Integrated Project Collaboration (IPC)

More Thoughts on Blinders

2011-08-22T18:50:00.002-05:00

In my previous blog post, I spoke about the problem with “blinders” in the design and construction industry. Successful commercial construction projects cannot be delivered without the contributions of many different team members, including but not limited to architects, engineers, other design consultants, general contractors, construction managers, subcontractors, and suppliers. Unfortunately, over the course of time, many of these roles have chosen to put on “blinders” and only focus on their own piece of the process. Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and “IPD-ish” projects (projects using elements of IPD, including greater collaboration) are challenging this status quo, and the technology used by project teams needs to evolve as well.

I thought it might be helpful to illustrate these thoughts with additional visual representations of a pre-IPD construction process (with blinders) and a post-IPD process (blinders removed). I am an architect myself, and visual representations help me tremendously.

Illustration 1 – “The Old Way of Thinking”:

Each team member has their blinders on. They are focused on their role in the process, their contributions, and their needs. Each team member selects their own independent software to manage project documents and information, such as project management software for contractors and “Project Information Management” or “PIM” software for architects and engineers. These software tools don’t interact and don’t do much to benefit the other team members, outside of some cases where they provide a portal to upload and download documents. They contribute to an environment that does not enable team accountability and frequently leads to conflict which can result in less than successful projects.

Illustration 2 – “The New Way of Thinking”:

In an IPD or IPD-ish process, project team members look at more than just their own needs. They select tools that benefit the entire team. Integrated Project Collaboration (IPC) software provides a common, web-based virtual table for all of the project team members to gather around and share critical project information through. Over the next decade, the most successful companies and projects will follow in this path, utilizing Integrated Project Delivery, seeking solutions that benefit the entire team, and removing their self-imposed blinders.

Time to Take Off the Blinders

2011-08-06T10:22:00.000-05:00

Taking an idea that is expressed as a napkin sketch or a verbal expression (“We need more space”) and turning it into physical reality can require a tremendous amount of creativity, effort, knowledge, and skill. Over the course of centuries, the commercial design and construction industry has developed to manage this process, taking ideas and needs from owners or developers and turning them into completed facilities. The process has evolved so that different roles each provide their own unique contributions, including but not limited to architects, engineers, other design consultants, general contractors, construction managers, subcontractors, and suppliers.

These roles are interdependent, and the desired result cannot be delivered without all of them working together. However, over the course of time, many of these roles have chosen to put on “blinders” and only focus on their own piece of the process. A number of architects focus only on their role in the process, their contributions, and their needs. (I am allowed to say this because I am an architect myself.) Many general contractors do the same, as do other team members. The end result is an environment that frequently leads to conflict and less than fully successful projects.

Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) challenges this status quo by looking at the process holistically. Instead of a process where each team member is focused solely on their own needs, IPD in its purest form brings together all parties in a fully integrated team as early as possible, with shared risk and reward. The promise of IPD is higher quality completed buildings with fewer delays and lower costs. Integrated project teams also have a direct positive correlation to achievement of sustainability goals, which is one reason that LEED 2012 will begin rewarding projects that utilize integrated teams and processes. Overall, the use of IPD and “IPD-ish” elements in traditional delivery models is growing but faces an uphill battle in an industry that tends to be resistant to change.

Unfortunately, many of the technology tools on the market today are still focused on blinder-based teams. Contractors have their project management systems that fill their needs but don’t benefit the rest of the team. Architects have internal “project information management” solutions that do the same on their side. I was reminded of this recently with a discussion on LinkedIn about collaboration tools. An architect recommended a tool because “it is designed for the A/E”. In a world where we all have our blinders on, a solution that is only designed for the A/E is acceptable, because the architect’s job is to look out for their own interests. But in a blinder-free world, teams should be looking at how their chosen solutions benefit the entire integrated team, not just one party, which in turn leads to a more successful project and satisfied owner.

