Partnering Magazine January/February 2016

IPI Profiles in partneringRecipes for success from IPI Members across the country

page 4The Spread

of Global Partnering

INSIDE:page 6

Success Factors in Construction

Projects

Issue 1January/February 2016

www.henselp

helps.c

om

World-Class Innovators . Landmark Bui ld ings. I nsp i r i ng Pe r fo rmance .

Bui l t co l l abo ra t i v e l y t h r o u g h p a r t n e r i n g .

Hensel Phelps + SLAC

www.partneringinstitute.org January/February 2016 Partnering Magazine 3

IN THIS ISSUE

4Executive Director’s ReportThe Global Spread of Partnering

16In the NewsIPI Calendar of Events– Get Involved!

CONTENTS

FeaturesJanuary/February 2016 IPI Profiles in Partnering

Research RoundupHow project delivery strategies,

team integration and group

cohesion affect project

performance.

6

IPI Profiles in PartneringLearn from experience! Three

organizations outline how

Partnering and collaboration

have helped them achieve

better project outcomes and

overall success.

10

Cover photo: IPI 2015 Photo Contest Winner Don Ross, Principal Construction Manager at CH2M

INTERNATIONAL PARTNERING INSTITUTEIPI is a non-profit 501(c) 3 charitable organization that is funded by our members and supporters who wish to change the culture of construction from combative to collaborative.

Phone: (925) 447-9100

BOARD OF ADVISORSLarry Anderson, Anderson PartneringPierre Bigras, PG&E Roddy Boggus, Parsons BrinckerhoffPat Crosby, The Crosby GroupPete Davos, DeSilva Gates ConstructionLarry Eisenberg, Ovus Partners 360Steve Francis, C.C. Myers, Inc.Rachel Falsetti, CaltransMichael Ghilotti, Ghilotti Bros, Inc.Richard Grabinski, Flatiron West, Inc.Randy Iwasaki, Contra Costa Trans. AuthorityJeanne Kuttel, CA Dept. of Water ResourcesJohn Martin, San Francisco International AirportPete Matheson, Granite Construction Geoff Neumayr, San Francisco International AirportJim Pappas, Hensel Phelps Construction Co.Zigmund Rubel, AditazzIvar Satero, San Francisco International AirportStuart Seiden, County of FresnoThomas Taylor, Webcor BuildersDavid Thorman, CA Div. of the State Architect, Ret.John Thorsson, NCC Construction Sverige ABLen Vetrone, Skanska USA Building

EXECUTIVE DIRECTORRob Reaugh, MDR

ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONSDana Paz

ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF MEMBER DEVELOPMENTJoe Hu

FOUNDER & CEOSue Dyer, MBA, MIPI, MDRF

EDITORIAL OFFICE: SUBSCRIPTIONS/INFORMATIONInternational Partnering Institute 291 McLeod StreetLivermore, CA 94559Phone: (925) 447-9100 Email: [email protected]

DESIGN/CREATIVEMichelle Vejby Email: [email protected]

COPYRIGHTPartnering Magazine is published by the International Partnering Institute, 291 McLeod Street, Livermore, CA 94550. Six bi-monthly issues are published annually. Contents copyright 2016 International Partnering Institute, all rights reserved. Subscription rates for non-members, $75 for six electronic issues. Hard copy issues are available only to IPI members. Additional member subscriptions are $75 each for six issues. Postmaster please send address changes to IPI, 291 McLeod Street, Livermore, CA 94550.

www.henselp

helps.c

om

World-Class Innovators . Landmark Bui ld ings. I nsp i r i ng Pe r fo rmance .

Bui l t co l l abo ra t i v e l y t h r o u g h p a r t n e r i n g .

Hensel Phelps + SLAC

4 Partnering Magazine January/February 2016 www.partneringinstitute.org

In our 2016 Profiles issue, we highlight outstanding

examples of Partnering and different ways that

construction programs can take their results to the next

level through enhanced collaboration. We also highlight

how IPI Members work with each other to improve project

outcomes. As we look into 2016, what excites us is that the

industry best practice has really begun to pick up steam across

the world. IPI’s traditional method for measuring momentum

is to identify how many new owner organizations are

implementing a Collaborative Partnering Program. A second

key indicator to determine what’s emerging in the field is

emerging academic research that focuses on piloted Partnering

projects overseas.

