0 valutazioniIl 0% ha trovato utile questo documento (0 voti)
171 visualizzazioni4 pagine
This document discusses Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), a collaborative project delivery method that establishes relationships and incentives to promote success. IPD is based on principles like shared risk/reward, collaborative decision-making, and no blame. It aims to reduce adversarial relationships by involving stakeholders early and considering whole-life costs and benefits. Collaboration is encouraged through incentives like shared profits released upon meeting milestones. The goal is to align individual and project interests to encourage collaboration and achieve goals.
This document discusses Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), a collaborative project delivery method that establishes relationships and incentives to promote success. IPD is based on principles like shared risk/reward, collaborative decision-making, and no blame. It aims to reduce adversarial relationships by involving stakeholders early and considering whole-life costs and benefits. Collaboration is encouraged through incentives like shared profits released upon meeting milestones. The goal is to align individual and project interests to encourage collaboration and achieve goals.
This document discusses Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), a collaborative project delivery method that establishes relationships and incentives to promote success. IPD is based on principles like shared risk/reward, collaborative decision-making, and no blame. It aims to reduce adversarial relationships by involving stakeholders early and considering whole-life costs and benefits. Collaboration is encouraged through incentives like shared profits released upon meeting milestones. The goal is to align individual and project interests to encourage collaboration and achieve goals.
(IPD) establishes the right relationships and incentives to achieve success IPD is a value driven process based on principles that promote collaboration between organisations. Its foundations are built around shared risk and reward, collaborative decision-making, no blame and earlier involvement of key participants and stakeholders. This delivery method breaks down adversarial relationships and considers decisions in the design phase that reect the whole-of-life of the project with inputs from owners, architects, consultants, contractors and asset managers from concept to completion while maintaining a competitive tender process. Collaboration is encouraged through early involvement of all organisations to deliver the project within budget and schedule while meeting or improving upon the project specications. This process is incentivised through shared prot that is released in tranches upon meeting agreed milestones. Individual interests are aligned with project interests, thereby encouraging collaboration in order to achieve self-interest goals. It is imperative that the right organisations and individuals are selected to deliver the project in order to reduce prot-loss. Adversarial behaviour that leads to lesser outcomes must be avoided otherwise all participants may be penalised nancially. Given that nancial risk is pinned to collaboration, it is not beyond consideration that psychometric testing of the project team be conducted by the responsible entity seeking to mitigate future conicts. Establishing a physical co-location environment where all project participants reside immediately reduces risk associated with silos of information and opens communication. Benecial use of this space relies on all key project team members participating in decision-making exercises, seeking improvements in design, delivery and cost savings that would not typically be found in the fragmented process of traditional project delivery. Further identication of construction efciencies can be achieved through Virtual Design and Construction (VDC), aided by the technology component of Building Information Modelling (BIM). The ability to virtually test sequencing and quickly verify cost impacts from design alternatives enables the project team to rene the project and potentially increase shared prot. A commonly cited barrier to the adoption of IPD is contracts. IPD continues the evolution of collaborative contracting that began in the UK oil and gas industry in the 1990s and has since evolved through alliance contracting in Australia during the 2000s. The key difference is IPDs exclusion of liability; this eliminates the threat of being sued. By removing liability as a distraction, the project teams vision becomes focused on reward driven innovation. Team selection also plays an important part in who is selected to participate in a project. If the lead design and build teams waive all potential claims against each other (with the exception of fraud or gross negligence), it becomes increasingly important that the right organisations and people are selected for the project. Insurance underwriters capacity to provide services supporting collaborative delivery models has matured over the past 10 years. Although this is now understood by the legal and insurance industries leading IPD delivery, there is more limited awareness in the wider construction industry both from owners and the delivery market. Mediation proceedings can also be introduced if an issue arises between project teams that would typically escalate to legal proceedings. An agreement between parties regarding the process of mediation is agreed at the commencement of the project and included within the contractual arrangements. A desire to overcome years of fragmented delivery processes, coupled with a society-wide structural change towards transparency are driving construction markets towards increased collaboration. Steve Appleby Practice Leader BIM steve.appleby@aecom.com PROCESS The Blue Book 2013 Target Cost Build Team (Labour and Overheads) Design Team (Labour and Overheads) Shared Contingency Shared Prot (Incentive Compensation Layer) Compensation Structure Positive Outcome 1 Negative Outcome 2 1 Positive Outcome Successful delivery of the project that exceeds set metrics (ie schedule, cost, operation targets, etc) has the capacity to earn the entire shared prot margin. 2 Negative Outcome Projects that fail to meet set metrics could, in worst case scenarios, result in fees associated with labour and overheads being withheld after the shared contingency is expended.