The growth of IPD is showing the benefits that can come from taking off traditional industry blinders. It is time for design and construction companies to do the same with their selection of technology tools, removing their blinders and looking for solutions that are built for the entire team. A number of companies have already done this with adoption of Integrated Project Collaboration (IPC) software. Over the next decade, the most successful companies and projects will follow in this path, utilizing Integrated Project Delivery, seeking solutions that benefit the entire team, and removing their self-imposed blinders.

Rating Systems, Standards and Codes

2011-05-14T10:29:00.000-05:00

“Should green building be mandatory or voluntary? The answer is yes.” That was the statement by a speaker at one of a series of sessions I attended Friday afternoon and Saturday morning at the 2011 AIA national convention. With the emergence of the International Green Construction Code (IGCC), ASHRAE 189.1, Calgreen and other new standards, this question and the answer effectively summarize the next step in green building. Green building will soon be both mandatory and voluntary in many locations.

The IGCC will provide a new minimum floor for green building. It is designed as a mandatory requirement that will be adopted by local jurisdictions and enforced by local building officials. It sets basic standards for a minimum level of green building. In contrast, the LEED rating system is intended as a voluntary system that focuses on the highest levels of green building.

Rating Systems, Standards and Codes

I found the chart above to be particularly helpful, a version of which was presented at one of the AIA educational sessions yesterday. The difference between rating systems like LEED, standards like ASHRAE 189.1, and model codes like IGCC can in part be evaluated by looking at their levels of flexibility and restrictiveness. LEED is a fairly flexible system, with owners and designers choosing which credits to focus on and what level of certification they want to achieve. LEED can also be considered an “aspirational” system that sets high benchmarks for motivated projects to aspire for. IGCC does have flexibility, but less so than LEED, and it also has more restrictions. It is intended as a mandatory performance based code, again setting more of a floor while LEED will continue to establish a higher level of optional performance.

The biggest challenge with this latest evolution in green standards, codes, and rating systems appears to be education—education of builders, designers, and enforcement officials. It will be interesting to see how the communication around this increases over the course of the next year and how the industry responds.

Word of the Day: "Green" ... or maybe "Hot"? Reflections from AIA2011

2011-05-13T14:24:00.000-05:00

On Thursday at the 2011 AIA national convention, the key word at many of the presentations I sat in on seemed to be “green”—or possibly also “hot”. In the morning, Thomas Friedman spoke at the opening general session. Much of his presentation seemed to relate to his 2009 book, “Hot Flat & Crowded”, about the continued expansion of globalization, population growth, and impact of climate change. While “green” has been a theme at industry meetings for years, Mr. Friedman brought some interesting new perspective to it instead of just repeating the same points that have already been made. I particularly liked his “glass half full” view of how globalization & climate change brings great risks but also great opportunities for design & construction and the U.S. as a nation. For a more detailed description of his presentation, check out this summary on the AIA website.

In the afternoon I attended sessions on the International Green Construction Code (IGCC) and the AIA 2030 initiative. The IGCC is a collaborative effort involving the International Code Council, AIA, USGBC, and other groups to set a new minimum standard for green building. Rather than the LEED approach, where performance criteria are optional and projects opt-in to pursue certification, the IGCC is viewed as a way to mandate minimum levels of sustainable construction using our existing infrastructure of building codes and local enforcement officials. It was particularly interesting to hear about how implementation of IGCC will ideally free up LEED to innovate further and continue to lead the industry (no pun intended) in setting higher optional standards. IGCC will set a baseline standard for all buildings (at least in those jurisdictions that choose to adopt it), while LEED will continue to represent the top level of green buildings.

My final session of the afternoon was an update on the AIA 2030 initiative. AIA 2030 is a program to make a 100% reduction in building energy use by the year 2030, to net zero. Individual architecture firms opt-in to participate in the program, and part of their participation includes tracking energy design and performance data for the projects they are involved with. The first year’s results have now been released, with about 130 firms participating and approximately half of those reporting design data from their projects. To put it in perspective, one of the presenters shared that in the year 2000, the U.S. had about 300 billion square feet of buildings. Due to continued population growth, it is predicted that we’ll need about 430 billion square feet of buildings by 2030. Last fall, the USGBC announced that over 1 billion square feet of buildings have been LEED certified in the ten-year history of LEED. In their first year of data collection, the AIA 2030 program reported design data for 385 million square feet of buildings—pretty impressive for the first year! For more information, check out the full results here.

