projects involve ‘siloed’ structures with rigid hierarchies with each ‘camp’ organised vertically separated from each other by contractual agreements. This in turn results in waste, increased cost, time and adversarial relationships (Thomsen et al. 2011).

(I)

Integrated Teams

Bringing together key stakeholders, such as Client/Owner, Construction Managers, and designers from the early stages of the project allows higher level understanding of project requirements. And this integration is increased by physically co-locating members from all disciplines by using BIM. This co-locating process is sometimes named the “Big Room”, where people begin to see themselves more as one team.

Image Ref: The “BIG Room” fosters Collaboration (www.leanconstruction.org)

Page 22 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

(II)

Integrated Governance

An integrated team also benefits from integrated governance, this is where most IPD projects use some form of leadership executive committee such as a Core Group or Project Management Team.

The executive committees are always comprised of the Client/Owner, Principle Architect and Principle Contractor, and may also include key design professionals. These leaders are fully committed and are critical to project delivery and success of an IPD project.

(III)

High-Performing Teams

Partnering activities are used to aid and develop shared processes to allow for a more open, collaborative culture. Many IPD projects seek to create a ‘high-performing team’ by using the right person for the right function regardless of employer. In turn, a ‘virtual company’ is created, where people remain employed within their organisation, but assume one or more roles based on their skills and project needs, eg. An engineer may also sit on the BIM Implementation team.

OPERATING SYSTEM Lean Construction and Lean Project Delivery offers an ‘operating system’ that reduces waste, shortens schedules, increases productivity and quality, and can also improve Health & Safety and project relationships. As a result many IPD projects implement Lean Construction methodologies.

The Lean Construction Institute describes Lean as: “A production management-based approach to project delivery – a new way to design and build.

Lean changes the way work is done throughout the delivery process. Lean Construction extends for the objectives of a Lean Production System – maximise value and minimise waste.”

Thomsen (2011) also states: “Learning Lean is hard work, requiring participants to unlearn many behaviours that worked well in traditional settings.”

Hence, Lean Construction is specifically formulated to arrive at all project and program goals without the trade-offs of time, cost, quality, satisfaction and safety. Lean tools should only be used to drive value, or eliminate waste from a project. Some of the most common Lean tools are listed here:

Page 23 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

LEAN TOOLS 

Plan-Do-Check-Adjust (PDCA) The PDCA cycle is a continuous loop of planning, doing, checking (or studying), and adjusting.

It provides a simple and effective approach for solving problems and managing change.



A3 Reports An A3 report is a way of organising and analysing issues all on a single A3 sheet of paper. It is invaluable for providing a record that reflects the knowledge, thought process, and recommendations in a simple and accessible format.



Value Stream Mapping This enables a team to analyse the business process step-by step. It allows team members to develop and explore a shared understanding, whilst documenting the current and future state of how an operation is performed, where by having optimised by eliminating waste.



BIM and Real Time Estimating This enables the project team to avoid rework and engage in real-time estimating, as and when changes to the design occurs, through the use of technology and BIM processes.



Target Value Design (TVD) Rather than designing first and estimating later, TVD utilises a project's estimated cost as the starting point. Targets are established for all relevant components (e.g., building envelope; structural system; interior finishes; mechanical systems; etc.), and then they are adjusted up or down collaboratively by cross disciplinary teams as the design evolves.



Last Planner System (LPS) LPS was developed to produce predictable workflow and rapid learning. This produces maximum value to the owner by eliminating waste caused by unpredictable workflow, then you can make better decisions about resource allocation, scheduling and coordination.

According to Thomsen (2011): a simplified view of LPS is based on “Should, Can, Will, Did”.

o

SHOULD - work is derived from master and phase schedule.

o

CAN - work is derived from the Look-Ahead Plan and represents what the team thinks can be done.

o

WILL - work is derived from weekly work plans and is work that a performer agrees will be done.

o

Page 24 of 63

DID - completed work.

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

Image Ref: What is the Last Planner System? (leanconstructionblog.com)

LEAN BEHAVIOURS Underlying Lean Project Delivery are specific behaviours. These behaviours support change in mindset from individual to collective project achievement. It requires moving from an attitude of ‘knower’ to one of being a ‘learner.’

Thomsen (2011) states: “Collaboration, Trust, Promised-based Management and Continuous Learning are behaviours required from each individual on a Lean project.”

COMMERCIAL TERMS Traditional construction projects do not interconnect project participants across contractual lines, and as a result of this contract structure, each stakeholder operates under commercial terms that maximises its own interests regardless whether it hurts the projects participants or outcomes. 

Collective Risk Management IPD projects use many ways of sharing risks and fostering collective risk management and responsibility. Common approaches include sharing cost-savings or cost overruns against an estimated cost of work by all stakeholders, promoting a collaborative project culture.



Painsharing and Gainsharing In this approach, all project participants jointly develop a mutually agreeable estimate of the anticipated construction cost of a project and devise a system of incentives and risk sharing, in turn the commercial interests of the teams are better aligned, and the focus on meeting project deadlines is increased due to the limited liability of cost overruns.

Page 25 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail



Profit Pooling The project stakeholders typically put all or a significant percentage of their profits (at risk) in a common pool, which is available to pay for cost overruns.



Contingency Sharing Sharing the contingency fund allows for greater cost transparency and collective ownership of mistakes, and by sharing contingency the total contingency amount on the project can be reduced, as the likelihood that everyone would need 100% would be low.

MEASURING PERFORMANCE 

Incentives In IPD projects, the goal is to have a ‘balanced’ set of commercial incentives that address the owner’s project goals. Nearly all owners will specify cost effectiveness as a goal, but there are also other important goals to consider such as schedule, quality, safety, sustainability.



Goal Definition The concept of IPD allows the owner’s goals to be aligned to the project team. This is done by defining achievable goals, measuring them and providing incentives for achieving them.



Award Fees Many IPD projects have a bonus system for achieving non-cost related goals, called Award Fees. These are based on either qualitative or quantitative measure, or a mixture of both.

To sum up, according to Thomsen (2011): “All projects require three elements to function: a project organisation, an operating system and commercial terms. IPD and Lean Construction is seen to offer significant improvements in all these areas. Project organisations move from working in silos to integrated, high performing teams.

Operating systems move away from linear, waste-laden processes to ones holistically designed to add value, improve reliability, foster collaboration and continuously improve. And commercial relationships switch from self-protecting to team based relationships.”

Page 26 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

6.5

Types of IPD Contractual Agreements

TRADITIONAL CONTRACTS

Can a traditional contract be used on an IPD project? No, because of the following reasons: 

You cannot align risk and reward to optimise project success over individual entity success if the designers and builders are not a ‘team’.



Cultural change is hard enough with a new contract, without it people revert to thinking about their own interests and on controlling information.