IPI recently came across two academic studies focused

on Partnering from countries not included in the 2015

IPI Meta-Analysis on Construction Partnering. The first

focuses on a series of six Partnering pilot projects in Iran,

entitled, Collaborative Procurement in Construction Projects

Performances Measure, Case Study: Partnering in Iranian

Construction Industry. This study found that Partnering

Performance is tied to “Project Performance” and “Partner’s

Performance” and identified the great value generated from

broader adoption of Partnering in the Iranian construction

industry. Despite mixed results stemming from a lack of

training and experience in Partnering projects, the client and

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S

REPORT

Rob Reaugh, MDR, IPI Executive Director

The Global Spread of Partnering

key stakeholders were satisfied with the project outcomes in

terms of cost, schedule, claims, and personal relationships.

The second study is An Assessment of Success Factors

and Benefits of Project Partnering in Nigerian Construction

Industry. This study consisted of a broad literature review

and surveyed national owners, contractors, CM’s, designers

and other professionals in the field. The study found that

there is a “need for broad adoption of Partnering across all

sectors of the construction industry,” and recognized the need

for a structured approach to be used. The researchers also

found that teams need to empower “Partnering Champions”

to help make the culture permeate the project team. Finally,

the researchers identified education as a key success factor in

future partnering endeavors in Nigeria.

Both studies use Partnering as it has emerged in the United

Kingdom, where “Partnering requirements” are embedded

into the contract itself. This implementation of Partnering

represents an important shift for construction in both Iran

and Nigeria, where for the first time the benefits of structured

collaboration are being tied to improved project outcomes.

To give you some context, IPI’s Meta-Analysis collected more

than 160 articles and publications on Construction Partnering

from over the past 30 years. The United States (53) and United


Kingdom (46) contributed the greatest number of academic

papers on Partnering, followed by Hong Kong (28) and Sweden

(12). No studies emerged from either the Middle East or Africa.

So these two studies not only represent Partnering pilot

programs spreading to new public entities throughout the

world, they also signal a global trend, where agencies are using

Partnering as the vehicle for improving outcomes through

enhanced trust and collaboration.

We live in a unique time for the construction industry. The

best practices and success stories for Partnering are emerging

from literally every corner of the world. We hope that you will

share your next Partnering pilot or potential profile feature

with us. Thank you for your commitment to construction

culture change and for your support of the International

Partnering Institute, we are here to support you!________________________________________________________________________

1 A Meta-Analytic Synthesis of Partnering Literature in the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction Industry, Mollaoglu (Korkmaz), Sinem, Sparkling, Anthony, Michigan State University CM Program, February 2015.

2 Hasanzadeh, Sogand Mohammad, Hosseinalipour, Mujtaba, Hafezi, Mohammad Reza, 27th IPMA World Congress

3 Collaborative, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 119 ( 2014 ) 811 – 818

4 Awodele, O.A. & Ogunsemi, D.R, An Assessment of Success Factors and Benefits of Project Partnering in Nigerian Construction Industry, 2015 (downloaded academia.com November 2015, https://www.academia.edu/566998/An_Assessment_of_Success_Factors_and_Benefits_of_Proj-ect_Partnering_in_Nigerian_Construction_Industry)

As one of North America’s largest transportation and infrastructure contractors, our commitment to building the best is demonstrated in the projects we build and the partnerships we develop. Our success is dependent upon our relationships with owners, partners, designers, subcontractors and community members. Flatiron works closely with our partners to develop innovative solutions that benefi t everyone, and we’re proud of what we’ve created together. The more than 20 partnering awards Flatiron has won in the past decade serve as recognition of these relationships and

the resulting successful projects.

To learn more about Flatiron’s innovation in partnering visit

www.fl atironcorp.com

Interstate 880/State Route 92 Interchange Reconstruction

Hayward, CA

2012 IPI Partnered Project of the Year, Diamond Level


Across the United States the construction industry has attempted to improve

project outcomes by adopting more “integrated” types of contracts like Design-

Build or CM at Risk and by using qualifications-based selection. This study

offers interesting findings on the links between team integration and actual project

performance, analyzing project teams from 204 building projects completed in the US between

2008 and 2013, and the complex relationships between their delivery strategies, selection, team

integration, group cohesiveness and ultimately, project performance. The study found that:

• Bringing teams together more often results in greater group cohesion.

