17 minute read

Journal on Infrastructure Systems: 2000 (Grajek TxDOT study) Ohio DOT Partnering Program Status Report, 2010 (Ohio DOT

On-Time On Budget

Step 4: Hire a partnering program consultant to assist and guide your culture change process

Most organizations just “smell their own exhaust” and really don’t understand where they are dysfunctional. You will need a “change agent.” Someone who is not a part of your organization; is a subject matter expert; has much experience with the CPP

On-Time On-Budget

How to Start a Collaborative Partnering Program

Sue Dyer

and culture change; and is someone you will allow to help guide you on this journey. Change will not occur if you don’t change. People don’t like to change. You will need a strong (but kind) change agent that is on the outside!

Step 5: Appoint staff and create a structure to support your collaborative partnering program

You are embarking on a culture change effort that will play out on your projects and within all of your support functions. You will need to have a CPP organizational structure, up and down the organization, to help you achieve your results. This can include having a Partnering Program Manger to help make sure all of the program elements get implemented, to having representatives from the field level provide feedback, to having a policy making body. You will need to put some structure around your culture change process.

Step 6: Develop a collaborative partnering steering committee

A very powerful step is to develop a Collaborative Partnering Steering Committee to identify barriers to partnering and then work to overcome each barrier. This policy making body includes senior level decision makers from the owner organization and construction industry, as well as representatives from designers and CMs. It will be the collective wisdom of this group that helps to steer you where you need to go.

Step 7: Develop a collaborative partnering manual

At the project field level, you will want to create a project partnering manual to guide the field teams on what they are to do to fully implement your partnering program. The guide can be updated as the steering committee changes policies or learns better ways of producing more significant results.

Step 8: Provide joint collaborative partnering basics training (on the project manual) to all field personnel

Once your partnering manual is completed, you will want to provide training to everyone in the field on the guide. This is called Partnering Basics Training. This 4-8 hour training outlines, roles, responsibilities, requirements, elements along with answering the question why you are establishing a CP program.

Step 9: Develop performance measures (program and project)

What gets measured gets done. What gets measured improves. If you believe these tenants, then you will definitely want to develop performance measures for your program to get regular feedback on what and how much is improving. For your projects you will want to measure that the team is following through with what they committed to doing. This accountability will keep their goals and commitments fresh in front of their faces each month.

Step 10: Develop a participate in partnering recognition programs and awards

Recognizing those who are making it happen is important. You can start your own, or participate in IPI’s prestigious partnering awards. By celebrating the successes of your teams that accomplished their goals, and became a highly functioning collaborative team; you will be broadcasting your commitment to culture change. As people advance within your organization because they know how to create a culture of collaboration, you will be on your way to real, lasting culture change.

IPI’s Owners’ Guide entitled On-Time On-Budget: How to start a collaborative partnering program is available. Just email ED@ PartneringInstitute.org to get your copy.

PROFILES IN PARTNERING

Resolving Issues Together Partnering at the SFO Grand Hyatt Hotel

On October 7th, 2019, IPI Member, San Francisco International Airport (SFO) announced the opening of the Grand Hyatt at SFO. SFO’s only onairport hotel, the $237 million luxury hotel sits on 4.2 acres and features 351 rooms offering views of the runway, the International Terminal Building and South San Francisco

Airport Director and IPI Board President, Ivar Satero stated; “with the opening of Grand Hyatt at SFO, we offer travelers a new benchmark in airport hospitality. The new hotel reflects our commitment to deliver a world-class experience for our guests, with seamless access via our Air Train system, sustainable building design, thoughtful service and amenities, and inspiring works of public art. My thanks go out to Hyatt, the San Francisco Arts Commission, and our entire design-build team for making this day a reality.”

The Grand Hyatt at SFO was a progressive design-build project constructed by Webcor Builders, IPI Member since 2012. The beautiful facility was designed by San Francisco-based architect Hornberger + Worstell and associate ED2 International. The interiors were designed by Brayton Hughes Design Studios and Rose Bernard Studio. Project Management Support Services were provided by PGH Wong and MCK Americas J.V. and OrgMetrics LLC facilitated the project partnering.

The progressive design-build project used monthly partnering sessions that started in the programming phase and continued through design, construction and activation of the hotel. The Executive team was made up of senior leadership from SFO, Webcor, Hornberger + Worstell, Hyatt, and PGH Wong. The Core team included project management from each of the key firms as well as the key subcontractors, and each quarter, the team used Stakeholder partnering to allow important project participants including the Building Inspectors, the Fire Marshall, Business and Finance, and the adjacent project teams give feedback to the Core team delivering the job.