And it is nearly impossible to integrate operating, design and construction knowledge without huge risk to the designers.

IPD contracts, on the other hand are fundamentally different from traditional design and construction contracts. Many organisations struggle with changing their procurement systems as adopting IPD requires rethinking their business and contract models (Fischer et al. 2017). Below are some reasons why traditional contracts are not appropriate for IPD projects. 

Traditional contracts such as lump-sum and Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) contracts create conflicting interest between owner, designer and builder.



Traditional contracts are based on a ‘piece-work’ business model as profits are based on number of units sold.



Traditional contracts rigidly divide work-based on traditional contracts by segregating participant’s roles and responsibilities.



Traditional contracts constrain communication to specific paths such as the owner and contractor can only communicate with each other through the Architect and communication by sub-contractors and suppliers is only through the contractor.



Traditional contracts reward individuals, not group performance, hence, collaboration without an IPD Agreement can increase risk.

The reality is traditional contracts are designed to maintain a distance between all project stakeholders and profitability is determined individually, and is unrelated to project outcomes.

Page 27 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

IPD CONTRACTS IPD contracts define relationships amongst project participants and the process that guides their actions. IPD contracts develop collaborative work-plans, co-location and BIM Executions Plans.

Fischer et al. (2017) states that IPD contracts lead to exceptional project performance and value by: 

Removing impediment to and stimulate communication, collaboration and creativity.



Aligning participants to well understood and agreed objectives encourages and rewards behaviour that increases project value (Fischer et al. 2017).

Hence, the transformation from traditional to IPD agreements requires a mutual shift in execution with regards to how contracts are developed, and delivered. The types of IPD contracts used are: 

Single Purpose Entity (SPE) This contract creates a limited liability company for the purpose of planning, designing and constructing the project. The SPE allows for complete sharing of risk and reward in a fully integrated collaborative process.



Tri-party Agreement In this type of contract, the owner, Architect and contractor are brought together where the interests of the parties are aligned with a collaborative process by sharing the risks and rewards by a certain percentage of the overall contract value.



Integrated Form of Agreement (IFOA) Single Multi-Party Agreement Here the owner, Architect, contractor, and r key project participants execute a single agreement for the design, construction and commissioning of a Project, support multi-lateral open sharing and collaboration; risk sharing teams process risk compensation/ reward and communications/ technology agreements.

Page 28 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

6.6

Challenges & Drivers for an IPD approach to construction

Use of IPD on construction projects will cause significant changes in the relationships of projects participants and the contractual agreements between them. Key challenges include: 

Legal changes (new contractual agreements) to documentation ownership and production



Changes in practice and use of technology and information



Initial cost of Implementation and cultural change



Use of BIM processes and interoperability



Skills shortage and lack of knowledge of IPD

The ‘drivers’ for using IPD include: 

A shift towards globalised working processes



The demand for sustainability and innovation



Need for increased productivity and low cost margins



Improved buildability



Delivery team collaboration and alignment



Systematic and collective learning

Image Ref: Factors Driving Increased adoption of IPD (Hays, 2009)

Page 29 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

6.7

Overcoming Barriers to IPD adoption within construction

Change is difficult, and virtually everyone cites instances where team members fell back on old behaviours (Fischer et al. 2017). Developing trust is a real and continuous challenge. It is easy to become protective of your personal interests and forget that in IPD the team wins or loses together.

Reaping the benefits of IPD is found when all project participants are brought together in the design and construction process as early as possible. IPD training can provide an element in overcoming these cultural barriers. Training may be achieved at two levels: Organisational and project level.

Using trust based activities and tools can help achieve IPD adoption through the use of Lean construction concepts such as Target Value Design and Last Planner System.

A summary of key ‘tools’ for adopting IPD are listed below:

 BIM According to the latest NBS National Construction Contracts and Law Report 2018, BIM helps foster better working relationships on collaborative projects. NBS CEO Richard Waterhouse states:

“BIM is an example of collaborative, information rich, design practice. Future technologies are likely to be even more collaborative and even more information rich and as we move towards BIM Level 3 and the implementation of future technology, creating a legal framework that describes BIM is a necessary foundation.”  COLLABORATION According to Fischer et al. (2017), collaboration is the heart and soul of IPD. When teams are collaborating, every step in IPD works better. When teams are collaborating, achievements become possible. Sharing information is a key component on any project, and even more important on an IPD approach. Regarding collaboration through BIM, he states:

“Collaboration working practices where all design team members are engaged at an early stage in the design process, aided by BIM tools, are estimated to save at least 10% over the cost of traditional design and construction projects.”

Hence, overall project value is maximised if IPD project participants choose a collaborative strategy.

Eg, risk/reward systems can be used to increase collaboration as well as increased frequency of interactions between project stakeholders.

Page 30 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

 TRUST & TRANSPARENCY Trust is the fundamental element to collaboration. Trust facilitates information sharing and enhances productivity (Fischer et al. 2017). Mutual respect and trust is the single most important principle of IPD (AIA, 2007). Trust is gained through relationships and commitment; when this kind of trust is present, an induvial accepts risks knowing that the intention of others is mutually positive.  MOTIVATION AND INCENTIVES Working towards the interest of the project and achieving targets and goals collectively requires a high degree of motivation amongst all project participants. Incentives, such as IPD’s compensation structure follows the project Alliancing Model (Fischer et al. 2017) with the goal of stimulating efficiency and the alignment of interests for the benefit of the project. In this model, project participants are compensated on a cost-plus basis where the owner guarantees the direct cost, but a portion of the profit and participant’s bonuses are dependent on the project outcome (AIA, 2007).

These factors allow individuals to work closely and collaborate better to achieve project goals.

 LEAN CONCEPTS Lean construction has many tools and processes that enable people to support IPD implementation.

Lean provides the means for teams to optimise their performance, minimise waste and achieve project goals by using Lean tools such as LPS and TVD (discussed earlier). Other key tenets of lean include: 

Focus on delivering value



Remove obstacles that prevent value flow



Eliminate anything that does not add value



Incorporate value engineering from start



Encourage knowledge and idea sharing across disciplines



Manage work to optimise the whole rather than the parts

 PROJECT INFORMATION MANAGMENT PMIS is a web-based centralised database created and used by the project team. A PMIS provides information so the team has a common understanding of the facts; a prerequisite for collaboration.

The PMIS defines the programs and projects; cost, time, scope and quality, and it defines the team, people, organisations and their roles. It also helps managing IPD contractual documentation.

Page 31 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

7.0

Integration of IPD with Lean Construction

Lean principles and the IPD process relies heavily on trust and respect of all people involved, resulting in a higher emphasis on communication and team performance. When a team is working as a unit, and not in the traditional adversarial way that has existed in the construction industry, every stakeholder feels empowered to highlight areas where more value and quality can be obtained.