• Team integration correlates with the ability to control schedule growth.

• Group cohesion correlates with being able to control cost growth and with improved project

quality.

Success Factors In Construction ProjectsHow project delivery strategies, team integration and group cohesion affect project performance.A STUDY PUBLISHED IN 2014 BY THE CHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION AND THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY INSTITUTE IN COLLABORATION WITH DESIGN BUILD INSTITUTE OF AMERICA EXAMINES “THE ROLE OF INTEGRATION IN THE SUCCESS OF BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.”

Less Integrated More Integrated

Figure 1: Delivery Strategies and varying degrees of intergrated concepts

RESEARCH ROUNDUP


Success Factors In Construction Projects

Team Integration The degree to which design and construction team members are brought together for a common purpose.

Group CohesionWhen groups evolve into an effective team.

Delivery StrategiesThe 2014 projects were sorted into 5 Classes—Class 1 being the

least integrated and Class 5 the most integrated (see Figure 1).

Class 1 projects are typically hard-bid, traditional contracts.

Class 5 contracts include many features of Integrated Project

Delivery (IPD) contract. The research revealed that most

owners tended toward a moderated approach (Classes

III and IV) and not toward either of the extremes of the

spectrum, although vertical builders tend to use more

integrated strategies on the whole.

Assessed FactorsThe study assessed 204 project teams, comparing performance

(cost, schedule and quality), team integration and group

cohesiveness; and correlating these elements amongst one

another and with their delivery strategies.

FACTOR DEFINITIONCost Percent of growth, unit cost and

intensity

Schedule Percent of growth, delivery speed and construction speed

Quality Turnover experience, satisfaction with building systems

Team Integration The team’s involvement in high-quality, collaborative interactions; measured by the number of BIM uses on the project, level of offsite prefabrication and proportion of the team participating in BIM planning, joint goal setting, design charrettes and construction phase co-location.

Group Cohesiveness

Represents the level of development attained by the team while delivering the project. Measured by ratings of timeliness of communication, commitment to project goals, team chemistry, frequency of compromise and formality of communication.

ENVISION THE FUTUREAirports face numerous challenges today, however, they represent endless opportunities.

WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff brings years of expertise and a full range of services enabling airport owners to envision the future … and create it.

Partner with us to advance the future of aviation.

For career opportunities visitwspgroup.com/usa


The correlations shown in

the Table on page 7, and

in the charts on the right,

support that team integration

and group cohesiveness

positively impact project

cost, schedule and quality

outcomes. Not surprisingly,

the best predictor of team

integration is the delivery

strategy. Class III, IV and

V projects had better team

Predictors of Cost Performance

Group cohesiveness was found to correlate to project cost growth, with cost growth reducing 2.3% per unit of increase in group cohesiveness

Predictors of Schedule

Performance

Project schedule growth was reduced by 4.4% per unit of increase in team integration. The mean delivery speed was slowest in Class I projects, and fastest in Class IV projects (111% faster than in Class I projects).

Predictors of Quality

Group cohesiveness proved a predictor of quality performance for both turnover experience and system quality, increasing by .55 units per unit of increase in group cohesiveness

integration than Class I or II.

Team integration proved to be the best predictor of group

cohesiveness, which had the corresponding result that group

cohesiveness was higher in projects with more integrated

delivery strategies.

What this means is that owners will want to

select a project delivery strategy that creates

the appropriate team environment for

their project. Each project is unique

and no delivery strategy is one-size-

fits-all. However, the evidence shows

that greater team integration improves

group cohesiveness, and both of these

yield better project outcomes. As evidenced

in this study, approaching team

integration by degrees is not only

doable, it may work better because

it is tailored to each owner’s needs.

This research produced an Owner’s

Guide to Maximizing Success in Integrated Projects

(available for download at bim.psu.edu/delivery). This guide

includes a structured approach that requires owners to:

1. Define project goals and constraints;

2. Consider team organization options;

3. Consider contract payment methods;

4. Consider team procurement practices; and

5. Select a project delivery strategy

Keeping in mind that the category of owner (public vs. private

or sub-sector specific) had no significant bearing on how unified

a team can be, this research demonstrates that owners should

establish a delivery strategy that fits with their needs and

constraints, paying extra attention to the actions that can lead to

team integration and group cohesiveness, the two elements

that were the greatest predictors of project success.

