Issue 3 May/June 2016
partnering research What Emerging International Research Tells Us about Trends in the Construction Industry
INSIDE: page 14
page 16
Design-Build Teams Benefit from Partnering
Collaborative Partnering and the Perfect Team
World-Class Innovators. Landmark Buildings. Inspiring Performance.
Building a culture of partnership, one project at a time.
CONTENTS INTERNATIONAL PARTNERING INSTITUTE IPI is a non-profit 501(c) 3 charitable organization that is funded by our members and supporters who wish to change the culture of construction from combative to collaborative. Phone: (925) 447-9100
BOARD OF ADVISORS Larry Anderson, Anderson Partnering Pierre Bigras, PG&E Roddy Boggus, Parsons Brinckerhoff Pat Crosby, The Crosby Group Pete Davos, DeSilva Gates Construction Larry Eisenberg, Ovus Partners 360 Steve Francis, C.C. Myers, Inc. Rachel Falsetti, Caltrans Michael Ghilotti, Ghilotti Bros, Inc. Richard Grabinski, Flatiron West, Inc. Randy Iwasaki, Contra Costa Trans. Authority Jeanne Kuttel, CA Dept. of Water Resources John Martin, San Francisco International Airport Pete Matheson, Granite Construction Geoff Neumayr, San Francisco International Airport Jim Pappas, Hensel Phelps Construction Co. Zigmund Rubel, Aditazz Ivar Satero, San Francisco International Airport Stuart Seiden, County of Fresno Thomas Taylor, Webcor Builders David Thorman, CA Div. of the State Architect, Ret. John Thorsson, NCC Construction Sverige AB Len Vetrone, Skanska USA Building
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Dana Paz
DIRECTOR OF MEMBER DEVELOPMENT Jessica Obee
MEMBER SERVICES COORDINATOR Lisa Mayfield
OPERATIONS COORDINATOR Candice Evenson
FOUNDER & CEO Sue Dyer, MBA, MIPI, MDRF
EDITORIAL OFFICE: SUBSCRIPTIONS/ INFORMATION International Partnering Institute 291 McLeod Street Livermore, CA 94559 Phone: (925) 447-9100 Email: ed@partneringinstitute.org www.partneringinstitute.org
Features May/June 2016 IPI Research
14 Facilitator’s Corner How Design-Build Teams Benefit from Partnering
IN THIS ISSUE
4
Executive Director’s Report
8
Research and development is critical to our own innovation.
International Research The International Adoption of Partnering: How Emerging Research In Germany, Nigeria and Iran Tell Us About Trends In The Construction Industry.
6
Committee Spotlight IPI’s Research Working Group looks at new findings in collaboration
16 Research Roundup
The Perfect Team and the five norms that successful teams share
DESIGN/CREATIVE Michelle Vejby Email: mvejby@msn.com
COPYRIGHT Partnering Magazine is published by the International Partnering Institute, 291 McLeod Street, Livermore, CA 94550. Six bi-monthly issues are published annually. Contents copyright 2016 International Partnering Institute, all rights reserved. Subscription rates for non-members, $75 for six electronic issues. Hard copy issues are available only to IPI members. Additional member subscriptions are $75 each for six issues. Postmaster please send address changes to IPI, 291 McLeod Street, Livermore, CA 94550.
www.partneringinstitute.org
Cover photo: “First Train to Arrive Under the New Canopy” by Ryan Dravitz Photography – Denver Union Station, IPI 2015 Diamond Level Award Winner (Transportation Mega Projects: $250M+), Denver Union Station Project Authority, Regional Transportation District, City and County of Denver
May/June 2016 Partnering Magazine
3
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S REPORT
Dana Paz, IPI Executive Director
What Research Means To IPI
I
nnovative teams and organizations have a longer
behind the trend lines on graphs and the numbers in statistics
lifespan than stagnant ones and are also more fruitful. In
columns. Through member profiles, success stories, awards
the movement toward a more collaborative construction
applications, educational presentations and our committees
culture innovation plays a critical role, in that it is both the
we learn what works and what doesn’t, and what’s more,
ideal starting point and the desired endgame of the players.
we learn how it works, when it can be applied and why it’s valuable. Research at IPI is a collective effort in which all of our
Innovation begets innovation. Organizations that learn
members and supporters play a vital role.
from their challenges and successes and pioneer new ways to get better results are innovators, and research has shown us
The most important part about research is the resulting
that they are more likely to embrace Collaborative Partnering,
development of new tools and resources. For instance, when
or to even pilot a project. Partnering itself is conducive to
research showed us the correlation between project risk and
innovation; it fosters an environment of trust and open
the need for collaboration, we developed the IPI matrix, a
communication, which in turn generates discussions built on
partnering scalability tool. Our training content and materials
the collective wisdom in the room, so the team can find new
are based on the challenges and success stories our members’
ways to think around corners and resolve issues.
project teams have faced. All of the tools that we’ve developed at IPI (specifications, white papers, guidebooks, standards
As an organization that champions the cause of collaborative construction, research and development is critical to our own
and more) have grown out of our members’ knowledge and experience.
innovation. In serving the industry, we need to be able to identify new trends in construction, in collaboration and in how these intersect.