Additionally, alignment on the goals and objectives from the beginning and a focus on coordination and collaboration during pre-construction means a decreased chance of problems and rework.

IPD was created to reduce waste within the construction industry through collaboration of project participants and the integration of new technologies and contracts. Hence, some fundamental principles inherent within IPD can be traced back to the manufacturing industry and in particular the Toyota Production System (TPS) using “just-in-time” delivery and “reducing waste” (Liker, 2004).

Lean and IPD work together in the same way BIM and IPD work together. Some key advantages of using IPD and Lean concepts together enable: 

Reduction in waste



Increased reliability of planning



Delivering value



Eliminating obstacles and allowing flow



Create pull production



Value engineering is built in from the start



Project schedule is optimised



Eliminating duplication and rework

According to McKinsey Global Institute analysis, using IPD increases productivity and costs by improving the contractual structures in favor of more collaborative contractual relationship by a: 

Range of 8-9% improvement in productivity



Range of 6-7% improvement on average cost savings

The combination of Lean principles and IPD puts the focus back on integrated construction teams. By creating a formal project delivery method that holds all team members accountable and focuses on communication, all stakeholders are rewarded to work towards the same goal of efficient project completion (Ayala, 2018).

Page 32 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

8.0

How BIM, Collaboration and IPD can work together

Synergies of IPD, BIM and Lean Construction It is clear that using BIM automatically enables project collaboration, which in turn brings three elements together within the IPD process: People, Process and Technology. Hence, synergising BIM, Lean concepts and IPD together, to support and reinforces each other to mutually beneficial results.

According to Deutsch (2011), “we have just barely put our toe in the IPD waters. IPD is the future as it enables you to talk about the whole supply chain. And In the context of this report, I see IPD as the process for good collaboration, BIM as the catalyst and Lean concepts as the ‘waste minimiser.’ All three ingredients are key for a project to be executed successfully.”

As IPD is a relatively new procurement process that is gaining popularity as the use of BIM expands within the AEC industry, trying to ‘synergise’ BIM, IPD and Lean together will not be an easy task (Eastman et al. 2011). When using lean concepts within construction, value to the client is maximised through continuous process improvements that optimise flow and reduce waste.

Hence, Lean supports the synergies of both BIM and IPD to take place. According to Eastman (2011) BIM and IPD already, go together and represents a clear break with current ‘linear’ processes. As mentioned earlier, IPD allows collaboration contractually to take place and BIM has proved to be the key enabling process behind IPD teams. Construction contracts such as “Integrated Agreement for Lean Contracts” allows teams to pull in all three areas of IPD, BIM and Lean (Eastman, 2011).

On a US Healthcare project – Sutter Health’s Integrated Form of Agreement (IFOA), all project participants including the owner, contractor and designers were all co-signatories of the agreement and members of the IPD team. Eastman (2007) goes on to say:

“Sutter Health has been experimenting with IPD and Lean construction practices over the past five years. They had considerable success in using these techniques on their recent projects.”

Page 33 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

9.0

Research Methodology undertaken

Through writing this report, I have tried to understand the basic concepts of IPD on construction projects and the importance of BIM and Lean in relation to achieving success within the AEC industry. BIM and Lean are dynamic ‘enablers’ for helping IPD within construction procurement.

They all pay a vital role in coordinating project information, minimising waste and supporting collaboration and integration of all stakeholders.

As part of my research, three interviewees were chosen from the UK AEC industry consisting of new and experienced users of IPD adoption, and who could provide a well-rounded perspective on this topic. All interviewees are senior figures within industry with both theoretical and practical experience of IPD applications on construction procurement.

The interviews were conducted in a semi-structured format to allow for an open and informal discussion to take place, and to allow the exchange of ideas between the interviewee. Prompts were given to stimulate further discussion, also to help interviewees to provide personal views, opinions and experiences regarding their exposure to BIM, Lean and IPD.

The interview questions were delivered using standard script. This maintained similarity in question delivery so responses could be analysed accurately and fairly. Questions were structured and developed to cover all areas of BIM, Lean and IPD, including its practical application and implementation. The interviews were around 60mins and a tabled version (questions & answers) can be found within the Appendix.

Interviewees were selected due to their: 

Experience and position in the AEC construction industry.



Proximity and usage of BIM & Lean methodologies within construction.



Experiences of working collaboratively with project teams.

Page 34 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

10.0

Case Study 1 and lessons learned

Two case studies were chosen on the basis of having used an IPD approach to construction procurement, including the use of BIM and Lean concepts. The first one is SUTTER MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING, US, that specified BIM within an innovative IPD Contract, project goals, Lean methods, and ensured goal alignment of all team members. The second is the WALTER CRONKITE SCHOOL OF JORNALISM, Arizona, US. Here, IPD, BIM and Lean principles were used in managing project delivery.

Image Ref: IPD Case Studies (AIA, AIA Minnesota, 2012)

SUTTER MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING This project was the first ‘true’ IPD project in the US. Sutter worked with the Lean Construction Institute to develop this new collaborative delivery method. This was a $19.4 million, three-storey medical office building housing primary care medical practices and laboratories. The three key principles of IPD approaches used on the project are reviewed below.

(I)

Early involvement of Key Stakeholders The initial project team consisted of Sutter Health, Sutter Regional Medical Foundation.

This group together selected and brought on the main design-build subcontractors early in the design process (AIA, 2012). Preconstruction design assisted of vital trades that had the largest impact on systems such as mechanical, electrical, and plumbing/fire protection, as well as external façade/glazing sub-contractors.

The benefits of using BIM early in the project were evident from the number of issues identified before construction, as live group coordination sessions were held in the ‘Big room’ every other week. These sessions enabled many clashes to be identified and

Page 35 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

provided significant cost savings due to increased field activity, tighter schedule, more prefabricated work and less re-design (AIA, 2012).

(II)

Shared risk/Reward System By aligning the owner’s commercial goals with those of the project team it was possible to create a ‘win-win’ situation where any incentive became an acknowledgement of a job well-done. Implementation tools such as BIM and Lean construction processes helped provide a framework for the team to collaborate and make decisions.

(III)

Contractual Agreement used The IFOA (Integrated Form of Agreement) was used. This is a three-way contract between the owner, the Architect and builder. Each party was held accountable to each other as equal partners. The Architect and builder combined their contingencies and were jointly responsible for construction errors and design omissions. Hence, the contract created a system of shared risk with the goal of reducing overall project risk rather than shifting it between parties. Contingency funds were jointly managed by project participants rather than at the owner’s discretion alone. This contract was the first of its kind to be used on a construction project in the US (AIA, 2012).

LESSONS LEARNED Sub-contractors felt more intense effort was required up front compared to traditional delivery systems, but all agreed the benefits of this up front effort and collaboration came later in the project, and rework was almost completely eliminated. The contractor also felt having people on site with BIM software capability to check progress and instantly find solutions to arising problems was very beneficial (Morton, 2011).