_____________________________

From “Examining the Role of Integration in the Success of

Building Construction Projects.” A report for the Charles Pankow

Foundation and Construction Industry Institute. Dr. Keith

Molenaar, Dr. John Messner, Dr. Robert Leicht, Dr. Bryan Franz

and Dr. Behzad Esmaeili. January 2014.

RESEARCH ROUNDUP

IPI Takeaway:Over thousands of projects, IPI members have learned that Partnering can

assist your team in developing a collaborative culture, regardless of the chosen

delivery method. As this research reveals, Owners who use qualification-based

selection and who can bring the team together prior to schematic design end up

with more integrated teams, which results in greater group cohesion and better

project outcomes. Layering the Collaborative Partnering structure on top of these

integrative elements will lead to more cohesive teams in measurable ways, and

can lend consistency to teams as Owners pilot emerging delivery models.

usa.skanska.com

Collaboration. Innovation. Sustainability.Partnering to build what matters for our customers and communities.

George Bush Intercontinental Airport, Terminal B South Side Replacement, Houston TX

Tampa International Airport, Main Terminal and Airport Concession Redevelopment Program, Tampa, FL

James B. Hunt Library, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC

Gold Line Bridge, Arcadia, CA


in PARTNERING

IPI PROFILES

EXPERIENCE HAS TOLD US

THAT COLLABORATION

AND TRUST MAKE

CONSTRUCTION

PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS

MORE SUCCESSFUL, AND

THAT COLLABORATIVE

PARTNERING CAN HELP

YOUR TEAMS ACHIEVE

THIS CONSISTENTLY. BUT

EACH ORGANIZATION

SHOULD TAILOR THEIR

PARTNERING INITIATIVES

TO SUIT THEIR NEEDS

AND THEIR SPECIFIC

CONTEXT. THESE IPI

PROFILES DEMONSTRATE

HOW ORGANIZATIONS

CAN DO THIS AND

ACHIEVE BETTER PROJECT

OUTCOMES IN THE

PROCESS.

A 24-Year Partnering JourneyThe Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) first launched

its Partnering Program under the leadership of Jerry Wray in the early 90s. When Jerry Wray returned in 2011, ODOT launched a reinvigoration of the Partnering program. Chase Wells, PE at ODOT’s Central Office shared that they’re now “actively working to prevent the life and death cycle of the past,” taking specific steps to make Partnering an ongoing and successful state-wide initiative.

To do this, ODOT enlisted the support of longtime partnering leader Larry Bonine, (Pinnacle Leadership Group) and Chris Runyan, the President of the Ohio Contractors Association, (OCA) to set up the program. Having the OCA’s buy-in and input was a key step in ensuring that the Partnering would stick.

In the spring of 2012, ODOT institutionalized Partnering by incorporating it into their construction specifications. They also

OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

IPI Member since 2012IPI Partnering Champion 2013Program Scope Size: 12 Districts2015 Program Budget: USD $2.4 Billion


Best Partnering PracticesO Enlisting expert support in developing the statewide

programO Engaging the industry in setting up the program – no

program exists in a vacuumO Establishing a recognition program to reward those who

are committing to the processO Engaging stakeholders in Partnered Projects to make

supporters out of the community and ease progressO Training staff periodically to keep all districts in syncO Oversight of the overall program with a steering committee

and statewide surveys, to track the Partnering climate

hired Kurt Dettman, IPI, (KDR Partnering Associates), and Dick Bayer to help them roll out a brand new Facilitator Standards and Expectation Guide (modeled on Caltrans’ Facilitator Standards and Expectations Guide), and train ODOT staff and facilitators on how to successfully run partnering meetings. ODOT Central Office and OCA conducted four regional meetings and 16 trainings to onboard staff and contractors across all of ODOT’s Districts, and established the Don Conaway Partnering Awards program to reward projects that have embraced Partnering and improved their results because of it.

As part of the yearly Conaway Partnering Awards, ODOT holds an annual massive partnering session with staff and contractors from across the state. This provides a forum to address issues and communicate updates to the program. They also honor award-winning

teams in that forum: “It is a real badge of honor to be given an award before 600 of your peers,” said Chase.

