IPD: Providing Value to the Owner
By: Shafraaz Kaba
Tags: Ipd, Design Thinking, Mcmaster University, Lean, Construction

The Value to the Owner

When building owners select Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) as their procurement for design services and construction, they are provided a good look “behind the curtain” of the architecture, engineering and construction industry. This glimpse usually results in a deeper understanding of how a collaborative team can deliver more value when project owners unleash designers and constructors from the binds of contractual relationships.

IPD is built on trust and partnership that dives deep into what the owner must have in a project and creates “conditions of satisfaction” with the entire team at the start of a project. This helps owners, designers and builders define from day one where budgets should focus to deliver the best value for the client. These conditions of satisfaction can also change, allowing the team to be nimble and agile to changing circumstances within a project. Also, it’s very cognizant of an owner’s costs and budget. During the early “pre-validation” and validation phases, the profit that is normally charged by design teams and builders is waived. Only when the project is validated, which means proceeding to construction documents, milestone payout of profit is allowed. This ensures all are working toward a successful and viable project that meets the owner’s allowable cost. It is the incentive to get the design right the first time and not have to enter into a “value engineering” cycle.

For 44 Frid Street, I asked Project Owner Mike Good for some of his insight in the process.

44 Frid Street Reimagines the old Hamilton Spectator Building.

How did you feel the 44 Frid Street team worked through prioritizing must-haves and to the budget?

The team provided significant insight and assistance into prioritizing the must-haves of the project. In some cases, to their detriment, they even made their tasks more difficult by providing some suggestions on must-haves to the project. This was the beginning of my realization into the fact that everyone involved in the project was strictly thinking about the project and what would make the project better, not easier, not less time consuming, not less difficult, just better. This enlightened me to the IPD way of things and framed the “all for the project” aspect of IPD.

How did you feel the budget & schedule were managed by the team?

When it came to the schedule for the deliverable of the Prevalidation Reports, the speed at which the team came together into efficient operation was impressive. By performing the pull planning for each of the deliverables and staying on track using the digital sprints in the PIT planning sessions, the team was able to stay on schedule and submit the deliverables on time, even with the tight timelines that we were on.

Virtual “Pull Planning” Board for 44 Frid Street

The budget, as it usually is with any project, was the more difficult item to pin down. Trying to nail down a burn rate at the very beginning of a project is like trying to throw a dart at a dart board, but blindfolded. After a couple of months the team was able to come together and start providing more accurate forecasting which dramatically improved the ability to maintain and manage the financials of the project.

In regards to the budget that was put together for the Prevalidation Reports, let’s just say it was impressive. Typically, at this stage of Prevalidation, you’re looking at a Class D budget which is primarily based on cost per square foot per use over the square footage of the building. The budget that was put together for the Prevalidation Reports was far more than that. Having subtrades providing feedback on conceptual design and being willing to provide some higher level numbers based on site walk-throughs, concept sketches, drawings and renderings took the budget that was provided to likely close to a Class C budget.

What was your biggest surprise on this project?

I think that my biggest surprise was how well the team gelled together from the very beginning and how engaged everyone was. There are a lot of people that “talk the talk” about IPD and wanting to be a part of a more integrated team, but the team that we have actually walk the walk. There is a lot of comfort and security in the big room which has allowed the team to openly share ideas, no matter how “out of the box” or “off the wall” they are. This to me is where innovation resides in a project.

What about challenges? How did you leverage the team to overcome them?

There were a number of challenges that we ran into during the Prevalidation. The biggest item was having an initial budget that was provided to MIP which was not in line with what was being proposed. This is where the “out of the box” thinking came in; or rather in our case, “in the box thinking”. Having to evaluate the existing building and determine how to minimize the cost of the actual work that needed to be done is where the Team really stepped up their game. Rather than build an addition and create additional space outside of the existing building, the Team put their heads together and managed to fit all of the programming into the existing building by adding floor space within the building, and squeezing the building for every ounce of volume available.

Some of the wins for this project included the re-use of existing building floor loading capacity for heavier program requirements, finding the optimal flexible, affordable lab design, creating the best balance between lab and office areas, and incorporating a large data centre that maximized racks within floor area. IPD can deliver value that far exceeds the owner’s expectations.