Morton (2011) also goes on to say that the IPD philosophy wasn’t accepted by everyone. Several sub-contractors did not want to attend scheduled group meetings, and the design team felt the owner had to be kept engaged from the earliest design stages and throughout construction, to enable quick decision making by the owner meaning less delays on the project.

Page 36 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

11.0

Case Study 2 and lessons learned

Image Ref: IPD Case Studies (AIA, AIA Minnesota, 2012)

CRONKITE SCHOOL OF JORNALISM In 2006, Arizona State University (ASU) in partnership with the City of Phoenix had 24-months to complete the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism. The primary issue forcing an extremely tight schedule was the date for move-in prescribed by the bond that financed the project. All disciplines were brought together along with the glazing sub-contractors when the design process began.

Although the teams could not enter into a pure tri-party IPD contract, the teams agreed to follow IPD principles for managing project delivery, including strategies such as early, open book accounting and transparency, and co-location.

(I)

Early involvement of Key Stakeholders Key participants who needed to complete the design were on board as the design process began. The Architect and contractor were selected as one team, as well as engineering and critical trades brought on board immediately to participate in the design process. Sub-contractors were required to use BIM and were selected in part on their preconstruction capabilities.

(II)

Shared risk/Reward System The project was obliged to follow the Standard City of Phoenix design-build contract, which did not allow for a shared ‘pain and gain’ mechanism. Money saved through efficiencies was put back into the project for value-added items. Regarding the use of BIM to test the cost of different design ideas, the Architects (HDR) stated: “The reality is when you’re willing to take responsibility and provide the builder with material quantities (from BIM) the end result is that the risk goes down for everybody.”

Page 37 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

(III)

Contractual Agreement used The contract was a two-way owner/designer-builder contract as prescribed by City Procurement Regulations. As a public project, the team was not able to make changes to the contract and so it did not include IPD specific clauses. But many IPD principles were implemented on a ‘non-contractual’ basis.

LESSONS LEARNED The team felt that there was not enough time up front to engage in the kind of team-building that is needed in such an intense collaboration. Participants felt that the design-build sub contractors were typically uncomfortable with the uncertainty and sometimes chaotic nature of early design and the iterative process that designers must follow to arrive at an appropriate solution. All felt this could have been overcome with additional training and experience. Due to the flexibility provided by early involvement, transparency and collaborative decision making, several major design decisions were made to optimise the project within the schedule and budget constraints.

Due to the success of this project, the Architects (HDR) has built out a new space (Big Room) in its office specifically for co-location. They commented that: “Co-location works because when you work that closely together you naturally develop a relationship of trust. As Architects we never sat in the contractor’s office and understood what they did.”

CASE STUDY SUMMARY The two case studies examined identified numerous benefits associated with using an IPD approach to construction. They have shown projects that have tight budgets and programmes that would normally be prone to value engineering to achieve budgets, and also involve delays when using a traditional delivery system, can be achieved and in some instances excelled if an IPD approach is adopted. It is clear there are some issues associated with IPD, including; people’s reluctance to try something new or change their ways by using something they are unfamiliar with (Morton, 2011).

The case studies also revealed that interoperability appeared to be a common issue that affected projects using BIM and IPD (Morton, 2011). Early planning and getting key participants together early enough can reduce the problem of interoperability issues arising, as software can be agreed prior to commencement of the project. It is clear that IPD requires further development to be a perfect construction procurement system, but it has also shown it can solve issues and inefficiencies currently affecting the construction industry (Morton, 2011).

Page 38 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

12.0

Data Analysis Findings

The analysis of the two IPD case studies reveals the benefits of using an IPD approach to construction. From the summary of lessons learnt in the case studies, an IPD approach combined with the effects of using BIM processes and Lean concepts are better understood with the feedback received from the owner, Architects and builder.

IPD combined with BIM and Lean shows that these concepts give real ‘tangible’ benefits to all project participants and the environment, but the research also shows that full benefits were still not fully realised due to: 

Cultural change still difficult to overcome



Lack of knowledge and training using IPD, BIM and Lean methodologies



Lack of interest in sharing risk and incentives with others in the same team



UK business value of BIM, IPD, Lean and their ROI



UK value of IPD to owner, Architect, builder and sub-contractors



Lack of ‘real’ case studies from a UK (or European) perspective



Finding a way forward for IPD adoption within the UK

In the US successful implementation using IPD in construction has led contractors to re-engineer their processes. Pilot projects that made early intensive use of BIM and IPD showed success and a positive impact on construction (Eastman et al. 2011). The benefits of collaborative practices and BIM have received wide review and extensive experiences using IPD on projects have been documented in the US.

The research has shown that the use of incentives (eg. rewards/profits) is becoming a part of the equity relationships with clients, with contracts that state the distribution of benefits and penalties, and a good example was the Sutter Health Integrated Form of Agreement (IFOA) with its pain and gain sharing provisions (Eastman et al. 2011). The research also shows that people are still not interested in change as they are still using traditional delivery methods within a ‘siloed’ approach to construction due to many years of having used the same tools and processes. Using a new delivery method such as IPD would be very difficult, as this would require a cultural change of collaboration in order to implement it.

Page 39 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

The literature review showed the difficulty in accepting change by using an IPD approach. Hence, to overcome these cultural changes, a proper training programme is required at both organisational level and project level. At organisational level, the training is directed towards using IPD to help change cultural barriers and for collaboration. At project level training is provided to individuals to allow for team based collaboration to develop and for the right people to come together using the right tools such as BIM and Lean. For example, in an IPD approach, issues of interoperability arise due to lack of knowledge and the skills set of team members. The case studies reveal that additional training is required on using IPD and associated tools if the true benefits, both are to be realised.

Both case studies revealed that team selection must be undertaken at the earliest stage possible and that the owner must drive the process. Even before the consultants and builders come on board, the owner must understand the level of collaboration required, the type of contract that facilitates collaboration and their capability with regards to BIM technologies, Lean concepts etc.

Image Ref: US IPD Case Studies. AIA, AIA Minnesota, March 2012

Page 40 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

13.0

Conclusions & Recommendations

In conclusion, the qualitative research shows that the use of IPD, BIM and Lean within the construction industry is still slow due to inexperience and lack of involvement. The interview respondents have shown that there are several IPD enablers currently in use in the UK construction industry. Clients are becoming more intelligent and want more input into projects; this pushes the project team to provide the client with clear, accessible information. The use of BIM, Lean and collaborative processes is enabling this process to improve. BIM is being used increasingly as a tool to not only design, simulate and maintain buildings, but also as a way to communicate design intent to project participants (Morton, 2011).