As an organization, learning is what keeps us relevant. What we do with what we learn is what makes IPI valuable to our members and to the industry. We are very fortunate
To learn, we rely on research that we conduct through
to be learning from the leading innovators in the field of
partnerships with academic institutions such as Michigan
construction, not only in the US but throughout the world.
State University, as well as research conducted by notable
With the IPI Award season upon us, we’re busy gathering
organizations such as the Center for Integrated Facility
data and learning about your Partnered projects of 2015. Next
Engineering (CIFE), Construction Industry Institute, Pankow
up: turning these experiences and lessons learned into the
Foundation and the Transportation Research Board. But most
future tools and resources that the industry needs to advance
important of all we learn from our members, the organizations
collaborative partnering to the next level.
4
Partnering Magazine May/June 2016
www.partneringinstitute.org
WITH Q&D ON YOUR TEAM, YOU CAN KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE SKIES.
Q&D’s experienced aviation team has the know-how, collaborative approach and proven preconstruction processes to integrate your project’s construction into your facility or operation without negatively impacting your day-to-day. Q&D’s capabilities include: Large Projects
Improvements
• • • • •
•
Terminal Revisions Terminal Buildings Airport Expansions Security Upgrades Baggage Handling Systems
Support Facilities • • • • • • •
Ground-up Construction Equipment Storage Buildings FBO’s Service Buildings Maintenance Buildings Hangars Runways / Barriers
•
Utilities
• • • • • • • •
Equipment Upgrades and Relocations Tenant Improvements Gate Relocations Security Revisions Concession Build-Outs Finish Upgrades Support Spaces Full Program Support Branding Updates
Project Delivery • • • •
CM-at-Risk Design-Build Full Preconstruction Services Partnering
qdconstruction.com (775) 786-2677 Member, IPI Duane Boreham VP Aviation Division
COMMITTEE SPOTLIGHT
Research Working Group
I
PI’s Research Working Group has been hard at work, conducting new research, combining thorough new findings in
collaboration and looking for more opportunities to fund research for collaborative construction. This year, the Working Group has completed two new research studies on
Photo Courtesy Gensler: San Francisco International Airport Boarding Area E Improvements Terminal 3 Project. IPI Ruby Level Partnering Award Winner, 2014.
Collaborative Partnering: a case study in Partnering at San Francisco International
Brinckerhoff, and members of the
for research initiatives by launching a
Airport, and a social network analysis of
Airports Consultants Council (ACC)
fundraising campaign, seeking more
the same team. Both research projects
and the ACI-North America Technical
research grants and establishing
were conducted in partnership with
Operations Committee.
strategic alliances with research
Michigan State University (MSU) and will be published later this year.
institutions. To continue to gather data Next up for the Research Working
on best practices and innovations, the
Group: a Quantitative Study of Four
group is also developing an internal
In addition, the Research Working
Partnered Project Teams. This study
research initiative which will focus on
Group has sought to expand funding
will be conducted in conjunction with
the partnering efforts of IPI members.
sources for new research opportunities,
MSU throughout 2016 and published
working with IPI’s Aviation Committee
in 2017. It will examine how project
to develop a problem statement for
partnering impacts individual, team, and
always looking for supporters who
the Airport Cooperative Research
project performance mediated through
can contribute with ideas, research,
Proposal (ACRP) to help secure funding
improved shared understanding across
and/or topics to develop a greater
to examine Collaborative Partnering as
organizations and within teams. The
understanding of Collaborative
a process to improve schedule, budget,
study will ask how teams are developing
Partnering and its impact on the
safety and quality performance on
their shared understanding (i.e. how
construction industry. Contact us at ed@
airport construction projects. To develop
are teams being trained, and how do
partneringinstitute.org to find out how
the problem statement, the Working
these training practices affect abilities to
to get involved!
Group relied on the support of experts
partner effectively?).
in airport construction, including representatives from IPI members SFO, Austin Commercial, WSP|Parsons 6
Partnering Magazine May/June 2016
The Research Working Group is
Do you have a project or innovation In 2016, the Working Group will also focus on generating more resources
that you’d like to submit for a case study? Contact IPI at (925) 447-9100. www.partneringinstitute.org
Collaboration. Innovation. Sustainability. Partnering to build what matters for our customers and communities.