Missing Posts

2011-05-13T14:00:00.000-05:00

It appears that two of my recent posts from the 2011 AIA National Convention have been removed as part of the Blogger service interruption that occurred this week. I am currently waiting for Blogger to restore them. In the meanwhile, I will keep posting new content.

BIM BIM BIM BIM BIM BIM BIM BIM

2011-05-12T10:18:00.000-05:00

Yesterday afternoon I attended the Technology in Architectural Practice's "TAP Revolution" event at the AIA National Convention in New Orleans. It was an insightful event, and I left impressed with the volunteers who manage TAP, educated about use of BIM in innovative ways, and intrigued by how BIM and GIS technology is helping with disaster recovery in Japan

From Cadalyst

With that said, I also left the event with questions on my mind about the mix of BIM and other technologies in the profession. I was not keeping official count, but it would not be an exaggeration to guess that I heard the term "BIM" possibly over a thousand times in the course of a four hour event. BIM is of course very important for a number of reasons:

- Building Information Modeling is a significant leap forward in how we envision and manage building information
- BIM is revolutionizing how firms work
- BIM can allow us to design greener, healthier, more efficient buildings
- BIM can reduce conflicts and increase productivity & cost savings during the construction process
- Other technologies will increasingly interact with BIM as part of an overall environment of interoperability

But is BIM the only technology the matters to the discussion today? From listening to the dialog at the some sessions, it would be easy to make this mistake. There was no mention of other collaboration tools, project management technology, financial management software, LEED® management software, "Project Information Management" products for managing information internally in a firm, or the many other technology tools in use in the industry today.

In 2009 the Construction Management Association of America (CMAA) published a whitepaper, Managing Integrated Project Delivery, that talks about this same issue. "BIM is sexy," was one quote from the whitepaper, meaning that BIM draws the attention. But the reality is that other technology tools are equally important to the overall purpose of delivering high quality completed facilities. According to this same whitepaper, web-based collaboration tools (Integrated Project Collaboration software) that engage the entire project team are equally important for the process of Integrated Project Delivery. To paraphrase the CMAA publication, these tools are to the design & construction process what BIM is to the building product.

BIM is critically important, and I appreciate the efforts of the dedicated TAP volunteers that have helped to lead the growth of BIM over the past decade. But as use of BIM becomes increasingly widespread and the conversations continue to mature, I hope we’ll be able to adopt a more holistic view of all the technologies that impact the design and construction process.

The Future Looks IPD-ish

2011-05-11T15:07:00.000-05:00

Two weeks ago I attended the 2011 KA Connect conference in San Francisco, sponsored by Knowledge Architecture. Kudos to Knowledge Architecture and Chris Parsons for hosting a great conference. It was interesting to see the Pecha Kucha presentation format in use to allow 40+ speakers share brief high-level information on teaching, methodology, tools, and culture in AE firms over the course of two intense days.

While all of the presentations were valuable, there were several that tied in specifically to integrated project collaboration and topics discussed in this blog. One was by Markku Allison, resource architect with the American Institute of Architects (AIA). His presentation was titled “Why the future looks IPD-ish”, and in it he shared several images that helped to visually relay important considerations with the growth of IPD and “IPD-ish” project delivery methods.

First, one way of viewing the traditional roles of designers and builders is illustrated below (please excuse my poor hand-drawn representation of what was presented at KA Connect):

Traditional process in the past

Architects and engineers have typically worked in the one quadrant, on the design side of the project timeline and focusing on design intent. Builders have typically worked in the opposite quadrant, on the construction side of the project timeline and focusing on the means & methods to convert design intent into physical reality.