Shared Contingency Shared Contingency Build Team (Labour and Overheads) Design Team (Labour and Overheads) Build Team (Labour and Overheads) Design Team (Labour and Overheads) Owners Contingency Maintained Separately
Shared Prot (Incentive Compensation Layer) Shared Prot (Incentive Compensation Layer) Early Planning Setting Conditions for Success Goal denition Involvement of key participants Incentives to Drive Behaviour Change Mutual respect and trust Shared risk and reward Integrated innovation Collaborative decision-making Open communication No blame agreement Provide co-location space Suitable Project Structure Leadership Teams Processes Technology Lean construction IPD Incentivising Collaboration Shared Risk and Reward Incentivising Collaboration State of Play The rate of Building Information Modelling (BIM) adoption across Australia and New Zealand continued to escalate in 2012. However, recent US reports indicate that the number of rms offering BIM services has increased by 400 percent since 2007, with contractors now leading architects. Globally, the BIM market is expected to grow from $1.8 billion in 2012 to $6.5 billion by 2020. Can the Australian and New Zealand markets overtake these adoption rates? There are indeed many promising signs of greater BIM adoption moving into 2013. The rise in the number of requests from clients for BIM projects and the increase in industry events with BIM topics point to greater industry interest in Australia and New Zealand. As more projects use BIM through design, construction and operation, the benets will be better understood by a wider audience. A sharp increase in the number of BIM projects is anticipated over the next 18 months, constituting a signicant market transformation well beyond achievements to date. It is important to also dene what level of adoption is occurring. Our AECOM Global Sentiment Survey research forms a snapshot of where the industry differs in terms of the extent to which BIM is being embraced by local industries. Some markets displayed greater disparity. For example, in the Middle East, Australia and New Zealand, average levels of take-up are closer to BIM Level 1 (where there is no proprietary exchange of formats); however, the industry leaders in these regions are striding ahead to BIM Level 3. In contrast, industry leaders in Europe were not as advanced. Australia The Australian Commonwealth Government and buildingSMART have released a strategic report outlining the support needed to drive the construction industry into a new efcient, low-carbon era of BIM. The National Building Information Modelling Initiative (NBI) Report was commissioned by the Built Environment Industry Innovation Council, with the ndings presented in Sydney in August 2012. The next stage of the National Initiative is yet to receive federal funding but industry proponents remain positive that this will be forthcoming. Even though the Commonwealth is yet to mandate BIM, several state governments have begun to implement BIM on their projects. South Australias Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) is developing BIM guidelines for government agencies, consultants and contractors to ensure that design and documentation occurs based on collaborative working, open standards and in alignment with national standards. DPTI plans to initially implement this strategy on major projects (>$10m) before rolling it out across all projects. From 1 January 2013, NSWs Health Infrastructure mandated BIM deliverables on all projects over $30 million. Across the country, there are at least eight state-funded hospital developments underway, either in design or construction, with BIM providing efciency gains. Another initiative, BIM in Practice, aimed at increasing industry knowledge of BIM was led by the Australian Institute of Architects and Consult Australia. This joint venture pooled experts from across the supply chain to produce a series of brief documents providing everyday advice for those implementing BIM. New Zealand New Zealand has also made progress on BIM implementation in 2012. It held the inaugural BIM Summit in New Zealand in 2012, attracting participants from across the industry. The chair of the Productivity Partnerships Construction Systems Work Stream a partnership of industry and government, established in 2010 through the Department of Building and Housing opened the conference with an announcement supporting the roll-out of BIM. BIM is one element of their plan to encourage widespread use of smart technology to enable knowledge sharing and faster and more efcient construction processes. Productivity Partnerships National Technical Standards Committee is keen to encourage the faster uptake of smart ways of working in the building