Morton (2011) states: “Clients, designers and contractors are increasingly seeking to integrate at an earlier stage in the project to identify key project and client objectives, strategies and timing of information release. The use of dedicated client or model review meetings scheduled at strategic times is helping the design team and client identify problematic areas, as well as reduce errors and design assumptions, which in turn reduces time and project cost.�

Both the case studies and interviewees identified that co-location of the design team was potentially a good idea that would work if it happened at strategic times throughout the project. As has been identified, the current appointment processes and procurement routes do not lend themselves to a collaborative working environment, and the lack of case history regarding multi-party contracts was also seen to be a prominent barrier for adopting IPD.

Page 41 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

14.0

Limitations of research undertaken

The research carried out gives an insight into ‘BIM enabled’ IPD. The data extracted and reviewed from the interviewees corresponded with the research obtained from the case studies and literature review. The information received was limited to using IPD on large-scale construction projects, with multi-national companies. Therefore no results or findings were present from SME’s, what their perception were of BIM, Lean and IPD and whether they would find it beneficial in implementing these processes on smaller scale projects.

15.0

Area for further research and investigation

Possible areas for future research include increasing the sample of individuals views and experiences from across the UK, and also the need for SME’s to participate to get an accurate picture of whether this approach to construction is plausible at a smaller scale.

16.0

Recommendations

Considering the data analysed and the research conducted, it is recommended that knowledge of IPD can be bolstered through using BIM and Lean from a ‘grass-roots’, basis, by teaching these strategies at undergraduate level across all design, engineering and construction disciplines, hence the need for programmes like the MSc BIM and Digital Built Environments course.

Fischer (2017) states: “The industry has a long way to go to perfect the ‘integrated project organisation’. We have seen significant interest and growth in new delivery methods and tools. Interest in IPD is growing. New contract programmes are being explored. Owners, designers and builders are exploring business models and organisation structures that support and enable integrated processes. The growth of BIM and Lean continues to generate new tools & processes to make projects more efficient & productive.”

To achieve optimal project integration, there is a need for more research on building project specific communities focused on improving team behaviours and to think of value beyond just ‘completing under budget and ahead of schedule’.

Page 42 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

17.0

Appendix A - List of Interview Questions & Participant Details

This chapter of the report presents data collected from a questionnaire and face-to-face interviews with professionals currently working in the UK construction industry. The goals of the questionnaire and interviews were conducted to measure individual and team member’s perception of how IPD impacts traditional methods of procurement.

A summary and comparison of responses is listed below. They are not exhaustive, but focus on primary areas of interest, such as:

1. Traditional Contractual Relationships 2. Use of BIM and IPD within Construction 3. Collaborative Project Delivery 4. Managing Risks 5. Sharing Information and Digital Security 6. Goal Definition and Costs 7. IPD Contractual Relationships 8. Shared Profits and Loss 9. UK Standards 10. IPD Future Use

Interviewee Profile a) What are your responsibilities in the company related to the scope of BIM? b) How many years of experience do/does you/your company have with BIM and IPD?

BIM & IPD 1. What motivated your company to implement BIM and IPD? a. (Answer yes for IPD – what are the changes needed for adoption of IPD and how long did it take?) b. (Answer no for IPD – why did you choose not to adopt IPD?) 2. What advantages/barriers arise from the use of BIM on IPD projects?

3. How do you think that behaviours, technology and process affect BIM implementation and IPD? 4. How does your company measure the results of BIM implementation and IPD? 5. How has the use of BIM encouraged the success of an IPD approach in your company?

Page 43 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

Collaboration 6. How do you think BIM and IPD enhance collaboration throughout the construction industry and how do you create high performance teams on an IPD project?

Risk 7. How can BIM and IPD help companies to manage risks in terms of identification, control and mitigation?

Sharing Information/ Security 8. Will IPD provide significant reductions in RFI´s and how?

9. What are the concerns regarding security due to the sharing of information in a BIM process and how can they be overcome?

Goal definition (owner/FM) + Cost 10. How is time & cost reviewed and tracked in an IPD projects and what, according to you is the business value of BIM and IPD? 11. How has an IPD approach optimised the operation and maintenance costs in the framework of facility management?

Contracts 12. How can contracts be a way to improve collaboration between owner, design team and contractor?

Profits 13. Do all the stakeholders get the projected profits at the end even if errors were made?

Standards 14. How are the UK government BIM standards, regulations and documents managed in your company?

Future 15. Do you believe that BIM and IPD will be game changers in terms of digital transformation for the construction sector?

___________________________________________________________________________ End of Interview Sample Questions

Page 44 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

INTERVIEWEES/PARTICIPANT DETAILS

Interview - Participant 1 Name:

Mac Muzvimwe

Position:

BIM & Digital Transformation Lead

Company:

Arcadis

Email:

mac.muzvimwe@arcadis.com

Tel:

01392 268 108

Mob:

07803 261 008

Date:

06/12/17

Interview - Participant 2 Name:

Marina Machado

Position:

BIM Implementation Manager

Company:

Morgan Sindall

Email:

marina.machado@morgansindall.com

Tel:

0161 874 1016

Mob:

07790 599 197

Date:

08/12/17

Interview - Participant 3 Name:

Martin Davis

Position:

Director and Cabinet Office Mentor

Company:

Integrated Project Initiatives (IPI)

Email:

martin.davis@ipinitiatives.com

Mob:

07866 733 857

Date:

14/12/17

Page 45 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

18.0

Appendix B

Summary & Comparison of Responses

Interviewee Profile

List of Interview Questions

a) What are your responsibilities in the company related to the scope of BIM?

b) How many years of experience do/does you/your company have with BIM and IPD?

The company has over 5 years of BIM integrated with IPD.

1. What motivated your company to implement BIM and IPD?

Efficiencies in design, delivery, better client engagement and establishment of long-lasting collaborative relationships.

How it took – it’s still work in progress; such change takes time.

(Answer Yes for IPD – what are the changes needed for adoption of IPD and how long did it take?)

BIM & IPD

Participant 1 Mac Muzvimwe (Arcadis) Lead responsibility for driving BIM and Digital Transformation in the Arcadis UK Property Sector (Residential & Commercial Developers) in line with the global business’s 100% BIM strategy.”

(Answer No for IPD – why did you choose not to adopt IPD?)

2. What advantages/barriers arise from the use of BIM on IPD projects?

Participant 2 Marina Machado (Morgan Sindall) BIM Implementation Manager responsible for developing and managing the implementation of the strategy for BIM processes, procedures and best practice across the business.

Me: 3 years. Company: over 10 years.

Participant 3 Martin Davis (IP Initiatives) Director at Integrated Projects Initiatives and Cabinet Office ‘Mentor’ for the IPI Model.

Since around 2000 I have been involved with the Integrated Project Insurance model (IPI).

BIM – client demand and the You cannot have design in one box, and construction in anotherindustry demand. you cannot have a ‘brick wall’ IPD – Lack of knowledge and between project members. The understanding within UK AEC Traditional approach to industry. construction is designed to fail.