George Bush Intercontinental Airport, Terminal B South Side Replacement, Houston TX
Tampa International Airport, Main Terminal and Airport Concession Redevelopment Program, Tampa, FL
Gold Line Bridge, Arcadia, CA
James B. Hunt Library, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC
usa.skanska.com
GLOBAL ADOPTION OF PARTNERING
The Adoption of Partnering
What emerging research in Germany, Nigeria and Iran tell us about trends in the construction industry.
The Evolution of Partnering in the US In the early 1980s, because the industry suffered from extended productivity loss due to conflicts, litigation and fragmentation, the Reagan administration called together a sub-council made
SINCE ITS INTRODUCTION OVER 30 YEARS AGO AS A SOLUTION TO FALLING PRODUCTIVITY IN CONSTRUCTION, PARTNERING HAS EVOLVED INTO A MEASURABLE PROCESS THAT LEADS TO IMPROVED PROJECT OUTCOMES AND INNOVATIVE ISSUE RESOLUTION, EXPANDING ACROSS THE WORLD INTO NEW REGIONS AND MARKETS. RECENT RESEARCH ON PARTNERING PUBLISHED IN GERMANY, NIGERIA AND IRAN DEMONSTRATES AN INTERNATIONAL TREND TOWARD THE DESIRE TO IMPROVE CONSTRUCTION THROUGH COLLABORATION. ALTHOUGH THESE COUNTRIES VARY GREATLY IN TERMS OF THEIR SOCIAL,
up of industry leaders to improve productivity in construction. The sub-council determined that three main areas needed attention for construction productivity to improve, and that construction programs needed to address all three in order to yield the best results:
Contracts — because traditional contracts foster fragmentation and don’t allocate risk fairly
Processes — because streamlined processes in other industries have demonstrated the need
ECONOMIC, AND BUSINESS CONTEXTS, THEIR RESEARCH NEEDS
for greater efficiency and waste reduction in
STATEMENTS ARE REMARKABLY SIMILAR: THE ADVERSARIAL
construction
NATURE OF THEIR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS AND THE RESULTING COST OVERRUNS, DELAYS AND LITIGATION, HAS CREATED A NEED FOR COLLABORATION AS A MEANS TO IMPROVE PRODUCTIVITY AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE AS WELL AS
Culture — because one of the main issues affecting productivity is inherent mistrust, and the inability of teams to communicate, collaborate and resolve issues.
PROJECT SCHEDULES, SAFETY AND QUALITY. 8
Partnering Magazine May/June 2016
www.partneringinstitute.org
Finding ways to develop team relationships and collaboration has proven to be as highly nuanced and complex as the individual teams themselves.
Interstate 880/State Route 92 Interchange Reconstruction Hayward, CA 2012 IPI Partnered Project of the Year, Diamond Level
The push to improve contracts has given rise to less fragmented contract forms such as Integrated Forms of Agreement (IFoA) and Integrated Project Delivery (IPD). The need to improve construction team processes has led to the adoption of practices such as pullplanning and value chain mapping used in Lean Construction. And the need to improve team culture has led to the practice of Partnering—finding ways to develop team relationships and collaboration. Understandably, this has proven to be as highly nuanced and complex as individual teams, and Partnering has evolved over time into a structured process as the industry has
teamwork proactively avoid problems, prevent disputes and
As one of North America’s largest transportation and infrastructure contractors, our commitment to building the best is demonstrated in the projects we build and the partnerships we develop. Our success is dependent upon our relationships with owners, partners, designers, subcontractors and community members. Flatiron works closely with our partners to develop innovative solutions that benefit everyone, and we’re proud of what we’ve created together. The more than 20 partnering awards Flatiron has won in the past decade serve as recognition of these relationships and
foster innovation, continuous improvement and good working
the resulting successful projects.
learned more about the science of team culture. A report on Partnering written by David Dombkins in 1993 for the Construction Industry Development Agency described it thus:
Partnering is not a contract, but a recognition that every contract includes an implied covenant of good faith. While the contract establishes legal relationships, the Partnering process establishes working relationships between the parties. Partnering provides an environment where trust and
relationships. In the US, this process consists of regularly bringing the construction team together to, with the aid of a neutral facilitator:
www.partneringinstitute.org
To learn more about Flatiron’s innovation in partnering visit
www.flatironcorp.com May/June 2016 Partnering Magazine
9
GLOBAL ADOPTION OF PARTNERING •
Co-create project goals and strategies to meet them in a
Design
signed charter •
Kick-Off
through team surveys Identify barriers and opportunities for project
Follow Up Workshops:
To Establish: •
Project Charter
•
Dispute Resolution Ladder
success in quarterly partnering sessions •
Close Out
Co ll a b o ra t i ve Pa r t ne r in g Pr o ce s s
Measure the goals and hold the team accountable to them
•
Construction
Resolve issues and prevent disputes with a defined issue
•
Update Charter
•
Monthly Scorecards
•
Identify Issues
Lessons Learned
resolution procedure •
Gather lessons learned from the project with a closeout
The partnering practices implemented in the projects were not
partnering session
uniform, and neither were the project outcomes. Projects were split pretty evenly, with half seeing better than expected outcomes
Research has shown that, with this structured process, teams have
regarding cost, schedule and quality; and the other half seeing few
been able to develop greater cohesion, which in turn results in
measurable improvements.