Today

Over time, IPD has led to an expansion of these roles, with design continuing later into the project timeline and builders and construction managers becoming involved earlier in the project to provide valuable input on how the project will be designed and constructed. This evolution offers the potential for significant improvements in how projects are delivered but also increases the complexity of communication and coordination across the project team.

A second graphic that was shared (again excuse my hand-drawn recreation) looked at the term “IPD-ish”, which is growing in use in the industry. “IPD-ish” projects seek to increase collaboration and early participation of key stakeholders without implementing the full set of formalized IPD legal agreements. On the left side is the traditional design-bid-build process. On the right side is the “full” IPD process, including use of the IPD multi-party agreements. In between these two extremes is the opportunity for “IPD-ish” projects, projects that utilize enhanced collaboration processes and tools. It is anticipated that a large portion of the industry and projects will look increasingly “IPD-ish” in coming years.

This week I am attending the AIA National Convention in New Orleans, and I am looking forward to more updates about IPD and IPD-ish topics there. I first heard discussion about IPD-ish one year ago, at the 2010 AIA convention in Miami, and it is exciting to see the increasing momentum and interest in this topic across the industry.

Winter Hiatus Is Over, Spring Is Finally Here

2011-04-27T02:10:00.001-05:00

In the Des Moines area where I live, spring is finally starting to arrive. We received a small taste of it in early April, with sun and warmer temperatures, then the past several weeks have been chilly and wet. But the forecast for the next week is promising. The trees are budding, grass is growing, and it’s even time to get the lawnmower out again.

The arrival of spring, a traditional time for new growth and rejuvenation, happens to coincide nicely with the re-awaking of this blog on Integrated Project Collaboration and software tools for Integrated Project Delivery. Last summer we launched the blog after many requests for additional commentary and information on the AEC industry’s increasing use of cloud computing and web-based collaboration tools. Then last November, I began an unexpected and completely unplanned “winter hiatus” from writing. While I’m not a fan of excuses, I will share a few reasons why time has been so short over the past several months:

At Greenbuild in Chicago last November, we launched Greengrade, a new LEED® management tool. While we knew that the existing processes many companies use to manage LEED certification are cumbersome and inefficient, and we hoped we would get a positive response to the new product, we frankly were blown away by the interest and attention. We’ve had conversations with thousands of LEED professionals over the past several months, and the feedback has been loud and clear: the industry is hungry for better solutions to help manage the complicated design and construction processes required for high performance green buildings.

Last fall we also launched Submittal Exchange for Design, a new extension of the popular Submittal Exchange product that allows you to extend Integrated Project Collaboration fully into the design phase of your project. We have been thrilled by the response to this as well, with hundreds of new projects taking advantage of the benefits that Submittal Exchange for Design brings to the table.

We’ve launched several major enhancements to the Submittal Exchange and Greengrade websites, including new features for managing online discussions and an online planroom that allows you to easily distribute documents from Submittal Exchange to potential bidders or other parties. We have even more significant enhancements on deck for later this year, including the pending launch of complete LEED-Online integration, allowing you to seamlessly complete the LEED certification process all from within Submittal Exchange and Greengrade.

Our online webinar series has continued to be tremendously popular! In both December and January we presented educational webinars on Green Building & Cloud Computing, and we drew literally thousands of participants. On May 19 we will be hosting a webinar called “Integrated Project Collaboration … The Missing Link for IPD”, and we will follow this on May 26 with “Light on the Horizon – Building Trust in Construction with Collaborative Software”. Click here for more information. The tremendous response we continue to receive for these webinars is great evidence of the industry’s growing interest in these important topics.

With the occurrence of spring also comes the beginning of the annual conference circuit. In March I was fortunate to attend the AGC Annual Convention and CONEXPO in Las Vegas, which brought refreshing insight into many things happening in the construction industry. This week I am attending the KA Connect conference in San Francisco, where I am looking forward to presentations on “IPD-ish” and many other topics. Then in May we will be presenting both Greengrade and Submittal Exchange at the AIA National Convention in New Orleans.