We conceived the IPI model to enable Integrated Project Delivery, as a no-blame culture is required.

Efficiencies are the advantages, and the biggest barrier is resistance to change.

BIM has many advantages which No barriers due to the UK BIM are globally documented, but Level 2 mandate. Doing BIM there is still lack of knowledge of together has enabled IPD case studies in the UK. collaboration and IPI is ‘sister’ to BIM. “Come together as one team on one screen.”

3. How do you think that behaviours, technology and process affect BIM implementation and IPD?

Behaviours – resistance to change from adversarial relationships that the industry is used to, to collaborative relationships that encourage sharing.

This is a complete cultural change in the way of working within the UK construction industry. BIM is just the beginning with technology & processes.

Suppliers (Fulcrow) had problems getting products into BIM L2 due to interoperability issues. Many technical problems arose due to this.

Based on efficiency savings achieved from design and quantity surveying services e.g. less time spent on designs, QTO, etc. and also efficiencies achieved for our clients, like cost, programme and quality issues.

BIM KPIs are currently used to evaluate BIM Implementation on projects.

People did not blame each otherthey just got on with it.

Construction Excellence is pushing measurement. 7 success criteria’s were used on Dudley project. BIM KPIs not used, but BIM technologies used from beginning.

See definitions above; we believe the two go hand in hand anyway.

BIM has encouraged Use the best people together on collaboration on all projects. projects who can collaborate well The next step would be looking with one another. at IPD approach to construction.

Information sharing. Technology – better tools that encourage collaboration and info sharing. Process – changes to how design is done, quantities are taken off, and how information is shared.

BIM & IPD

4. How does your company measure the results of BIM implementation and IPD?

5. How has the use of BIM encouraged the success of an IPD approach in your company?

Page 47 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Lessons learned and project reviews at construction handover

Iftikhar Ismail

Collaboration Risk Sharing Info/Security

6. How do you think BIM and IPD enhance collaboration throughout the construction industry and how do you create high performance teams on an IPD project?

Info sharing as explained on call. High performance teams are created by identifying the best skilled staff, supporting them throughout the project, running collaboration and knowledge-sharing workshops, etc. and ensuring that they are continuously upskilled.

BIM has enabled collaboration and co-location has also been very beneficial.

The IPI model required all project team members to come together from the start of the project.

7. How can BIM and IPD help companies to manage risks in terms of identification, control and mitigation?

Collaboration and info sharing means informed decisions are made, and the team work together to identify risks and necessary mitigation measures. The use of BIM technology reduces risk of human errors and risks that come from lack of design co-ordination.

Via an IPD specific contract, which we currently do not have here in the UK.

Look at opportunities within risks and work at them.

8. Will IPD provide significant reductions in RFI´s and how?

Yes, more so BIM becomes the facility is built virtually before getting to site.

Yes, with early deployment of the construction and design teams.

People are in the same room (colocation) hence there should not be any (or minimum) number RFIs. You can also co-locate teams.

9. What are the concerns regarding security due to the sharing of information in a BIM process and how can they be overcome?

Risk of cyber terrorism, and information about assets falling into the wrong hands. Adoption of PAS 1192-5 helps, but cyber terrorism is a global issue and there is no easy fix.

Technological and cultural Collaboration and Innovation.

Data is shared on the pretence that people will not blame each other and team decisions should be recorded.

Page 48 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

BIM has helped reduce rework and allowed better coordination at design & construction stages.

PAS1192-5: specification for security-minded building information modelling (BIM).

Iftikhar Ismail

Goal definition + Cost Contracts

10. How is time & cost reviewed and tracked in an IPD projects and what, according to you is the business value of BIM and IPD?

See answer to Q4 above, plus also there are case studies demonstrating the benefits of using BIM for FM.

IPD methodologies not currently used on our projects.

Solutions should be arrived at on dates agreed by team. Full resourcing is required on projects and open transparency working.

11. How has an IPD approach optimised the operation and maintenance costs in the framework of facility management?

Yes, because the FM staff/ contractors have easy access to all the asset information they require to manage the facilities.

Demand a lot of change to allow early engagement of stakeholders in the project.

Part of our business model is to prefer 2 stage tenders on D&B projects. That allows us to get involved early on in the project and interfere in the decisions to improve buildability of the project.

The Dudley College client team had a lot of input into the design for facilities management, hence the BIM model was a required deliverable as part of project handover.

12. How can contracts be a way to improve collaboration between owner, design team and contractor?

The UK government endorsed the NEC form of contract as it encourages collaboration, i.e. requires that parties work in the “spirit of mutual trust and collaboration”.

We have incorporated BIM Level 2 Standards into our company process and procedures and we hold BSi BIM Level 2 Certification.

Cut out waste by using the right form of contract on project (an Alliance Contract). This frees people to work together using the right contract – equivalent to a multi-party agreement.

Page 49 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

NEC contract options C & D are based on incentivisation scales agreed precontract which are allow the parties to share the profits and indeed losses, e.g. if final costs are say 88-94% of target price, profit share 60/40 between employer and contractor; if between 94-100%, 50/50. If the costs exceed the target cost, i.e. a loss, say 100-106, losses shared 50/50; 106-112, 40/60, and above 112, 0/100.

Possibly. This will require all project participants to re-think and re-learn a new approach to construction. Breaking away from traditional cultural methods will be difficult.

Use of gainsharing for projects.

Painsharing reduces profits by a little bit. But this is all done collectively as one team.

14. How are the UK government BIM standards, regulations and documents managed in your company?

We adopt the UK standards and create guidance documents and templates that support our delivery framework to comply with the said standards.

We have embedded BIM Level 2 processes within our organisation using in accordance with BSi recommendations.

BIM Coordinator was used on Dudley College Projects (Fulcro).

James Blood managed BIM element on the Dudley project.

15. Do you believe that BIM and IPD will be game changers in terms of digital transformation for the construction sector?

Yes, but BIM is only the start.

Yes possibly, with more case studies, and BIM/IPD specific contracts.

Do not try to do BIM Level 2 unless you have an Alliance Contract, similar to IPI. An IPI contract is required for BIM to work.