improved budgets, schedules, safety and quality.
Partnering Internationally
Among the successful projects, the researchers identified these determining factors:
The research coming out of international construction markets
a)
commitment to a win-win attitude
is based on the same lessons learned and documents that have
b)
selection of an appropriate partner
been used to develop Collaborative Partnering in the US. But
c)
top management support
because the context in each of these regions varies so much, so
d)
long-term perspective
do the models they’ve ended up with. Research in Iran shows an
e)
regular monitoring of partnerships through meetings
incipient level of partnering that is still working out how to engage
f)
the use of information technologies
all stakeholders in the collaborative process, while Nigeria has seen
g)
integrated team agreements
an increasing trend toward Partnering and is now poised to adopt a more structured process. Germany is further along the path,
Poorer performance, on the other hand, was attributed to several
having identified and published specific guidelines for successful
barriers to partnering:
structured partnering.
a)
dealing with large bureaucratic organizations; slow decisionmaking
Sucess Factors and Barriers to Partnering in Iran
b)
difference in partners’ workcultures;
An increasingly complex environment in Iran, with significant time
c)
stakeholders not developing a ”win-win” attitude
pressures, uncertainty due to turmoil in the region and limited
d)
lack of training and guidance in project partnering
access to resources, has led a growing number of organizations to
e)
little experience with the partnering approach
implement Partnering on their construction projects. Researchers
f)
risks or rewards not shared among the team
performed case studies of six partnered projects, interviewing the project teams to identify their level of satisfaction regarding time,
The study went on to recommend improvements to the
cost, quality, client satisfaction and claim performance through
partnering process, finding that conceptual changes require
Partnering.
a change in behavior as well as the adoption of specific tools. Teams for instance, need to develop openness,
Partnering in Iran is at a very early stage in its development and thus
trust, commitment and compromise; and adopt tools that
far refers to partnerships between contracting agencies. Contractors
facilitate collaboration, such as BIM. The research team also
are motivated to partner in order to improve construction and quality,
recommended adopting facilitative management techniques
reduce cost, gain market advantages, mitigate any weaknesses and
and frequent meetings to achieve better collaboration
enhance strengths, share risk, and innovate.
and cooperation. Project managers of the studied projects
10
Partnering Magazine May/June 2016
www.partneringinstitute.org
recommended that the partnering team prepare a partnering agreement, choose appropriate project delivery methods, develop a project organization chart, clearly define roles and responsibilities and allocate risk more equitably.
Good Practice in Nigerian Construction In Nigeria, project partnering has increasingly been seen as an innovative practice to improve quality on construction projects and respond to the shortcomings of adversarial construction, which has been characterized by exploitation, rigid specifications, unfounded decision-making and a focus on short
ENVISIONING THE FUTURE Airports face numerous challenges today, but those issues also represent opportunities. WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff brings years of experience and a full range of services to enable airport owners to envision the future … and then create it. Partner with us to advance the future of aviation.
term gains. This study sought to assess the factors contributing to partnering success, and analyze the benefits of implementing Partnering more broadly. The team surveyed various owners, contractors, designers and consultants, and found that many companies had already partnered a project. The survey respondents agreed that certain requirements were needed for Partnering to succeed in the Nigerian construction industry; specifically, mutual trust, good and effective communication, commitment from all parties, a clear understanding of roles, consistency and a flexible attitude. They also generally agreed that all contracting parties, including clients, consultants, project managers, main contractors, subcontractors, and on-site staff benefit from Partnering, while the establishment of a collaborative relationship increased customer satisfaction, streamlined project implementation, and improved all parties’ understanding of how to improve poor performance and ineffective communication. The partnering process empowered teams to accept responsibility, delegate decision-making and resolve issues at the lowest level. When properly implemented, Partnering could generate a workable model for people to communicate more effectively and efficiently, eliminating unnecessary misunderstandings and possible conflicts.