To further motivate project staff, ODOT creates 3-5 minute films for the winning project teams and posts them on the website. These are particularly motivating, as being featured in one of these shorts is a great marketing tool for the contractors on the team, and for the Partnering process itself.

For oversight of their Partnering program, ODOT established a steering committee that meets annually to select the annual winners and to plan the conference. Partnering surveys are sent out to all projects, and the resulting feedback is used to monitor progress and assess how the Partnering effort is going.

Four years into ODOT’s reinvigoration, leadership is continuing to explore ways to ensure that all districts are aligned. “We’ve found that

the new employees are more receptive to committing to the process. And it’s a lot easier to partner the first session,” said Chase, “but once the dirt starts flying and everyone gets busy, it’s much harder to keep that commitment up.” To address this, ODOT is enlisting the outside assistance of Partnering experts (IPI Members Mark Leja and Dan Himick); and exploring training opportunities.

Even with these challenges, the ODOT Partnering program has yielded real results. Since 2009, construction claims have been cut in half, which means that resources wasted

in litigation can instead be invested in more preventative programs (see table above). Chase also shared other more qualitative benefits, “One of the more unexpected benefits has been the community relationships. Involving community stakeholders in our Partnering sessions has really generated a lot of support for our projects. We get fewer complaints, and that support creates a whole different dynamic on the project.”

___________________________________

1 IPI is the designation for Professional Facilitators who have completed more than 25 professional Sessions and are Certified by the International Partnering Institute

The Nelsonville Bypass Project– Winner of the Don Conaway Partnering Award and the IPI Partnered Project of the Year Award.

The Nelsonville Bypass Project Team. Left to Right: ODOT Director Wray, ODOT District 10 Deputy Director Steve Williams, ODOT Project Engineer Daniel McDonald, Beaver Excavating Project Manager Kyle Perry, ODOT District 10 Construction Administrator John Cary Betzing, Beaver Excavating Vice President Jack Ford, and Ohio Contractor Association President Chris Runyan.

Year Total # of

Claims

# Heard by the Director’s Claims Board

# Heard by the Alternative

Dispute Resolution

# Dropped

or Settled

2009 25 17 3 5

2010 18 13 0 5

2011 11 4 0 7

2012 12 7 0 5

2013 12 8 0 4

2014 13 1 0 7


IPI PROFILES

In Contra Costa County, California, State Routes 160 and 4 were built when the area was mostly rural. Now, with suburban growth expanding throughout the San Francisco Bay Area, the two highways see increasingly heavy traffic. The need for new transportation infrastructure resulted in an extensive expansion of transportation capacity in the area: the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) is upgrading the 160/4 connection to make it a modern freeway interchange – and is using partnering to ensure the success of the project. The 160/4 interchange, paid for by regional bridge toll funds administered by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, is one part of an ambitious $1.3 billion initiative to widen Highway 4 and provide for new Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) commuter rail service.

The 160/4 Direct Connector Ramps is a $50 million grade separation project. The project broke ground in March of 2014 and the contractor, RGW Construction (Livermore, CA) is building two grade-separated connections to fill gaps in the existing interchange, adding a 12-foot auxiliary lane in each direction from E18th/Main Street Interchange to SR-160/SR 4 Interchange, and building retaining walls and a sound wall. This project is one of the first

major construction projects to be directly managed by CCTA and Partnering has been a key element of the construction bid process, contracting, and delivery on the project.

Since Executive Director Randell Iwasaki (a former Caltrans Director) came to CCTA in 2010, the agency has been proactively Partnering to manage its own projects and provide better oversight of taxpayer dollars. According to Ivan Ramirez, CCTA Construction Manager, CCTA builds the expectation for Partnering into bid documents, provides information about Partnering at pre-bid meetings, and addresses Partnering immediately with the selected vendors, in order to ensure Partnering will be successful on each project.

While CCTA is a small agency with twenty staff members, it has embraced Partnering in a big way. To keep up-to-date on the latest innovations, CCTA staff follow the work of Caltrans’ Partnering working group, and are actively involved in the International Partnering Institute. “Being involved with organizations like IPI is how you stay involved and current with the latest practices,” said Ramirez. He added that seminars and publications are particularly helpful tools provided by IPI.