IPI got to talk with Greg Chauhan, Project Executive at Webcor Builders, to discuss some of the ways partnering affected project outcomes.

IPI: How did Partnering impact the process in the way the team approached issues that came up on the project, and what value did it bring to the team?

GC: “The partnering sessions allowed the team to pause, catch its breath and take a step back to look at how our successes, issues and team dynamics were working. It gave us value with seeing what is really important to the larger group and the individual stakeholders, and provided the venue to listen.

The greater value is from the “next steps” when team members connect to follow-up on solving an issue or reset a goal.

Partnering Facilitator Rob Reaugh noted that an added benefit of the partnering process was how it effectively integrated Hyatt’s staff into the team. Hyatt will be operating the hotel for years to come, so the monthly partnering sessions provided a forum to give the design-builders design and operational feedback in real time and meant that the team could regularly walk the job and resolve challenging issues together.”

IPI: Many teams that struggle, tend to approach issues the same way over and over. What was the most notable change that Partnering brought to the project team?

GC: “The most obvious change was aligning resources and motivating the group to tangible action items. Even though in some sessions the alignment may not have been perfect, we still ended each session with a method to continue forward. As mentioned above—the best value or change, was the smaller groups getting together after the larger session to solve problems and drive results.”

IPI: The success of a Partnered project greatly depends on how the construction team is able to overcome the various barriers to Partnering. What were the most difficult barriers that this team experienced?

GC: “The most difficult barrier was being honest and making sure that you do not hold back. It is always hard to balance between trying to have harmony, staying motivated and inspiring, and not letting the group down with progress. We were at a very difficult time with the project, and numerous issues, and struggles were upon us every day. It was easy for

...the monthly partnering sessions provided a forum to give the design-builders design and operational feedback in real time and meant that the team could regularly walk the job and resolve challenging issues together.

everyone to be overwhelmed with the magnitude of issues and there were sessions where these issues were left undiscussed —but—there were also some incredible times of complete openness and problem solving. Overall, the partnering was effective in guiding the team on the longer path to success.”

IPI: What is the big takeaway that Webcor and the team experienced from this project in relation to the Partnering?

GC: “The biggest take away is that with the right mindset and clear objectives, teams can work through anything, and healthy conflict creates stronger teams to achieve positive results.”

For more information about the Grand Hyatt at SFO visit: https:// www.hyatt.com/en-US/hotel/california/grand-hyatt-at-sfo/sfogh.

IN THE NEWS

The 2019 Collaborative Partnering Awards Program recognized 14 City of San Francisco building and infrastructure projects that best exemplify the principles and success of structured collaborative partnering. Each project went through a formal judging process. A panel of nine City and industry professionals was assembled to support the Partnering Awards program as judges. The applications were divided into three budget categories for both infrastructure and buildings: • Category 1: Under $10 million • Category 2: $10 to $30 million • Category 3: $30 million and above Congratulations to the SFCPSC Award Winners!! Award Winning Partnering

SILVER LEVEL

Pier 94 Backlands Improvement Owner: Port of San Francisco Prime Contractor: Hoseley Corp. A&E: San Francisco Public Works Facilitator: Jessica B. Romm, JBROMM PHD Powdered Activated Carbon System Owner: San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Prime Contractor: Anvil Builders A&E: Stantec, Inc. Facilitator: Jessica B. Romm, JBROMM PHD The 2nd San Francisco Collaborative Partnering Awards Ceremony

Category 1 – Public Infrastructure (Under $10 million) BRONZE LEVEL

Fall Protection & Disconnect Switch Owner: San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Prime Contractor: Cal State Constructors, Inc. Facilitator: Jessica B. Romm, JBROMM PHD

SEP Cryogenic Oxygen Plant Demolition & Lox System Upgrades Owner: San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Prime Contractor: Cal State Constructors, Inc. A&E: San Francisco Public Works Facilitator: Jessica B. Romm, JBROMM PHD

Drumm and Jackson Streets Sewer Improvements Owner: San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Prime Contractor: Anvil Builders A&E: San Francisco Public Works Facilitator: Jessica B. Romm, JBROMM PHD

GOLD LEVEL

Golden Gate Park Oak Woodlands Trail Improvement Owner: San Francisco Recreation & Parks Prime Contractor: Yerba Buena Engineering & Construction, Inc. A&E: San Francisco Public Works Facilitator: Rob Reaugh, OrgMetrics LLC

Mountain Tunnel Interim Repairs Owner: San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Prime Contractor: Sierra Mountain Construction, Inc. A&E: SFPUC + McMillen Jacobs Associates, Inc. Facilitator: Jessica B. Romm, JBROMM PHD