Partnering Guidelines in Germany Germany conducted research on Partnering due to their context of consistent cost and time overruns on construction
For the latest news visit: insights.wsp-pb.com
projects, and because of complaints from both owners and contractors regarding adversarial work environments. They assessed partnering efforts in the US and in the UK to develop Partnering guidelines for publicly financed infrastructure
For career opportunities visit wsp-pb.com/usa
projects, and found that, in order to meet their construction
www.partneringinstitute.org
May/June 2016 Partnering Magazine
11
GLOBAL ADOPTION OF PARTNERING needs, their Partnering model needed to incorporate eight main elements: 1.
A Preamble •
A meeting that precedes construction, where the team addresses principles like trust, open communication and willingness to cooperate. Leaders of both parties sign the preamble document
2.
Clear project specifications
3.
A defined process for handling project changes
4.
Risk management •
The use of a risk register and the understanding that risk
8.
handling and all relevant decisions are to be handled
Contractual incentive regulations •
Pain share, gain share
jointly between the owner and contractor 5.
Sharing documents
Once established, the research team field tested the guidelines
6.
Clearly defined roles and responsibilities
on two highway projects, to prove the practicality of the
7.
Conflict prevention
recommendations and fine-tune the final version. They found that
•
Through a defined issue resolution process, with the
the projects that implemented the guidelines saw:
recommendation to resolve issues jointly and at the
•
More open communication between client and contractor
lowest possible level
•
Fairer risk allocation
•
Faster problem solving without litigation
BUILDING CALIFORNIA F O R S E V E N T Y- F I V E Y E A R S PAV I N G • R O A D / H I G H W AY • G R A D I N G • D E M O L I T I O N / E X C AVAT I N G INTERNATIONAL PARTNERING INSTITUTE JOHN L. MARTIN 2015 PARTNERED PROJECT OF THE YEAR - DIAMOND LEVEL SFO RUNWAYS 1-19S RSA IMPROVEMENTS WINNER OF THE 2014 CALTRANS EXCELLENCE IN PARTNERING AWARD “BEST IN CLASS” FOR PROJECTS GREATER THAN $50 MILLION Highway 65 Lincoln Bypass Project
11555 Dublin Boulevard, Dublin, California 94568-2909 925-829-9220 w w w . d e s i lva g at e s . c o m Contractors License No. 704195A
12
Partnering Magazine May/June 2016
www.partneringinstitute.org
•
Cost savings due to incentives, at a rate .4 – 2.3%
•
Optimization of project quality
•
More trust and higher satisfaction of the participants
•
Overall budget savings (of over € 1 million)
How do we know Partnering works?
The field test also showed that the guidelines alone did not immediately result in the behavior change of project team members. Some situations caused one or both parties to revert to hostile behavior, for instance when one party violated the agreements and the other party felt mistrust, or during the bidding process when negotiating cost. In Germany, proliferation of small and medium-sized construction companies contributes to a competitive market, so many will bid low and rely on change orders during the construction phase to fill the gap. Sound familiar? In the end, the research team concluded that public infrastructure projects would benefit greatly from the guidelines they developed, but that this was not a magic bullet. True behavior change would come from building trust and relationships over time.
In Conclusion Partnering research from across the globe covers widely varied cultural and market contexts, but there are common threads in what makes for successful partnering. Across the spectrum, owners, contractors, and designers want the same things: projects that are high-quality, that don’t go over budget, that are completed on time and that create rewarding work environments. Organizations also agree that clearly defined roles and responsibilities, executive commitment, and a pre-defined
Even high functioning teams will experience conflict on construction projects. If we want to maximize the effects of collaboration to achieve exceptional results, we must increase our own understanding through research. Sponsoring IPI’s research efforts is the best way to make your teams, and the industry more efficient, safe and with higher quality.
Sponsor IPI’s research efforts today! Contact us! Call: 925-447-9100 or email: ed@partneringinstitute.org
issue resolution process are needed to improve construction project outcomes. All teams respond to the basic requirements of collaboration: trust, fairness, and open communication. But because these behaviors are not the norm in the industry, teams need a structured process to get there. Different regions are at varying junctures in collaboration, with some at the beginning of the spectrum and others closer to standardizing Partnering across the board. Understanding where different construction markets are on this path helps us validate the development of our own best practices, while shedding light on our role at the forefront of collaborative construction as we strive for the next innovations in Collaborative Partnering. _____________________________________________________ Sources: Collaborative procurement in construction projects performance measures, Case Study: Partnering in Iranian construction industry. S. M. Hasanzadeha, M. Hosseinalipour, and M. R. Hafezi, 2014 An Assessment of Success Factors and Benefits of Project Partnering in Nigerian Construction Industry. O.A. Awodele, and D.R. Ogunsemi, 2010
(925) 829-9220
Partnering in infrastructure projects in Germany. K. Spang and S. Riemann, 2014. www.partneringinstitute.org
May/June 2016 Partnering Magazine
13
FACILITATOR’S CORNER
How Design-Build Teams Benefit from Partnering
Partnering can help to address issues in an open and honest manner and gives the design-
P
artnering is a tremendous tool for enabling cooperation and teamwork on projects of any size or type. Although Partnering originally emerged from the traditional design-bid-build contract structure, it can be equally beneficial when applied to projects that use alternative delivery methods, such as design-build. All project
teams, including design-build teams, need to find alignment, have a common mission and goals, resolve issues and engage stakeholders regardless of the delivery method. In some
build team an
cases owners may need to demonstrate the success of design-build as a delivery method to
opportunity to
the process can help the design-build project team deliver a successful project and reduce
acknowledge the concerns of the
external influencers and decision-makers. Regardless of the reason for utilizing Partnering, overall project risk. Here are five very important ways a design-build team can benefit from collaborative partnering.