CONTRA COSTA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

IPI Member since 2012IPI Partnered Project of the Year Award, Winner Sapphire Level 2015Multi-year Program Scope: 60 projects, $2.7 Billion

Photo courtesy of CCTA and RGWConstruction

Small Agency—Big Collaboration: Partnering for Success in California’s Contra Costa CountyBy Contra Costa Transportation Authority

Best Partnering PracticesO Leadership commitment regardless of program size,

executive commitment to Partnering will improve outcomes

O Using external resources to keep abreast of Partnering breakthroughs and best practice

O Implementing the Partnering process from planning through completion to demonstrate to contractors and designers that Partnering is how they do business

The 160/4 Direct Connector Ramps project has faced several unexpected challenges in the course of its construction, but none were more potentially disruptive than the discovery of federally protected migratory birds nesting in and adjacent to the construction area. Rather than begin blaming each other, the contractor, construction manager, and CCTA took precautions

to avoid migratory bird habitats and rescheduled work around the migratory season. According to Ivan Ramirez, “We have [had] challenges with birds nesting in our work area, but the contractor has worked with us, isolated the area, and worked in other areas where the migratory birds aren’t being impacted. Working within railroad property has been another challenge. We don’t have any potential claims from the contractor and the project is going to be completed in early 2016, under budget. Furthermore, the partnership remains strong as we move to project completion.

David Kennedy, the operations manager for RGW, the contractor on the 160/4 project, agreed, “Our relationship with CCTA is excellent. They do partnering so well…in terms of the partnering philosophy of solving problems right then and there. CCTA doesn’t just preach the philosophy of partnering, but they really do it. They are an incredibly pro-active owner.”

With construction of the 160/4 Direct Access Ramps on track to be completed in early 2016 – on time and on budget – CCTA has demonstrated that a small agency can successfully bring large projects to completion. Partnering has enabled CCTA to reduce conflicts and avoid pitfalls, even in the face of the multiple unforeseen issues that can arise on a project.

1 Stop Shop

Earthwork & Grading Recycling & Materials Paving & Concrete Erosion Control Demolition Underground

Ghilotti Bros., Inc. (415) 454-7011 www.GhilottiBros.com


IPI PROFILES

High Stakes PartneringWhen the $104 Million Charlotte Veterans Affairs Health

Care Center project was awarded to developer Childress Klein-Cambridge Healthcare Solutions, LLC (CKC) in 2013, the team anticipated a variety of challenges. Not only was there a great deal of media attention surrounding Veterans Affairs (VA) construction projects at the time, but the complexities involved with lease-leaseback delivery, high community expectations, and a large number of stakeholders made Partnering on this project critical to its success.

In the Charlotte metropolitan area, there are an estimated 140,000 veterans, but there is only one small outpatient clinic in the area that can serve 25,000 annually. The new 295,000 ft2 hospital will provide crucial outpatient specialty services to about 35,000 veterans per year.

To help ensure a positive outcome on all fronts, CKC enlisted Ventura Consulting Group’s (VCG) Neal Flesner to guide the Partnering effort on the project. Early in the process, Flesner foresaw the need for greater engagement of senior leaders on the project. According to Flesner, (a Master Level IPI Certified Facilitator), “senior level engagement is what makes or breaks a project.” Knowing this, Flesner took an active role and repeatedly reached out to senior-level leadership at the VA and CKC, ensuring that each Partnering session included the participation of the construction team, developer, design team, VA, major subcontractors and end-users. By the last Partnering session, 30 VA staff members were engaged.

Gathering more participation, not only by senior level leadership, but also on the part of stakeholder groups, (nurses, radiologists, therapists, administrative staff, maintenance and others) meant that decisions could be made quickly whenever issues arose, and

kept the project moving forward. It also gave end-users a voice and a stake in construction, aligning them with project goals and making them advocates for the project.

Throughout the two-year project, the project team participated in quarterly Partnering sessions using VCG’s Good to World ClassTM model, which is aligned with the tools and steps recommended by the International Partnering Institute (including establishing a project charter, an issue resolution ladder, and regular scorecards administered by the facilitator. Additional sessions were scheduled whenever the need arose.

