Benefits and challenges to applying IPD: experiences from a Norwegian mega-project

Monique Rieger Rodrigues · Søren Munch Lindhard

58 citations0/0 files storedConstruction Innovation

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Construction Project Management and Performance BIM and Construction Integration Public-Private Partnership Projects

Abstract

Purpose The traditional construction delivery method is challenged by low trust and collaboration issues, resulting in increased project costs. The integrated project delivery (IPD) method is developed, through a contractual agreement, to overcome these challenges by creating a common set of terms, expectations and project goals. Design/methodology/approach A singular construction case was followed during a four-month period. Data collection consisted of contract documents and a series of semi-structured interviews with representatives from the owner, design-group and contractors. Findings The IPD contract was found to have a number of positive effects; it improved project behavior (e.g. trust, collaboration and communication), increased ownership among project participants and improved buildability of the design, leading to fewer surprises and interruptions in the construction phase. The study also revealed a number of challenges including contractual and legal challenges and involving too many participants in the early phases. Moreover, co-location was identified as a particular important supporting element, to build relations and improve collaboration. Originality/value This research identified lessons learned from the application, as well as initial barriers and persistent barriers for implementing IPD. To improve IPD application the top three lessons were as follows: 1) the contractual documents should be adapted and signed at an early stage as this increases financial transparency, 2) cost estimates should be carried as an iterative process and project main concept be freezed at an early stage to increase understanding and minimize risks, 3) only the most important project developers should be involved in the early phases, to avoid going into detailed design issues before the main concept is completed.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 58 citations exist upstream.

References

1985Trust as a Social Reality 2000THE LAST PLANNER SYSTEM OF PRODUCTION CONTROL 1978The development of trust, influence and expectations 2012Making sense of the multi-party contractual arrangements of project partnering, project alliancing and integrated project delivery 2010Understanding Construction Industry Experience and Attitudes toward Integrated Project Delivery 2015Factors Affecting Schedule Delay, Cost Overrun, and Quality Level in Public Construction Projects 2002The trust paradox: a survey of economic inquiries into the nature of trust and trustworthiness 2012Target value design: using collaboration and a lean approach to reduce construction cost

Cited by

2022Overcoming the principal-agent problem: The need for alignment of tools and methods in collaborative project delivery

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.