owner.
14
Partnering Magazine May/June May/June2016 2016
www.partneringinstitute.org
Ensuring design-build team alignment
Additional stakeholders
Certainly one of the advantages to owners using design-build
Most projects have additional stakeholders that can influence
project delivery is having a single team and point of contact
the project in some manner. These may include end users,
to work with throughout the project. But just because a
suppliers, vendors, other departments, permitting agencies,
contracting team has been procured using the design-build
and others. Any one of these may have just as much influence
delivery method doesn’t mean they have experience actually
on a project as the parties to the main contract. By utilizing
working together. Many design-build teams are formed
collaborative partnering with the owner, the design-build
only for a specific pursuit. In fact, even if their companies
team can better engage these influencers and help gain their
have worked together in the past, it is not unusual for the
alignment. In addition, the owner may view the design-
individuals in a design-build team to not have any direct
build team as being more proactive and creative in utilizing
work experience together at all. The first time that the
collaborative partnering to engage these other stakeholders.
actual individuals on the design-build team sit down to work together outside of putting together the proposal may be in a
Modified sequence
project partnering session. In cases like these, the structured
Design-build projects utilize a modified sequence of events
Partnering process can be instrumental to the team in
vs the traditional design-bid-build process. While the intent
developing the trust, respect and collaborative environment
of design-build is for construction to occur concurrently with
that they need to move forward.
design, it does not do so in exact lock-step. Frequently, the
Developing comfort for the owner
design is brought to a specific point before the construction starts, and/or specific design packages are produced first to
If an owner does not have experience with design-build
allow the contractor to begin work more immediately. These
projects, there may be a paradigm shift in not having as much
may include site development and civil construction activities.
direct control over the design, or in not having a representative
Also, in a progressive design-build process, the design of the
looking out for their interests exclusively. Partnering can help
project is developed to a point at which the design-build team
to address these issues in an open and honest manner and
and the owner can agree to a GMP or guaranteed maximum
gives the design-build team an opportunity to acknowledge
price for the project. These variations of sequence provide
the concerns of the owner. Through the Partnering process,
an excellent opportunity to utilize Partnering in the various
the owner can develop a better understanding of roles and
phases of the project. In the traditional design-bid-build
responsibilities and clarity on how issues will be resolved. By
process, Partnering is used at the beginning of construction
engaging the owner in a collaborative partnering process, the
activities. With design-build, Partnering kickoff can take place
design-build team can work with the owner throughout the
at the beginning of the design process so that the charter can
project to identify and resolve any specific concerns, to make
address issues specific to the design phase. The team can
the transition to design-build a smooth and positive experience.
then re-adjust the Partnering initiative at the beginning of
If an owner already has experience with alternative project
the construction phase to address evolving goals, new team
delivery, they will certainly appreciate the improved
members, and any new challenges. This is an important
performance and results of a highly collaborative team.
adaptation of the Partnering process that is unique to design-
Overcoming challenges
build projects and further highlights the benefit of the creative application of Partnering principles.
One of the reasons to engage in the partnering process is to enable a culture of problem solving and collaboration for when
The bottom line is that Partnering helps all teams thrive by
problems arise. No contract methodology can eliminate all of
creating a culture of collaboration, communication and trust.
the challenges that might occur on a project. All of the same
By committing to the partnering process, design-build teams
issues, risks and challenges may still exist. Each project needs
can build upon the benefits inherent in design-build and,
a clearly defined process for overcoming challenges, an issue
through collaboration, rise to even greater heights.