One of the hallmarks of VCG’s Good to World ClassTM model is establishing clear and measurable Big, Hairy, Audacious Goals (BHAGs) to direct the project’s strategy and actions. This team’s BHAGs included: early completion, acclaimed teamwork and excellence, becoming the gold standard for VA construction,

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Project: Charlotte Veterans Affairs Health CareCenter, Charlotte, NC

Owner: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

Developer: Childress Klein-Cambridge Healthcare Solutions, LLC

Contractor: JE Dunn Construction Company

Designer: RPA Design

Facilitator: Ventura Consulting Group

Delivery Method: Design-Build, Lease-Leaseback

Scheduled Completion: January 2016

Photo courtesy of Childress Klein-Cambridge Healthcare Solutions, LLC


Best Partnering PracticesO Active facilitator intervention to allign and engage

senior level leaders on the project.O Stakeholder engagement to increase the number

of advocates on a project and incorporate end-user knowledge into design and construction.

O Regular Partnering sessions with additional sessions as needed to ensure prompt and thorough ensure prompt and thorough issue resolution and to keep the project moving forward.

O Establishing clear and measurable goals to direct the project’s strategy and actions.

impeccable safety, improved public perception, exceeding budget margins and achieving U.S. Green Building Council LEED-silver level certification for energy efficiency and environmental standards.

The team’s commitment to Partnering has paid off—the project will be wrapping up in a few months, and is on track to finish early and on budget. Months before construction concluded, a media tour was conducted by the project team to share how Partnering has helped the team build a state-of-the-art medical facility that provides the high-level healthcare services our nation’s heroes deserve and of which the entire community can be proud.

“This team has created a real culture, where everyone is working towards the same goal,” said Steven Parris, project manager for the Department of Veterans Affairs. “Though we have had challenges, this is a very unique level of teamwork and we continue to be proactive and push ahead.”

The venture has been so successful, that the VA will be replicating the experience, working with CKC on construction of its new facility in Butler, Pennsylvania. Mark Hefferin, senior vice president for CKC, said that he’s been Partnering since the eighties, and over the years, the company has developed a strong commitment to Partnering. “In all these years, because of how we Partner, I’ve never had a client not come back to me for their next project. That’s a true testament to the value of Partnering.”

( 9 2 5 ) 8 2 9 - 9 2 2 0

11555 Dublin Boulevard, Dublin, California 94568-2909 925-829-9220

w w w . d e s i l v a g a t e s . c o m

Contractors License No. 704195A

B U I L D I N G C A L I F O R N I A F O R S E V E N T Y- F I V E Y E A R S

P A V I N G • R O A D / H I G H W A Y •G R A D I N G • D E M O L I T I O N / E X C A V A T I N G

INTERNATIONAL PARTNERING INSTITUTE JOHN L. MARTIN 2015 PARTNERED PROJECT OF THE YEAR - DIAMOND LEVEL

SFO RUNWAYS 1-19S RSA IMPROVEMENTS

WINNER OF THE 2014 CALTRANS EXCELLENCE IN PARTNERING AWARD“BEST IN CLASS” FOR PROJECTS GREATER THAN $50 MILLION

Highway 65 Lincoln Bypass Project


Van Ness and Geary Campus, San Francisco, California

By creating opportunities for innovation and collaboration, we pursue continuous improvements to make each project our best one yet.

INTEGRATED PROJECT DELIVERY

southlandind.com

COLLABORATE

+1.800.613.6240For more information, visit southlandind.com/IPD

AVIATION COMMITTEE:

12:00noon - 1:00pm / Dates:

2/2/16 3/15/16

4/19/16 5/31/16

7/12/16 8/30/16

10/4/16 11/8/16

12/13/16

FACILITATOR PEG:

Times Vary / Dates:

2/22/16 3/21/16

4/18/16 6/26/16

7/11/16 8/18/16

9/26/16 11/14/16

VERTICAL CONSTRUCTION

COMMITTEE:

8:00am - 9:00am / Dates:

1/21/16 2/18/16

3/24/16 4/21/16

6/16/16 7/21/16

8/18/16 9/15/16

10/13/16 11/17/16

12/15/16

IN THE NEWS

IPI 2016 Schedule of Events: Save the Dates!All Committee Teleconferences are at this phone number and are listed in

California Time: (712) 775-7035 • Access Code: 721605#

HORIZONTAL COMMITTEE:

8:30am - 9:30am / Dates:

1/29/16 3/18/16

6/24/16 8/26/16

10/28/16 12/2/16

INTERNATIONAL

COMMITTEE:

Times Vary / Dates:

1/28/16 3/10/16

4/14/16 6/2/16

7/14/16 8/25/16

10/6/16 11/10/16

When looking for

members for your project

teams, always choose IPI members

first!