Finally, Submittal Exchange was pleased to be recognized several weeks ago by the Technology Association of Iowa as their 2011 Software Company of the Year (Small/Medium category). We are thrilled to receive this recognition of our hard work and growth over the past several years, and we are equally thrilled to be part of the vibrant Iowa technology community.

Please stay tuned to this blog and Twitter (@MattOstanikAIA) over the next several weeks for much more news and commentary! I have a lot of catching up to do, and I also am excited to share information from upcoming conferences and events. The key question of “how can technology help us collaborate?” is being discussed everywhere in our industry. While we don’t promise to have all the answers, we do have many ideas, and we look forward to continuing to be part of the discussion.

Submittal Exchange Announces New LEED® Management Software

2010-11-09T16:01:00.002-06:00

At Submittal Exchange, our mission is to be a driving force for continuous improvement in the commercial construction industry, delivering innovative technology products with exceptional service and care. This innovation can take many forms, whether adding new features to our Integrated Project Collaboration software, launching new products for different phases of design and construction, or building partnerships with other innovative technology providers.

We’re pleased to continue this innovation with the announcement of our new LEED® management software, Greengrade. The additional paperwork and administration required to facilitate a successful LEED certification process is cumbersome and costly to manage, so it made sense to extend our technology expertise and knowledge of Integrated Project Collaboration (IPC) software to improve the LEED communication process.

At its core, Greengrade provides a centralized online platform for project teams to learn about green building requirements, plan a specific strategy for their project, and act by managing tasks, documents, and communications between all team members. The result is a significant time and cost savings for LEED projects. The Greengrade solution can be used independently or integrated with other Submittal Exchange products.

We’ll be sharing more information about Greengrade at the 2010 Greenbuild International Conference and Expo in Chicago next week. If you’ll be attending the conference, please stop by to learn more at booth #290 or drop me a line in advance. I’ll also be sharing information from Greenbuild on this blog and via Twitter, and I look forward to talking more in the weeks and months ahead about using collaboration software to improve the LEED process.

Expanding horizons for IPC software during design and construction

2010-11-04T00:19:00.000-05:00

Submittal Exchange’s Integrated Project Collaboration (IPC) software was created in 2003 and publicly launched in 2005 with an initial focus on the shop drawing and submittal process. It was focused on this particular piece of the construction communications process because in my work as an architect, I had found the traditional paper-based submittal process to be the most frustrating, cumbersome, and inefficient portion of my work. It was clear that this frustration was shared by many others in the industry, architects and contractors alike, and use of the solution grew quickly as a result.

As use of Submittal Exchange increased, we also began to receive suggestions and ideas for additional features and processes. This feedback from industry professionals quickly led us to expand Submittal Exchange to also encompass RFIs, ASIs, and many other document types. Today our solution’s flexible, powerful workflow processes can accommodate a wide variety of construction communication needs.

One of the great things about this industry is that there is never a shortage of ideas. It did not take long for people who loved using Submittal Exchange during the construction process to come back to us and ask to use the software earlier in the process, during the design phase on their projects as well. In response to these requests, we introduced a beta version of the website for use during a project design phase in early 2009. We have continued to gather feedback on how to improve it. After listening carefully to additional suggestions, we are pleased to release an expanded offering of features for use with collaboration and information sharing during design, which we’re calling Submittal Exchange for Design™.

Specific new features offered with Submittal Exchange for Design include:

- Comprehensive design document sharing (drawings, specs, models, etc.)
- Collaborative online whiteboard space
- Automatic synchronization of large files
- Automatic notifications
- Version tracking and detailed upload & download histories
- Project milestones and schedule reminders
- Online photo viewing and commenting
- Seamless transition into construction phase features when design is complete

These expanded features make Submittal Exchange a robust solution suitable for use from start-to-finish on projects. As an Integrated Project Collaboration (IPC) solution, Submittal Exchange provides a virtual table for all project team members to sit around and share critical project information. This information starts with the earliest drawings, models, and other information during design, and then proceeds to submittals, RFIs, and all other documents needed during construction. For more information about Submittal Exchange for Design, please visit our website or view the official press release.