escalation ladder and guidelines to enable efficient problem resolution. Design-build teams that utilize collaborative
Eric Sanderson, Red Rocks Advisors
partnering are taking the critical steps necessary to resolve
Eric Sanderson, MBA, MIPI President of Red Rocks
them proactively and keep the project moving forward. In the
Advisors, LLC. Based in Arizona, Eric is an Award-
face of a challenge, the team will demonstrate the strength of collaboration, rather than fall apart. www.partneringinstitute.org
winning Partnering Faciliatator who specializes in Wastewater, Horizontal and Vertical Construction. RedRocksAdvisors.com
May/June 2016 Partnering Magazine
15
RESEARCH ROUNDUP
The Perfect Team
Google Determines the 5 Norms Successful Teams Share
I
n 2015 Google People
difference when it came
Psychological Safety
Operations Analyst,
to performance. Rather,
According to the data
Julia Rozovsky,
success can be attributed to
collected by Project Aristotle,
published the results
5 key norms of team culture
psychological safety was
of “Project Aristotle” on
that determine how a team
by far the most important
Google’s re:Work blog.
relates to their work and to
of these five norms. As the
The research project
one another.
very foundation of trust,
dedicated more than two years to studying teams at Google and determining what it is that makes the great ones great.
psychological safety enables
The Five Norms that Make for the Perfect Team 1.
Psychological Safety —trust between team-
optimal collaboration. Harvard Business School professor Amy Edmondson
increase psychological
published an article in
safety? It starts with team
mates
Administrative Science
leaders recognizing the
Meaning of Work —
Quarterly on Psychological
power of norms and the
personal fulfillment
Safety in 1999, which defines
need to establish good ones.
Dependability —
the concept as the “shared
Charles Duhigg emphasizes
and analyzed more than
reliable quality and
belief held by members of a
this in his book Smarter
250 attributes of about 180
effort from teammates
team that the team is safe for
Faster Better – The Secrets
Structure/Clarity — clearly established
interpersonal risk-taking.”
of Being Productive in Life
continued to elude them.
She goes on to explain how
and Business. Good norms,
In fact, no combination of
norms
psychological safety is “a
states Duhigg, create “a sense
Impact of Work — the
sense of confidence” and “a
of togetherness while also
background experience was
sense that there is a
team climate” that allows
encouraging people to take a
consistently more successful
purpose to our work
everyone to speak their mind,
chance.”
In pursuit of this “magical algorithm,” as Rozovsky calls
2.
it, researchers interviewed over 200 employees at Google
Google teams. But patterns
temperament, skill, and/or
3.
4.
5.
than any other. Teams
ask questions, and share
comprised of shy individuals
The good news is that these
ideas without fear of being
One element that creates an
might be just as successful, or
findings mean that any
discouraged or looked down
environment of psychological
just as unsuccessful, as their
team has the potential to
upon. On the other hand, if
safety is the guarantee of
outgoing counterparts. The
be successful, if their team
they do not feel this safety is
“equal conversational turn
same could be said of teams
culture is founded upon the
a given— a norm—and if the
taking.” Sometimes all
who did or did not share the
right norms. As Laszlo Bock,
factors contributing to their
people need to participate
same hobbies, who socialized
head of People Operations at
discomfort go unaddressed,
during meetings and voice
outside of work, or who
Google, put it, “You can take a
barriers to communication
any questions or concerns
had the same educational
team of average performers,
and trust lead to weaker
is encouragement. Team
backgrounds. What the
and if you teach them to
teams regardless of who may
leaders can create positive
researchers concluded
interact the right way, they’ll
comprise them.
norms during meetings
was that who was on the
do things no superstar could
team made no discernable
ever accomplish.”
16
Partnering Magazine May/June 2016
and establish and support So what can be done to
a climate of psychological www.partneringinstitute.org
Collaborative Partnering and the 5 Norms of the Perfect Team Neutral Facilitation
Follow-Up Partnering Sessions
Equal turns, trust, guidance, structure, communication
Co-Created Goals
Issue Resolution Process
Dependability
Surveys
The research team also found
Empowerment, commitment, trust, collaboration, efEiciency, accountability
quality and effort from their
that teams are more effective if each team member can depend upon reliable teammates. Dependability is a norm directly related to commitment and must be
Psychological Safety, Dependability, Structure and Clarity, Meaning of Work and Impact of Work
enabled and encouraged by team leaders. When all team members are committed, they are held accountable and
safety by listening well, giving
sensitive to how one another
is the energy that a team
will be more involved in the
everyone an equal chance to
feels”—and that is the mark
puts into it. They might ask
success of a project.
speak, encouraging the team
of the right norms being
themselves, “It doesn’t matter
to express their frustrations,
modeled by leadership.
to me, so why try?” When
Therefore, successful teams
meaning goes missing it
are not only made up of
and addressing conflicts through open discussion.