and construction sector. The GeoBuild initiative is one example of this and will bring together three systems: Building Information Modelling The proposed National Online Consenting System A location-based information modelling system being developed in partnership with Land Information New Zealand a common approach to location information interoperability, allowing the reuse of information in 2D and 3D. It provides users with a graphic representation of underground services, such as sewer pipes and telecom cabling. The Committee is selecting open industry standards for data for building and location data for all of these systems so that they are interoperable and can be rich sources for data mining. BIM Adoption by Region Source: AECOM Global Sentiment Survey Level 0 Australia Asia Relative Strength of Industry Leaders Typical Industry Level Middle East New Zealand Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Europe North America Level 0 Unmanaged CAD with pdf les as the main form of data exchange. Level 1 Managed CAD in 2 or 3D with a collaborative data environment. Level 2 Managed 3D environment with proprietary exchange formats. May include 4D program and 5D cost data. Level 3 Fully-open process with a single project model and data exchange using Industry Foundation Classes standards. AECOM The Blue Book 2013 BIM Management Roles and Responsibilities BIM Roles Advisor and Model Manager The BIM Management Project Timeline explains the difference between a Model Manager and a BIM Advisor or Manager. It is crucial to the success of BIM projects that clients, consultants and contractors all appreciate the differences between how these roles operate together. Further steps are critical to the successful delivery of a BIM project: Eliminate Confusion Educating the market is still a signicant BIM hurdle. Industry needs to work towards a more coherent denition of BIM so clients are not confused. We need to break down what BIM means to our clients during design, construction, fabrication, maintenance and operations. Standardisation and best practice guidelines will also help. NATSPECs National BIM Guide and a BIM Management plan template provide useful terminology and common standards. The NATSPEC template is a great base document for the management of the BIM process and will help the industry adopt a more uniform approach. Focus Teams on Client Returns Overlooking practical details is one of the quickest ways to undo any potential project gains. A model content plan is an excellent way to introduce a project team to the requirements of BIM. This should be established at the start of every project through a brieng session with the client and project team. This ensures they understand what can and cannot be done in the current market, what the likely costs are going to be and what returns should look like. A further workshop should then be held with the design team on appointment to ensure they understand these client demands. Get the Procurement Details Right It is very hard to get value for money with BIM using traditional contractual frameworks and procurement. In the BIM world, a design is produced and all discipline models are merged and, in theory, clashes are resolved ahead of tendering to a contractor. However, when the model is handed over, it includes a string of caveats that are meant to protect authoring parties from litigation. Also, traditional 2D drawings and schedules are still the contractual basis for the tender price. In reality this limits the extent to which the contractor can benet from the model/s received. The appointment of project teams must shift from an adversarial environment to one that is incentivised and collaborative in nature. After years of pursuit of the lowest bid, a shared risk/reward process allows room for improved initiatives and innovation by project teams. This cannot be organised in arrears it must be agreed during the appointment of each team member. BIM Management BIM Advisor Model Manager Application of BIM Independent from the design team. Separate engagement. Discipline-led. Design team member or subcontractor team member. Engaged for design authoring. P r e - C o n s t r u c t i o nProgramming Cost Estimate Energy Analysis & Simulation Stakeholder Engagement Coordination Visualisation Inception Brief client on suggested BIM scope Report implications of time, ROI, cost and metrics. Engage Consultants Write project brief, consultant scope, BIM deliverables. Draft BIM Management Plan (BMP)for design period. Schematic Design Coordination meetings bi-weekly. QA model elements. Author discipline specic models. Issue to BIM Advisor for review and federation. Design Development Brief shortlisted tendering Managing Contractors. Attend coordination