Future

Standards

Profits

13. Do all the stakeholders get the projected profits at the end even if errors were made?

Page 50 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

19.0

Appendix C - Interviewee 1: Response from Mac Muzvimwe

a) What are your responsibilities in the company related to the scope of BIM? Driving BIM & Digital Transformation in our sector with approx. 400 staff in the UK, and also part of the global team pushing our BIM & Digital strategy. Prior to this I was Faithful+Gould’s UK Head of BIM into BAU (business as usual). b) How many years of experience do/does you/your -/company have with BIM and IPD? Personally, been into BIM since 2008 when I was doing my MBA research, but have been a practitioner since 2010. The company has over 5 years of BIM integrated with IPD. We believe that IPD is an integral part of collaborative BIM, i.e.  IPD is a project delivery approach that integrates people, systems, business structures and practices into a process that collaboratively harnesses the talents and insights of all participants to optimize project results, increase value to the owner, reduce waste, and maximize efficiency through all phases of design, fabrication, and construction. (Autodesk)  BIM refers to the processes and collaborative behaviours associated with the creation and sharing of object orientated databases of an asset in its environment, relevant to all stages of the asset’s life cycle including design, construction and operation. (Arcadis) BIM & IPD 1. What motivated your company to implement BIM and IPD? a. (Answer yes for IPD – what are the changes needed for adoption of IPD and how long did it take?) Efficiencies in design, delivery, better client engagement and establishment of long-lasting collaborative relationships. How it took – it’s still work in progress; such change takes time. b. (Answer no for IPD – why did you choose not to adopt IPD?) 2. What advantages/barriers arise from the use of BIM on IPD projects?

As explained on call, efficiencies are the advantages, and the biggest barrier is resistance to change.

3. How do you think that behaviours, technology and process affect BIM implementation and IPD? Behaviours – resistance to change from adversarial relationships that the industry is used to, to collaborative relationships that encourage information sharing.

Technology – better tools that encourage collaboration and info sharing. Process – changes to how design is done, quantities are taken off, and how info is shared.

4. How does your company measure the results of BIM implementation and IPD? Based on efficiency savings achieved from our design and quantity surveying services e.g. less time spent on designs, QTO, etc. and also efficiencies achieved for our clients, like cost, programme and quality issues.

5. How has the use of BIM encouraged the success of an IPD approach in your company?

See definitions above; we believe the two go hand in hand anyway.

Collaboration 6. How do you think BIM and IPD enhance collaboration throughout the construction industry and how do you create high performance teams on an IPD project? Better

Page 51 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

info sharing as explained on call. High performance teams are created by identifying the best skilled staff, supporting them throughout the project, running collaboration and knowledge-sharing workshops, etc. and ensuring that they are continuously upskilled.

Risk 7. How can BIM and IPD help companies to manage risks in terms of identification, control and mitigation? Collaboration and info sharing means informed decisions are made, and the team work together to identify risks and necessary mitigation measures. The use of BIM technology reduces risk of human errors and risks that come from lack of design co-ordination.

Sharing Information/ Security 8. Will IPD provide significant reductions in RFI´s and how? Yes, more so BIM becomes the facility is built virtually before getting to site.

9. What are the concerns regarding security due to the sharing of information in a BIM process and how can they be overcome? Risk of cyber terrorism, and information about assets falling into the wrong hands. Adoption of PAS 1192-5 helps, but cyber terrorism is a global issue and there is no easy fix.

Goal definition (owner/FM) + Cost 10. How is time & cost reviewed and tracked in an IPD projects and what, according to you is the business value of BIM and IPD? See answer to Q4 above, plus also there are case studies demonstrating the benefits of using BIM for FM, e.g.

Page 52 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

11. How has an IPD approach optimised the operation and maintenance costs in the framework of facility management? Yes, because the FM staff/ contractors have easy access to all the asset information they require to manage the facilities.

Contracts 12. How can contracts be a way to improve collaboration between owner, design team and contractor? The UK government endorsed the NEC form of contract as it encourages collaboration, i.e. requires that parties work in the “spirit of mutual trust and collaboration�.

Profits 13. Do all the stakeholders get the projected profits at the end even if errors were made?

NEC contract options C & D are based on incentivisation scales agreed pre-contract which are allow the parties to share the profits and indeed losses, e.g. if final costs are say 88-94% of target price, profit share 60/40 between employer and contractor; if between 94-100%, 50/50. If the costs exceed the target cost, i.e. a loss, say 100-106, losses shared 50/50; 106-112, 40/60, and above 112, 0/100.

Standards 14. How are the UK government BIM standards, regulations and documents managed in your company? We adopt the UK standards and create guidance documents and templates that support our delivery framework to comply with the said standards.

Page 53 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

Future 15. Do you believe that BIM and IPD will be game changers in terms of digital transformation for the construction sector? Yes, but BIM is only the start; only a foundation as evidenced by graph below:

Page 54 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

20.0

Appendix D - Interviewee 2: Marina Machado

a) What are your responsibilities in the company related to the scope of BIM?   

BIM Implementation Manager for the North Region.

Achieve consistent delivery of BIM throughout all projects, improving efficiency and profits.

Responsible for BIM Strategy Implementation, training and project support.

b) How many years of experience do/does you/your -/company have with BIM and IPD? Me: 3 years – Company: over 10 years BIM & IPD 1. What motivated your company to implement BIM and IPD? BIM – client demand and the industry demand.

IPD – Lack of knowledge and understanding within UK AEC industry. c.

Answer no for IPD – why did your company choose not to adopt IPD? i. As a BIM implementation manager would you advise your company practice IPD and why?

Yes, as this would be a natural progression from BIM processes and technologies.

2. What advantages/barriers arise from the use of BIM on IPD projects?

BIM has many advantages which are globally documented, but there is still lack of knowledge of IPD case studies in the UK. 3. How do you think that behaviours, technology and process affect BIM implementation and IPD? This is a complete cultural change in the way of working within the UK construction industry. BIM is just the beginning with technology & processes.

4. How does your company measure the results of BIM implementation and IPD? BIM KPIs are currently used to evaluate BIM Implementation on projects.

Lessons learned and project reviews at construction handover 5. How has the use of BIM encouraged the success of an IPD approach in your company?

BIM has encouraged collaboration on all projects. The next step would be looking at IPD approach to construction.

Collaboration 6. How do you think BIM and IPD enhance collaboration throughout the construction industry and how do you create high performance teams on an IPD project?

BIM has enabled collaboration and co-location has also been very beneficial.

Page 55 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

Risk 7. How can BIM and IPD help companies to manage risks in terms of identification, control and mitigation?

Via an IPD specific contract, which we currently do not have here in the UK. Sharing Information/ Security 8. What are the concerns regarding security due to the sharing of information in a BIM process and how can they be overcome?

Technological and cultural Collaboration and Innovation.

PAS1192-5: specification for security-minded building information modelling (BIM).

Goal definition (owner/FM) + Cost 9. In your opinion, what is the business value of BIM and IPD? Technological and cultural Collaboration and Innovation.

10. How has an IPD approach optimised the operation and maintenance costs in the framework of facility management?

IPD methodologies not currently used on our projects.

Contracts 11. How can contracts be a way to improve collaboration between owner, design team and contractor?

Demand a lot of change to allow early engagement of stakeholders in the project.

Part of our business model is to prefer 2 stage tenders on D&B projects. That allows us to get involved early on in the project and interfere in the decisions to improve buildability of the project.

