Kent, D C and Becerik-Gerber, B (2010) Understanding construction industry experience and attitudes toward integrated project delivery. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(8), pp. 815-825. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Integrated project delivery (IPD) seeks to improve project outcomes through a collaborative approach of aligning the incentives and goals of the project team through shared risk and reward, early involvement of all parties, and a multiparty agreement. Although there has been a huge interest in IPD in principle, the current adoption status by the construction industry is unknown. Several professional organizations are supporting the advancement of IPD, and several projects have demonstrated its benefits; however, the amount of projects using IPD remains relatively small. This research is based on the results of a web-based survey that was designed to target a wide range of construction professionals in an effort to shed light on current status of IPD use and its future widespread adoption by the construction industry. The paper attempts to provide hard data concerning the knowledge and experience levels of construction professionals regarding IPD as well as their opinions concerning its benefits and problems as a project delivery method.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | collaboration; delivery methods; integrated project delivery; project delivery; surveys |
| Index terms: | integrated project delivery, survey, collaboration, delivery method, project outcome, construction professional, construction industry, project team, project delivery |
| Subjects: | management, professional development, delivery method, industry analysis, data collection methods, project completion, contractual arrangements, project delivery |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Information Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here