meetings. Resolve any conicts. Contract Documentation Prepare BMP for construction. Issue models for costing. C o n s t r u c t i o nProgramming Cost Estimate Clash Detection Logistics & Scheduling Digital Fabrication Visualisation O p e r a t i o nAsset Management Building Automation Systems Redevelopment Operations Handover of virtual building deliverables, integrated with Facilities Management software. Training of FM/O&M staff and production of associated process documentation (security, work order execution, record keeping). Periodic review and optimization, using captured performance metrics. LOD - Level of development in the model LOD100 General/generic dimensions, locations and materials LOD200 Performance criteria to be specied and designed LOD300 Manufacturer and/or model specication LOD400 Shop drawings/models, including processes LOD500 As-built data, with performance-related data, manufacturer and model specications Source: AECOM LOD100 LOD200 LOD300 LOD400 LOD500 AECOM The Blue Book 2013 The Future of BIM It is clear that BIM is set to become increasingly relevant in the construction industry, not only for early adopters on larger building projects, but for most businesses involved in construction. Companies will have to develop at least a minor degree of BIM capability in order to be considered for public work. The next few years of industry development will be critical as larger construction businesses in particular will be increasingly expected to have developed a signicant BIM capability. The increased take-up will help promote benets of BIM more widely. Our AECOM Global Sentiment Survey research demonstrates that many in the industry already understand the signicant advantages BIM enables at the design and construction phases of an assets development. But there is little understanding of how it can provide value during the assets operational life. To maximise these operational stage benets, local capability is required early on in the BIM process to ensure sufcient information is incorporated into the model. Otherwise it will not be optimised for long-term use and integration into building automation systems. What does the future of BIM look like? Industry Perceptions of BIM Benets by Asset Stage Source: AECOM Global Sentiment Survey Source: AECOM
Unrealised benets in the use of BIM to enhance asset management are considerable. -1.0 -0.5 0 0.5 1.0 Signicant benets Moderate benets No benet Design Costing Construction Operations Industry understands and has dened BIM for design and construction leading to an availability of data to enable industry benchmarks for the cost of construction Varying combinations of cloud-based hosting of projects are widespread, early adoption issues (security and data ownership) are resolved BIM adoption rate hits 60 percent Australian Government mandates BIM Australia and New Zealand have established ISO BIM Standard(s) BIM protocols well-dened and understood Mobile computing is prevalent on construction sites Project insurance policies cater for BIM and IPD Prefabrication and modularisation are standard practice for many building Augmented Reality (AR) makes signicant headway in the property industry Virtual Australia and New Zealand (VANZI) provides a portal to the virtual world Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) technology used for surveying subterranean assets Tier-1 design and construction companies offer more whole-of-life services to clients; other organisations resort to collaborative contracting models to compete and offer better service BIM integration with building management and computer-aided facility management systems is commonplace New material technology continues to impact on whats possible and associated methodologies Collaborative, digital prototyping becomes the new standard for all infrastructure projects, not just buildings BIM adoption rate hits 80 percent Model-based contract deliverables are commonly sought by clients (in addition to drawings) Advanced data validation tools enable fast and transparent QA checks Digital ID and sensor technology used for material and equipment transportation, physical properties assessment and construction progress tracking Robots augment humans in construction (for survey, manufacture, transportation and fabrication), improving productivity and safety Off-site manufacturing prevalent as companies realise that design for manufacture and assembly is a no brainer Design information provided direct through supply chain to manufacturing BIM adoption rate hits 90 percent Emergency services organisations have access to digital building information for better disaster responses Robotics replace some human workers in construction 2016 2018 2023 AECOM The Blue Book 2013