Meaning of Work
may be a sign that the team
hardworking individuals
Special attention must be
Team members who see their
feels ignored and unvalued.
but are characterized by
given to the structure of
work as being personally
Morale will inevitably
teams that actively value
meetings to ensure everyone
meaningful do better. That
decrease as this sense of
dependability, making it a
on the team is heard.
makes sense, given the fact
insignificance grows, and
point on a regular basis to
According to Duhigg, “Teams
that the hours we spend at
increase as they feel that their
stay on task, communicate
succeed when everyone feels
work constitute such a large
contributions to team goals
on the project’s progress, and
like they can speak up and
part of life. When meaning
and accomplishments are
recognize contributions.
when members show they are
is drained from work, so too
respected.
www.partneringinstitute.org
May/June 2016 Partnering Magazine
17
RESEARCH ROUNDUP A dependable team is efficient because each member is aware
Impact of Work
of his or her roles and responsibilities. It is much harder for a
Beyond the personal level, the impact of a project should be no
team to depend on one another if their goals are vague, their
secret. When teams are proud of their work, and when they are
values conflicting, and their roles under-defined.
reminded of the concrete effects their work has on the world and on their community, their job becomes that much more
Structure/Clarity
fulfilling and they become that much more productive. Team
Understanding the team’s goals and values, and where one fits
leaders should ensure that the team regularly articulates what
into it all, is critical to a team’s success. It is significant here
impact their project will have, and that the team connects with
that this research puts structure and clarity together as a norm
the greater community to see this impact clearly.
that will provide support to that end. Structure must be made a priority. Where it is given appropriate importance, clarity emerges—which in turn builds confidence and trust. Structure
HOW CAN YOU KNOW WHERE YOU STAND?
plays a role in establishing psychological safety because it
Google researchers found that even teams that seem to be
provides the team not only with a shared identity but with many
content may in fact be keeping their dissention silent. Abeer
cultural norms.
Dubey, a Google People Analytics Director, told Duhigg that after 150 hours’ worth of interviews they found, “One team might
These norms, be they written or spoken, must be clear so that
appear like it’s working really well from the outside, but, inside,
all team members understand expectations and can adapt to the
everyone is miserable.” This gives the team leader the illusion
team environment. After all, norms change from team to team,
that nothing needs to be changed, which further illustrates the
so even if someone has worked well in some teams, they might
role of surveys and open discussions in strengthening a team.
still have troubles in another. Without proper structure (and without feeling enough psychological safety to ask questions)
Matt Sakaguchi, a mid-level team manager at Google,
one runs the risk of breaking the same norms again and again.
experienced this illusion firsthand. Sakaguchi explained to Duhigg that he contributed to Project Aristotle by bringing a survey before his new team. The survey results showed that this team, which he believed to be a strong one, did not clearly understand “the roles of the team” and “whether the team had impact.” Suddenly, he knew what invisible weaknesses needed to be addressed.
COLLABORATE Van Ness and Geary Campus, San Francisco, California
The data collected by this research highlights the important roles that leadership, commitment, communication and trust play in a successful team. Contracts and process in construction do
INTEGRATED PROJECT DELIVERY
not result in exceptional outcomes or issue resolution—these
By creating opportunities for innovation and collaboration, we pursue continuous improvements to make each project our best one yet.
meetings, or you are an executive leader responsible for ensuring
For more information, visit southlandind.com/IPD
southlandind.com
18
The Takeaway
Partnering Magazine May/June 2016
are achieved by the team. Whether you are facilitating team that your teams succeed, take action to establish the culture that your teams need to thrive. Structured Collaborative Partnering takes the vagueness out of the concept of collaboration and can help you ensure that your teams develop the five key norms
+1.800.613.6240
so that, in construction, we can see the level of innovation and productivity that is being seen in other sectors.
_____________________________________________________ Sources: - https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/five-keys-to-a-successful-google-team/ - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/magazine/what-google-learned-from-its-questto-build-the-perfect-team.html?mwrsm=Email&_r=0 - Duhigg, Charles. (2016). Smarter Faster Better – The Secrets of Being Productive in Life and Business - Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2),350.doi:10.2307/2666999
www.partneringinstitute.org
We COLLABORATE To Unify Teams OrgMetrics is DRIVEN to make a difference for your people, your projects, your programs and ultimately YOUR SUCCESS. We aim to give you a competitive advantage by creating a collaborative working environment for your projects. With a commitment to co-creating solutions, common goals, and fair resolutions you magnify your ability to thrive in a highly competitive industry.
Celebrating
30
Years
OrgMetrics – Building extraordinary project outcomes since 1986. We Are DRIVEN For You! 291 McLeod Street, Livermore, CA 94550 | www.orgmet.com | 925-449-8300