Ma, Q; Li, S and Cheung, S O (2022) Unveiling embedded risks in integrated project delivery. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 148(1): 04021180, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) is an innovative procurement approach through which the client, designer, and contractor work together under one contract as a team. While an integrated team is expected to be able to create extra value for the project, this practice may bring new risks if not all team members are committed. The slow uptake of IPD may possibly be due to the insufficient understanding of the risks involved, especially those hidden risks associated with inappropriate integration practice. This study identifies critical risks in IPD projects, and investigates if risk criticality can be alleviated by having previous or future partnership between IPD partners. By collecting the views of construction professionals on the level of criticality of general risks and IPD-specific risks, it is found that (1) most highly critical IPD project risks are borne from multidisciplinary teams of poor integration quality, inaccurate target costs, or unreasonable cost estimates; and (2) having future cooperation intent can significantly alleviate the criticality of certain IPD risks, whereas no effect of previous partnership was found on risk criticality. This study contributes to a growing body of knowledge on IPD by providing insight into the effect of new and general risks on IPD project outcomes in particular and clarifying the role of previous/future partnership in risk management. This study suggests active involvement of client and contractors in the design of IPD and signals future cooperation intent to IPD partners during the project process.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | critical risks; integrated project delivery; IPD projects; previous/future partnership |
| Index terms: | body of knowledge, integrated project delivery, target cost, designer, construction professional, cooperation, multidisciplinary team, integration, project outcome, risk management, integrated team, cost estimate, partnership |
| Subjects: | financial and cost management, organizational analysis, management, contractual arrangements, professional development, economics, profession, risk assessment, psychology, sociology, partnership management, project completion, knowledge management |
| Topics: | Information Management, Organizational Design, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Cost Management, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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