Arar, A J; Poirier, E and Staub-French, S (2025) A research and development framework for integrated project delivery. Construction Management and Economics, 43(2), pp. 85-112. ISSN 0144-6193
Abstract
Integration and collaboration within construction projects are seen as responses to the construction industry's inherent efficiency and performance issues. New project delivery methods, such as integrated project delivery (IPD), have emerged as potential solutions to enable this integration and collaboration to overcome the industry's inherent challenges. The number of studies published on IPD has increased rapidly in recent years, covering many aspects of this innovative approach. However, as IPD is still emerging, many questions remain around its components, their instantiation, and the areas of research and development needed to support their progression within academia and industry. This study aims to establish a comprehensive view of the current landscape of IPD research and identify the domains that are underrepresented through the development of an R&D framework. The framework aims to help both researchers and practitioners navigate the different components of IPD and guide research efforts to further their development. The R&D framework is built upon established frameworks and a systematic literature review of 175 papers from 2017 to 2022 and was validated using data from three case studies. The research findings identified a framework with six primary themes and 19 sub-topics that relate to both′ well-explored and under-researched aspects of IPD.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | integrated project delivery; IPD barriers; IPD benefits; IPD success factors; research and development framework |
| Index terms: | systematic literature review, construction industry, project delivery, practitioner, construction project, academia, case study, integrated project delivery, integration, research and development, success factor, efficiency, collaboration |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, project delivery, educational institutions, practitioner, organizational analysis, industry analysis, production management, research evaluation and metrics, performance management, health monitoring assessment and metrics, data collection methods, management, research management |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Health and Safety, Roles and Professions, Education, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Project Management, 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