Shop drawing terminology – do you approve?

2010-10-25T15:51:00.002-05:00

Last month I participated in a webinar hosted by the AIA Construction Contract Administration Knowledge Community, “Fear of Shop Drawings: What is the Process, Really, and Does It Need Fundamental Change?” The webinar featured a spirited discussion on the shop drawing and submittal review process. One of the presenters was Dale Munhall, AIA, NCARB, LEED® AP, Senior Associate and Director of Construction Services for Leo A Daly.

I have been pleased to know and work with Dale for several years now as his firm has used our company’s Integrated Project Collaboration (IPC) software, Submittal Exchange, on projects nationwide. Dale has a tremendous amount of industry knowledge and experience, and earlier this year he sparked many conversations with his thoughtful article, “Why We No Longer ‘Stamp’ Shop Drawings At Leo A Daly”. The article discusses their firm’s decision to no longer apply the traditional shop drawing stamp to each submittal, substituting a transmittal instead, to reduce confusion over the role of the designer’s review of submittals.

The AIA webinar discussed the issues raised in the article, including thoughts around the ultimate purpose of the submittal review process and the difference between reviewing vs. approving submittals. Many experts frown upon use of the word “approve” when it comes to submittals because it implies a level of responsibility for the documents that may not be necessary or appropriate. (For a better description of these concerns, please see the article linked to above.) There continues to be disagreement on this topic, however, with strong opinions on both sides of the argument.

On the Submittal Exchange system, submittal reviewers have the flexibility to choose their own terminology for actions they take on submittals. This flexibility is very important because individual firms have different standards for the terminology they would like to use. (Some software solutions force reviewers to choose from a pre-defined set of terms, including the word “Approved”, which is often not preferred.) Because Submittal Exchange offers our clients the flexibility to define their own terms, I thought it might be interesting to look at what terms are being used. Here is what I found:

1. Revise And Resubmit – used by 17.1%
2. Rejected – used by 17.0%
3. Reviewed – used by 11.7%
4. No Exceptions Taken – used by 10.6%
5. Make Corrections Noted – 7.8%
6. Approved as Noted – 6.4%
7. Approved – 6.2%
8. Submit Specified Item – 4.5%
9. Furnish as Corrected – 3.5%
10. No Action Taken – 2.1%
11. Not Reviewed – 1.8%
12. Resubmit – 1.8%
13. Exceptions Noted – 1.3%
14. Not Approved – 1.1%
15. Disapproved – 1.0%
16. Amend & Resubmit – 1.0%
17. Note Markings – 0.9%
18. Comments Noted – 0.6%
19. Submittal Received, Action Not Required – 0.6%
20. Accepted – 0.6%
21. Approved as Submitted – 0.6%
22. For Information Only – 0.4%
23. Receipt Acknowledged – 0.4%
24. Implement Exceptions Noted – 0.3%
25. Corrections Noted – 0.3%
26. Conforms as Noted – 0.2%
27. Acknowledged – 0.2%
28. Additional Information Needed – 0.2%
29. (All other variations) – 19.1%

As you can see, there is a tremendous amount of variety in the terminology being selected on the system. There is no one clear standard, although more firms avoid use of “Approved” than choose to use it. While there may be no consensus at this time, I look forward to seeing the discussion continue.

What’s in a name? How Integrated Project Collaboration software is changing the industry.

2010-10-20T10:56:00.001-05:00

It’s clear that a new class of web-based collaboration software is beginning to make a major impact on the design and construction industry, both in North America and worldwide. What is so different about this new option? Project websites and extranets have been around since the mid-1990s, but after much early fanfare during the Internet boom, their adoption rate slowed significantly as designers and builders found that most of the solutions available on the market at the time had significant limitations or failed to work the way that the industry was used to working. In recent years new technologies (including the emergence of cloud computing) and more attention to building applications that are intuitive and easy to use for AEC professionals has resulted in a growing use of web-based software again. Multiple other publications have noted this, including the Construction Management Association of America’s (CMAA) whitepaper, “Managing Integrated Project Delivery”, and a cenews.com article I cited in a previous blog post, “A neutral platform enables the trust behind successful project management”, by Dexter Bachelder.

