Integrated Project Delivery for Public and Private Owners is a new, free, downloadable, 40-page PDF from APPA: The Association of Higher Education Facilities Officers and several other organizations.

Click here to get the document from APPA. 

Table of Contents

Introduction – Degrees of Collaboration: An Evolutionary Process

1. Integrated Project Delivery (IPD): An Overview

A. Forces Driving Change

B. Result: Integrated Project Delivery

C. Levels of Collaboration and IPD: “Delivery Method” versus “Philosophy”

i. IPD as a Philosophy (IPD “Lite” or “IPD-ish” / Non Multi-party IPD)

ii. IPD as a Delivery Method (“True” IPD / Multi-party IPD)

D. IPD Principles and Catalysts E. Convergence: Related Industry Trends

i. Lean Construction / Lean Project Delivery to Increase Efficiency ii. Building Information Modeling (BIM) as a Catalyst iii. Sustainability

2. In Pursuit of Integrated Project Delivery

A. Why Adopt IPD Philosophies?

B. Why Adopt IPD as a Delivery Method?

C. IPD as a Delivery Method

i. Applying Principles and Practices with IPD as a Delivery Method

ii. Early Lessons Learned – Practices to Consider

iii. IPD Case Studies

D. IPD as a Philosophy – What Can You Do if You Can’t do Multi-party?

3. Trying Integrated Project Delivery: First Steps

A. Culture – Willingness to Change; Take Risks and Trust

B. Addressing Potential Barriers or Limitations

i. Selection / Procurement Options: Buying Value ii. Regulatory / Legislative

4. Summary | Recommendations for all Owners (Not Just Public)

Appendices:

A: “IPD-ish” at Massachusetts and Emory

B: Levels of Collaboration

C: Standard Form Agreements

Click here to get the document from APPA.

Why should universities hire a consultant and not just start streamlining procurement and information technology?

“Folks who look at the reports will know that procurement is a major area, I.T. is a major area, and reducing the number of organizational layers is a major area, but just because you know procurement’s a problem doesn’t give you the expertise of having handled 930 procurement problems in the last decade,” Mr. Mankins said. “Most doctors don’t do self-diagnosis, and the same reasoning applies in higher education.”

Many higher education institutions rely on external consultants not only for advice but also for help in diagnosing and developing strategies related to common and uncommon challenges in a whole host of areas—such as compensation, leadership development, enrollment, labor relations, strategic planning, technology, capital planning, and succession planning. . . . Ideally, a consultant brings a fresh perspective, best practices from other IHEs, problem-solving skills, and cost-effective ways of managing the college or university’s resources. That description paints a rosy picture. But unless institutional leaders assess their needs clearly and choose consultants wisely, the experience can be an exercise in futility. . . . These caveats and best practices form a strategic approach to the hiring of consultants. The approach begins with recognizing a clear need, problem, or opportunity; carefully selecting a consultant whose experience and style fit the institution and the issue; working proactively with the consultant to create change; and measuring success over time. Being methodical and strategic is far superior to the common hit-or-miss method of rushing into a consulting relationship. It will avoid painful experiences and optimize results.