Ebrahimi, G and Dowlatabadi, H (2019) Perceived challenges in implementing integrated project delivery (IPD): Insights from stakeholders in the U.S. And Canada for a path forward. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 15(4), pp. 291-314. ISSN 1557-8771
Abstract
Conventional project delivery in the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction industry is plagued by: cost over-runs, delayed delivery, and poor quality control. Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) seeks to improve project outcomes by fostering collaboration among key stakeholders through shared risks and rewards as well as early and sustained engagement. The objective of this study is to identify the challenges in implementing IPD by drawing on 39 semi-structured interviews with owners, constructors and designers. 90+% of respondents reported challenges in: (1) sustaining a collaborative environment, (2) dealing with the operating environment, (3) selecting the right team, (4) embedding IPD concepts, and (5) making sound and timely decisions. These observations were insensitive to level of IPD experience. Detailed analysis of stakeholder experiences led to four key insights for improved implementation of IPD: (a) focus on partnership capability in IPD team selection; (b) empower IPD team members and establish a flatter organizational structure; (c) bridge the knowledge gap on IPD concepts and their implementation; and (d) establish a balance between efficient resource allocation and collaboration. More generally, this study shows that IPD will not succeed by principles alone. It requires cultural change in the AEC industry and rethinking project planning and management.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cultural change; integrated project delivery; project delivery; project planning and management; stakeholder perspective |
| Index terms: | resource allocation, owner, partnership, project outcome, designer, Canada, quality control, implementation, construction industry, project delivery, interview, organizational structure, drawing, integrated project delivery, collaboration, cultural change, project planning |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, project completion, Geography, project delivery, resource management, technical documentation, control systems, data collection methods, profession, industry analysis, partnership management, sociology, management |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Project Management, Geographical Context, Procurement, Design Practice, Site Management, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management |
| 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