The IPI Awards Ceremony and Conference will be held on May 19, 2016 at the Hilton San Francisco

Airport Bayfront, in Burlingame, CA.AWARD CEREMONY ACTIVITIES:

May 18, 2016:

- Technical Tour in San Francisco 4:00pm - 6:00pm

- IPI Member and Guest Dinner 6:00pm - 8:00pm

May 19, 2016:

- Owner’s Round Table 9:00am - 12:00pm

- Industry Forum 10:00am - 12:00pm

- Networking and Lunch 12:30pm - 1:30pm

- Exhibitor Displays 12:30pm - 5:30pm

- Registration 1:30pm - 2:30pm

- IPI Awards and Ceremony 2:30pm - 4:30pm

- Networking and Cocktails 4:30pm - 6:30pm

IPI UPCOMING EVENTS (AND DEADLINES):JANUARY 13 Board Dinner 6:30pm - 8:30pm 14 Board Meeting 9:00am - 1:00pmFEBRUARY 12 IPI Award Application DeadlineMARCH 2 CSI Conference Training 3-6 Partnering Presentation at the AACE Western Winter Workshop 7 IPI Awards Ceremony - Registration Open 16-18 IPI Awards Applications JudgedAPRIL 1 IPI Award Winners Announced 14-16 IMAQ SymposiumMAY 19 IPI Awards Ceremony 19 Board Dinner 6:30pm - 8:30pm

20 Board Meeting 9:00am - 1:00pm


Q&D’s experienced aviation team has the know-how, collaborative approach and proven preconstruction processes to integrate your project’s construction into your facility or operation without negatively impacting your day-to-day.

Q&D’s capabilities include:

qdconstruction.com(775) 786-2677Member, IPIDuane BorehamVP Aviation Division

WITH Q&D ON YOUR TEAM, YOU CAN KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE SKIES.

Large Projects• Terminal Revisions• Terminal Buildings• Airport Expansions• Security Upgrades• Baggage Handling

Systems

Support Facilities• Ground-up Construction• Equipment Storage

Buildings• FBO’s• Service Buildings• Maintenance Buildings• Hangars• Runways / Barriers

• Utilities

Improvements• Equipment Upgrades and

Relocations• Tenant Improvements• Gate Relocations• Security Revisions• Concession Build-Outs• Finish Upgrades• Support Spaces• Full Program Support• Branding Updates

Project Delivery• CM-at-Risk• Design-Build• Full Preconstruction

Services• Partnering

qdc_ipi-2016b.indd 1 12/21/2015 10:48:49 AM


IPI’S COLLABORATIVE PARTNERINGORIENTATION TRAINING

IS GETTING RAVE REVIEWS!

COLLABORATION

COMBAT

SLOTS ARE LIMITED! DON’T MISS OUT—BOOK A TRAINING FOR YOU OR FOR YOUR TEAM [email protected], (925) 447-9100

“Great information, Would recommend this training to all involved in project design, and implementation.” — Koa Pickering, Landscape Architect SF Public Works

“The training/orientation provides a great roadmap with tangible steps to make a project succeed.”— Pete Bjostad, Vice President CAGE, Inc.

“We believe that it is essential that Airport staff, builders, designers and other consultants understand the IPI Structured Collaborative Partnering Model to ensure we deliver exceptional project outcomes on every project! This highly valuable training teaches the concepts of Structured Collaborative Partnering—the process & implementation, the return on investment, and how trust is the essential critical path to success on any project.” — Geoff Neumayr, Deputy Director SFO International Airport

Making SFO’sPartnering Program FlyFor almost two decades OrgMetrics has been providing Partnering Services for San Francisco International Airport’srenowned Partnering Program

Partnering Program Development/Facilitation • Project Partnering Facilitation • Strategic Partnering Facilitation • Facilitated Dispute Resolution • Project Scorecards

www.orgmet.com | (925) 449-8300

Partnering Magazine January/February 2016

Documents

Transcript of Partnering Magazine January/February 2016