Category 1 – Buildings (Under $10 million) BRONZE LEVEL

Balboa Pool Renovation Owner: San Francisco Recreation & Parks Prime Contractor: CLW Builders A&E: Kuth Ranieri Architects Facilitator: Jessica B. Romm, JBROMM PHD

Category 2 – Public Infrastructure ($10 million-$30 million) BRONZE LEVEL

Masonic Avenue Streetscape Improvements Owner: San Francisco Public Works Prime Contractor: Shaw Pipeline, Inc. Facilitator: Jessica B. Romm, JBROMM PHD

SILVER LEVEL

Polk Streetscape Owner: San Francisco Public Works Prime Contractor: M Squared Construction Facilitator: Phil George, P.E.

SEP Existing Digester Gas Handling Improvements Owner: San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Prime Contractor: Monterey Mechanical Co. A&E: San Francisco Public Works Facilitator: Jessica B. Romm, JBROMM PHD

Category 2 – Buildings ($10 million-$30 million) SILVER LEVEL

San Francisco Fire Station No. 5 Owner: San Francisco Fire Department Prime Contractor: Alten Construction Project Manager, A&E: San Francisco Public Works Facilitator: Jessica B. Romm, JBROMM PHD

Category 3 – Public Infrastructure ($30 million+) GOLD LEVEL

Calaveras Dam Replacement Owner: San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Prime Contractor: Dragados USA/Flatiron West, Inc. + Sukut, Inc. JV A&E: AECOM + SFPUC Facilitator: Paul Crotty, Ventura Consulting Group

Category 3 – Buildings ($30 million+) GOLD LEVEL

San Francisco International Airport Long Term Parking Garage 2 Owner: San Francisco International Airport Prime Contractor: Nibbi Brothers, Inc. A&E: DLR Group + FMG Structural: WBC PMSS: The Allen Group + CPM Associates Facilitator: Rob Reaugh, OrgMetrics LLC

Best In Class Public Infrastructure

Calaveras Dam Replacement Buildings

San Francisco International Airport Long Term Parking Garage 2

The International Partnering Institute congratulates all 14 award winners in the 2nd Annual San Francisco Collaborative Partnering Awards Program.

For a culture of collaboration to grow, it is essential to recognize the individuals and teams who are effectively demonstrating partnering in the field.

IPI MEMBERS Owners

Port of San Francisco San Francisco International Airport San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency San Francisco Public Utilities Commission San Francisco Public Works San Francisco Recreation and Parks Industry

Flatiron West, Inc. Yerba Buena Engineering & Construction, Inc. Facilitators

Jessica B. Romm, JBROMM PHD Paul Crotty, Ventura Consulting Group Rob Reaugh, OrgMetrics LLC

IN THE NEWS

Partnering: San Francisco

Beginning January 2020, the San Francisco Collaborative Partnering Steering Committee (SFCPSC), will be launching its new Partnering Fundamentals Training Initiative. The training, which is Free for attendees, is based on the City of San Francisco’s updated partnering specification and the new San Francisco Partnering Field Guide, available for download at www.sfpartnering.com.

The new partnering specification appears in contract documents and requires at least one member of the contractor’s project team to complete partnering training and receive certification within 90 days of NTP on City projects. San Francisco Public Works Director Mohammed Nuru, who serves as co-chair of the SFCPSC, notes, “This training provides essential and practical problem-solving tools for project teams and is part of our commitment to the City’s partnering program and the collective goal to make the City and County of San Francisco the owner of choice. We already have seen huge savings and positive results on our projects, thanks to our collaborative partnering efforts.”

IPI Board Member, Mike Ghilotti, of Ghilotti Bros, Inc., who co-chairs the SFCPSC with Nuru, added: “This is a big deal! Since launching the Steering Committee in 2016, we have been focused on building cohesion across the six City departments

and aligning with industry partners to deliver quality construction projects. We now have a successful partnering awards program, a comprehensive Partnering Field Guide and this training initiative. We are making great strides in making San Francisco the first major metropolitan city with a robust Partnering program.”

The four-hour training sessions will be held regularly in San Francisco with participants from the City and industry. Attendees will be given invaluable tools to effectively implement the partnering process, carry out project goals and resolve issues to improve project outcomes. In addition to providing an overview of the partnering specification and San Francisco Partnering Field Guide, the training gives attendees the opportunity to prepare a sample charter and brainstorm ways to address key issues gathered from actual City projects. The SFCPSC is comprised of department heads from San Francisco Public Works, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, San Francisco Recreation and Park Department, the Port of San Francisco and San Francisco International Airport, as well as representatives from industry membership organizations such as United Contractors, AGC of California and the Construction Employers’ Association.

