I agree with Anne. IPD is very poorly defined, and the participants tend to me much more hopeful than knowledgeable. Typical pitfalls:
- If the contract uses target pricing, and your reward depends on whether the project hits that target, what precludes the Owner from setting too ambitious a goal, which will be largely unattainable? And how would you, the architect, know if that target is too low, with sufficient precision so as to bet your reward on it?
- While the subcontractors ought to participate in the pool of people whose reward is also at risk, they tend to NOT want to confirm their price until you produce sufficiently advanced designs, with the result that you are doing all the documentation anyway, and they price it afterwards, reducing their risk, and eating at the pool of monies available for the reward.
- In my experience, there tends to be no (or very little) reward money at the end. In an IPD project everybody is supposed to be made WHOLE in their costs (but not their profits), with their profits coming from the reward pool. As the A/E you have a minuscule portion of the costs (your fee, 5% of the total?) but you are risking your entire profit. It doesn't take much "error" in the performance of the other 95% of the project in order for your profit to disappear.
Gustavo Lima (Retired Director of Construction Administration at CannonDesign)
------------------------------
Gustavo Lima AIA
President
Gustavo A. Lima Architecture, PC
Williamsville NY
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 08-31-2020 17:50
From: Anne Whitacre
Subject: IPD Questions
I have had the experience where the Owner talks about IPD but the contract isn't really IPD -- it ends up being some weird hybrid collection of clauses that ends up being difficult to administer. I've also found that the time investment is very heavily front loaded, and that it is common for the contractor to request that the project is issued in multiple smaller packages that aren't always consecutive. I would have a clear discussion with the parties regarding package issuance. In addition, we've had outsize involvement by subcontractors in reviewing partially finished drawings and specifications, and an expectation that we will be responsive to all of those entities. There may come a time when you have to put all comments on hold while you simply advance the project design. A clear definition of your scope of work and your responsibility vis a vis all the other players is necessary.
------------------------------
Anne Whitacre Assoc. AIA
HOK
San Francisco CA
Original Message:
Sent: 08-27-2020 21:17
From: Ivan Contreras
Subject: IPD Questions
Hello Everyone,
I have recently been invited to participate as the Architect for a new Building project, where the Owner / Contractor would like to implement Integrated delivery, BIM management and would be hiring all consultants directly.
It is an exciting opportunity, the project is also seeking LEED Silver as minimum requirement. BIM management will be an outside consultant as well.
Understanding fees cannot be discussed, I am seeking feedback from colleagues with experienced in this delivery model, specifically to know how it compares in terms of necessary hours worked and effort to a traditional project fee structure.
It's hard to determine if you've never done it. My fear is it sounds good, but it can be really bad.
Thank you.
------------------------------
Ivan Contreras, LEED AP, AIA
Qualifier | Director
CONTRERAS MUNOZ & CO
Miami FL
------------------------------