Standards 12. How are the UK government BIM standards, regulations and documents managed in your company?

We have incorporated BIM Level 2 Standards into our company process and procedures and we hold BSi BIM Level 2 certification, meaning that we are Tier 1 Lead Contractor which includes Construction, Design Management and Project Management complying with BIM Level 2 in accordance with PAS 1192:2 2013, BS 1192:4 2014 and BS 1192:2007.

Future 13. Do you believe that BIM and IPD will be game changers in terms of digital transformation for the construction sector?

Possibly. This will require all project participants to re-think and re-learn a new approach to construction. Breaking away from traditional cultural methods will be difficult.i

Page 56 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

21.0

Appendix E - IPD Interviewee Signed Consent Forms

Page 57 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

Page 58 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

Page 59 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

22.0

Bibliography & References

AIA, AIA Minnesota, School of Architecture University of Minnesota (2012). IPD Case Studies.

Retrieved from: http://rp.design.umn.edu/resources/documents/IPD-Case-Study-Matrix2012_corrected02.pdf

Alshawi, M. (2017, December 15). Integrated Project Delivery, Concepts, Benefits and Challenges.

PowerPoint Presentation, MSc BIM and Digital Built Environments, The University of Salford.

American Institute of Architects (AIA). (2007). Integrated Project Delivery: A Guide (1st Edition). AIA National, AIA California Council. (www.aia.org/ipdg).

American Institute of Architects (AIA). (2010). Integrated Project Delivery: Case Studies. AIA National, AIA California Council. Retrieved from: https://www.ipda.ca/site/assets/files/1111/aia-2010-ipdcase-studies.pdf

Ashcraft H. W. (2010). Negotiating an Integrated Project Delivery Agreement.

Retrieved December 9, 2017. https://www.hansonbridgett.com//media/Files/Publications/NegotiatingIntegratedProjectDeliveryAgreement.pdf

Autodesk White Paper. (2008). Improving Building Industry Results through Integrated Project Delivery and Building Information Modelling. Retrieved from: https://damassets.autodesk.net/content/dam/autodesk/files/bim_and_ipd_whitepaper.pdf

Ayala, R. (2018). 5 Unexpected Benefits of Lean Construction Management. Retrieved February 3, 2018. https://blog.plangrid.com/2018/02/5-unexpected-benefits-lean-construction-management/

BIM+ Staff. (2018). Nearly Half of Designers say BIM Helps Collaboration. Retrieved April 23, 2018 http://www.bimplus.co.uk/news/nearly-half-designers-say-bim-helps-collaboration/

Deutsch, R. (2013). BIM and Integrated Design. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley.

Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., Liston, K. (2011). BIM Handbook (2nd Edition). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.

Page 60 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

Elvin, G. (2007). Integrated Practice in Architecture, Mastering Design-Build, Fast Track, and Building Information Modelling. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.

Erickson D. J. (2010). Implementing Integrated Delivery Principles while Addressing Risk Management Obstacles. North-Eastern University, Boston, Massachusetts, US. Retrieved November 16, 2017. https://repository.library.northeastern.edu/files/neu:826/fulltext.pdf

Fischer, M., Khanzode, A., Reed, D. and Ashcraft, H. (2017). Integrated Project Delivery. Somerset: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.

Garber, R. (2014). BIM Design, Realising the Creative Potential of Building Information Modelling.

West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Ghassemi, R. & Gerber, B. (2011). Transitioning to Integrated Project Delivery: Potential barriers and lessons learned. Retrieved December 21, 2017. https://www.leanconstruction.org/media/docs/ktlladdread/Transitioning_to_Integrated_Project_Delivery_Potential_barriers_and_lessons_learned.pdf

Hardin, B. and McCool, D. (2015). BIM and Construction Management. Indianapolis, Indiana: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.

Hays, M. (2009). Integrated Project Delivery: Reality and Promise. A Strategist’s Guide to Understanding and Marketing IPD. White Paper. Retrieved November 29, 2017 http://www.tedsive.com/docs/Sive_White_Paper_IPD.pdf

Korb, S., Haronian E., Sacks, R., Judez, P. and Shaked, O. (2016). Overcoming “But we’re Different”: An IPD Implementation in the Middle East. Retrieved January 3, 2018. https://iglcstorage.blob.core.windows.net/papers/attachment-73d3c095-cd66-43d0-84d5a25c96780892.pdf

Kumar, B. (2015). A Practical Guide to Adopting BIM in Construction Projects. Scotland, UK: Whittles Publishing.

Liker, J., K. (2004). The Toyota Way - 14 Management Principles from the World’s Greatest Manufacturer. McGraw-Hill Companies, US.

Page 61 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

Macdonald, J. A. (2011). BIM, Adding Value by Assisting Collaboration. Sydney: University of Technology Sydney. Retrieved from: http://docplayer.net/45856423-Bim-adding-value-by-assistingcollaboration-jennifer-a-macdonald-university-of-technology-sydney.html

Manning, R. (2012). Challenges, Benefits & Risks Associated with IPD and BIM. Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Kansas. Retrieved January 3, 2018. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.914.8971&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Morton, J and Thompson, E. M. (2011). Uptake of BIM and IPD within the UK AEC Industry: The Evolving Role of the Architectural Technologist. School of the Built and Natural Environment, Northumbria University. Retrieved December 21, 2017. http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/9405/1/Segment_001_of_PMoton-EMT-BIM-uptake.pdf

McGraw Hill Construction. (2014). The Business Value of BIM for Construction in Major Global Markets. Retrieved December 9, 2017. https://www.icn-solutions.nl/pdf/bim_construction.pdf

Neve, H. H., Wandahl, S., Kaeseler, S. M., Tandrup, A. (2017). Integrating IPD & Exploring Potentials.

Retrieved November 6, 2017. http://revalue.dk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Neve-published.pdf

Nichani, A., D. and Rajendiran, A. (2016). BIM and IPD in the AEC Industry. School of the Built Environment, The University of Salford, MSc BIM and Integrated Design.

Sharman, J. (2017). The NBS guide to collaborative construction. Retrieved November 29, 2017 https://www.thenbs.com/knowledge/the-nbs-guide-to-collaborative-construction

Smith, D. and Tardif, M. (2009). Building Information Modelling, a Strategic Implementation Guide.

New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.

Thomsen, C., Darrington, J., Dunne, D., Lichtig, W. (2011). Managing Integrated Project Delivery.

Retrieved November 11, 2017. https://www.leanconstruction.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/02/CMAA_Managing_Integrated_Project_Delivery_1.pdf

Underwood, J. (2017). Introduction to Integrated Project Delivery (IPD). PowerPoint Presentation, MSc BIM and Digital Built Environments, The University of Salford, Greater Manchester, UK.

Page 62 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail

Page 63 of 63

Module: Integrated BIM Projects

Iftikhar Ismail