For more information on the program or to enroll in an upcoming class, please contact Jennifer Lei, San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency at partneringtraining@ sfmta.com or visit www.sfpartnering.com.

B U I L D I N G C A L I F O R N I A S I N C E 19 3 2

th ’ p m

h vy v t t

PAVI N G • G R AD I N G • R OAD/HI GHW AY • D EMO LITI O N / EXCAVATI N G

Hilton San Francisco Airport Bayfront May 14-15, 2020

SFO Runway 28L Reconstruction 2019

Networking

Presentations by Industry Leaders

Celebrating Partnering Excellence

925-447-9100 partneringinstitute.org

Oakland International Airport Runway 12-30

p t m p p t w

11555 Dublin Boulevard, P.O. Box 2909 Dublin, California 94568-2909

925-829-9220 w w w . d e s i l v a g a t e s . c o m

PARTNERING IN THE TRENCHES

We often hear that project teams want to know what’s possible with Collaborative Partnering. What can your teams hope to achieve if they really focus on making partnering work on their projects?

The ROI of Partnering Your Project

Over the years evidence has grown on the benefits of Collaborative Partnering. The 1996 CII Benchmarking Study (identified in red below) identified the following areas where partnering provides significant improvements. Over the years several other studies and programs have continued to validate what the 1999 Construction Industry Institute’s (CII) The Partnering Process – Its Benefits, Implementation and Measurement (CII Benchmarking) study found. We hope that this information will help you inspire your project teams to learn how to achieve similar or even better results.

Savings on the overall project cost and schedule are evident in the results shown below. A cost savings of 10% was the original CII benchmark. Others have achieved similar savings and some have achieved a significant amount more. Geoff Neumayr, Deputy Director of Design and Construction at San Francisco International Airport said that: “SFO is able to realize a significant reduced cost per square foot in the range of 20%-30% as compared to other aviation projects around the country. This is possible because the dollars are utilized on scope rather than on expensive claims mitigation measures. In addition money is saved because projects are completed quickly realizing significant savings in overhead cost attributable to reduced time. This is the result of our Partnering!”

Continued on page 18

According to the 2019 IPI Award Winning Projects, for each $1 spent on partnering, the project saved $123—If you spend $30K on your partnering, you would save $3,690,000!

Fewer claims and improved safety are also benchmarks of Collaborative Partnering. The evidence below shows that partnered projects have fewer claims than non-partnered projects and when there is a claim, the amount of the claim is significantly lower. It used to be unheard of that Mega Projects could come in with zero claims, yet the evidence below shows that this is being achieved on projects where Collaborative Partnering has been implemented. Safety is improved when people communicate well, work together and look out for one another. This is another hallmark of Collaborative Partnering as the evidence below shows.

There is more to learn and more to study, but it does seem that Collaborative Partnering provides a great ROI!

Partnering: Federal

Nurturing relationships is our sole mission

Design-Build New Office Annex to the U.S. Embassy in Kampala, Uganda includes 178,000 SF of new construction including a new annex, parking structure, medical facilities, and secure spaces.

“Gregory and the GCC involvement in our project have been pivotal to our recent successes and have created a monumental change in our effectiveness and trajectory towards success.” — Lou Zecca, President, Pernix Federal

GCC GCC LLC SDVOSB / DVBE / DBE / CBE / SBE

www.gcc-llc.com | 949.636.0461

STUDIES/PROGRAM DATA used in this Article 1. CII: Partnering – Its Benefits, Implementation and Measurement, CII RR102-11, 1996 (CII Benchmarking/Partnering) 2. Gransberg, D. et al., Quantitative Analysis of Partnered Project Performance, JCEPM, 1999 (TxDOT Partnering Study) 3. Anderson, L. and Polkinghorn, B. Efficacy of Partnering on the Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project, ASCE, 2011 (Woodrow Wilson Partnering Study) 4. SFO Results ($800M built – Total Program $5B), 2014 (SFO: Terminal Program) 5. Caltrans Excellence in Partnering Award Winners stats (2012 – 2014) and Caltrans Partnering Program http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/ construc/partnering/ (Caltrans Partnered Projects) 6. International Partnering Institute: Partnered Projects of the Year, 2013-2014 7. Utah Transit Authority: 2015 Frontlines Program Results (UTA Frontlines 2015) 8. Maryland State Highway Administration: Partnering Program, 2000-2010 9. Grajeck, k. et. al., Partnered Project Performance in Texas DOT, Journal on Infrastructure Systems: 2000 (Grajek TxDOT study) 10. Ohio DOT Partnering Program Status Report, 2010 (Ohio DOT)