Rebecca--
There is good information out there regarding Qualifications Based Selection (QBS). One good website is produced jointly by AIA/Georgia and ACEC/Georgia at
http://www.qbsgeorgia.org/.
QBS is, in fact, the statutory way that the Federal Government and many State agencies, are supposed to use in order to select firms who provide professional services, known as the Brooks Act. Unfortunately, though, Contractor-led Design-Build is too often used as a way around Brooks laws, since that method shifts the selection and hiring of design firms onto the Design-Build Contractor, making A/Es merely subcontractor-vendors as part of a re-sold construction commodity, not providers of intangible professional services as the Owner's fiduciary protector. Not what we were all educated and trained to do, and many if not most Owners, public or private, do not realize that by using Contractor-led D-B, they are no longer the Architect's client -- the General Contractor is, and that is whose interests the design subcontractor is legally, financially, ethically and contractually required to serve first and foremost--not the Owner's.
However, Design-Build CAN be based on QBS principles, at least, even if just indirectly. I helped negotiate the Nebraska Construction Alternatives Law, which now requires QBS-only procedures for all public Owners who choose to use D-B (no free design up-front or abusive, unpaid 'design competitions' at Architects' risk, as is all too typical in 'Competitive' D-B).
In addition, under the Nebraska law public Owners can also choose to use CM at-Risk (CMR), where the Architect is required to sit on the Selection Committee to help the Owner select the CM under QBS-only rules. A big improvement. CMR ensures professional, well-qualified builder who is compatible with and capable of collaborating with the Architect during design, where the benefits to the Owner are greatest. And, most of all, QBS-based CMR removes the closed-book, profit-driven incentives for a Contractor to cut corners, exploit loopholes and attack 'defective' design documents during construction, all of which are legendary in traditional low-bid delivery methods. Real, not contrived, teamwork for a change, where the design and construction TEAM is jointly dedicated to serving only the Owner's interests.
Eventually, technology via BIM and enlightened legislative advances will drive the design and construction industry toward true Integrated Project Delivery. But in the meantime, CM at-Risk with its 'Collaborative' provisions such as joint Owner-Architect selection of a CM under a fixed fee with a transparent, open-book GMP and team management of a realistic Contingency is our -- and our clients' -- best transitional delivery method toward less-adversarial, more-successful projects produced by REAL teamwork. That is how we can, and should, be starting off our projects and giving our clients the benefit of non-adversarial collaboration by a well-qualified, team of compatible professionals from start to finish.
-------------------------------------------
Dale Munhall AIA
Director of Construction Phase Services
Leo A Daly
Omaha NE
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-08-2012 00:03
From: Rebecca Schenker
Subject: How do we get started off right?
Dale, is there a formal document describing "Qualifications Based Selection" somewhere? Sounds like it, since there's an acronym.
-------------------------------------------
Rebecca Schenker AIA
Principal
Weave Architecture LLC
San Antonio TX
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 10-26-2012 12:24
From: Dale Munhall
Subject: How do we get started off right?
Rand/Jim-
Noble goals. But, to continue Rand's list, actually enabling CA Teamwork depends on the following...
8. Any chance of cooperative CA Teaming is determined at the very start by the owner's choice of project delivery method. The chosen method has to contractually align interests of the owner, designer and builder in order to allow them to function as true partners on the same team with the same contractual incentives and motivations. Otherwise, 'partnering' is just an idealistic pretense that has to fly in the face of very real, too-often insurmountable, contractual obstacles and profit disincentives.
9. There can be no expectation of "CA teamwork" unless all the project's players are contractually on the SAME side of the SAME team. Any delivery method where one party profits at the other's expense is NOT a team arrangement. This may sound obvious, but in the typically contentious low-bid D-B-B and Design-Build delivery methods, an Owner is essentially paying the Contractor to be their opponent instead, resulting in contractual I-win-you-lose profit incentives to aggressively substitute, exploit loopholes, cut corners and make change order claims due to 'defective design documents', all of which slow down progress, defeat noble partnering ideals and increase costs for everyone.
10. Successful projects do not just 'happen'-they require teamwork. And successful teamwork requires far more than just lip service: all team members have to contractually be on the same side, with the same transparent open-book, non-conflicting motivation to achieve the same goals for the same client, start to finish. Traditional low-bid, no-peek Design-Bid-Build and Design-Build delivery methods impose on contractors self-interest incentives that are exactly the opposite to the interests of the Owner and Architect. The only method that can guarantee an Owner that their project will stay within a financially feasible budget and schedule-and do it in a true team effort with the Owner and their A/E-is a modified "Collaborative" version of CM at-Risk, a practical transitional step toward Integrated Project Delivery.
11. In the Collaborative version of CM at-Risk, CMR, the best-qualified (and fully-bonded, if desired) CM/GC builder is selected jointly by Owner and Architect via Qualifications Based Selection, QBS, to work open-book on a competitive fixed-fee basis to keep the project on a guaranteed early-GMP and schedule. The CMR/builder is thus contractually incentivized to work as an actual team member with-not against, for a change-the Owner's staff and the A/E from early planning through completion of construction. My firm is now encouraging clients to use this method on every project we can. It works.
-------------------------------------------
Dale Munhall AIA
Director of Contract Administration
Leo A. Daly
Omaha NE
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 10-25-2012 10:15
From: Rand Soellner
Subject: How do we get started off right?
Thanks James. Well, if a National AIA Director like yourself says it's good, then I appreciate the blessing. So be it. And for now, let's call it:
AIA-CA Teaming
"The constructive approach for Architects & Contractors."
I'll get the ball rolling by stating what I see the main principles being. Anyone else is welcome to chime in with their own thoughts about what and how this should be accomplished, or if something should be edited.
1. The Architect and Contractor will cooperate to help the Client achieve his goals.
2. The Client will support the Architect and Contractor by paying invoices for professional services and for the construction in a timely manner, in accordance with signed agreements.
3. The Architect & Contractor will coordinate frequently, forecasting situations that may have created issues previously, and thoroughly review what needs to happen to make things run smoothly for this project.
4. When either the Architect or the Contractor or Client find defects in something each other has done or is about to do, this will be discussed with the party who initiated the problematic situation and immediately discuss the best and swiftest and most cost effective solution, without involving other parties and without broadcasting the deficiency. Problems are to be solved in the most inconspicuous way possible and in the most direct way possible. Each party is to be respectful of each other and realize that this is a team effort and that the Team succeeds together. No one threatens anyone else or casts disparaging remarks about anyone else's efforts. Each party helps the others in this Team to excel.
5. This bears repeating: Team members respect each other.
6. No one will use e-mails as a method to air grievances or to broadcast blame-laying. People will meet in person, when possible to resolve controversial issues, or through video conference calls (via Skype, etc.) or at the very least, through a phone call. No one may vent directly at any other team member, particularly in writing.
7. ok: more AIA CA folks...add some more...
-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner AIA
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 10-24-2012 10:02
From: James Rains
Subject: How do we get started off right?
Rand:
I believe you answered your own request. Here it is again "I'd appreciate hearing other comments about how to start off on the right foot with the contractor and owner and develop a cooperative spirit of sharing the common goal of helping the owner achieve his goals."
What a great way to state it....CA Teaming....I love it!
-------------------------------------------
James Rains FAIA
Rains Studio, PA
Ramseur NC
-------------------------------------------