But what’s the right name to refer to these web-based collaboration tools? “Project website” and “project extranet” are outdated terms that don’t reflect the advancement in technologies or the increasingly sophisticated role of web-based solutions. The CMAA whitepaper uses the term “Project Management Information Systems” (PMIS), but I personally feel this term is misleading. It is easily confused with traditional “project management” or “project information management” software, which have come to refer to internal software that focuses primarily one project team member instead of the entire integrated team. For example, Newforma is a widely used project information management tool for architectural firms, and Prolog is a widely used project management package for construction firms. Both Newforma and Prolog are typically hosted on servers located inside the firm’s offices. Both offer great benefits to the party that owns them, but outside team members have only limited access through web portals, limiting their benefit to the rest of the project team members.

To best describe the new class of web-based applications that clearly differ from past technologies and traditional in-house software, I prefer the term “Integrated Project Collaboration” (IPC) software. This title makes sense for a number of reasons:

Integrated = Available to the entire project team, all team members seated at the same virtual table

Project = Project-based with information for the specific project that the integrated team is focused on

Collaboration = Designed for shared use, with equal access and accountability for all team members

A distinguishing characteristic of IPC software is that it is web-based, hosted by a neutral third-party and accessed through the Internet by all team members. And what does this mean to the future of our industry? It means more options for efficient collaboration, increased shared accountability and transparency, ultimately leading to better project outcomes. IPC software is the convergence of cloud computing technologies with the industry’s focus on Integrated Project Delivery methodologies, and in an era of increasing collaboration, it makes a lot of sense.

Software Neutrality – Building Trust in Construction

2010-10-12T23:05:00.000-05:00

“Neutrality” is an interesting word that I don’t often hear in the context of my chosen industry, construction software and cloud computing. For me personally, it brings to mind images of Switzerland in World War II or, in a more recent headline, debates in Washington over network traffic levels (the “net neutrality” debate).

Map of Switzerland
http://www.solarnavigator.net/geography/switzerland.htm

Recently an article on cenews.com about construction software neutrality caught my attention. Written by Dexter Bachelder and titled “A neutral platform enables the trust behind successful project management”, the article outlines how the selection of collaboration software on commercial construction projects can have a direct impact on the level of trust between project participants and the ultimate success of the project.

Mr. Bachelder notes that due to the historic tensions and conflicts in the industry (which I have also commented on in this blog, including in my recent post, “Happily Ever After”), project participants often enter the team environment in a defensive stance, limiting their information sharing from the beginning in anticipation of possible future conflict. This approach undermines trust and sets the stage for disputes to occur.

Participants in projects have found that having effective collaboration software can increase information sharing, thereby decreasing the possibility of disputes or miscommunications (see the FMI/CMAA survey cited in the cenews.com article). The article also notes that collaboration software operated by an independent or neutral third-party is more successful at building trust and improving information sharing. As the article states, “A neutral collaboration platform built around the principle of fair treatment for all, linking project partners on a single, secure, common platform, helps build trust among engineering and construction industry partners.”

I agree with this viewpoint, and I encourage design and construction firm leaders to consider the importance of neutrality when selecting software tools for their next project. Many organizations have existing project management or project information management systems, hosted and run off of servers in their offices. These solutions are effective tools for internal operations, but they do not fulfill the neutrality needs for truly effective collaboration across the entire project team. Some products have add-on web portal components that allow limited access to outside parties through a firewall, but this is not the same as a product that is built from the ground-up to be open and accessible to all project team members.

Instead, web-based collaboration software (also known as Integrated Project Collaboration, or IPC, software) is a truly neutral solution that allows all project team members to sit at the same virtual table, with equal access to critical project information and accountability for all parties. IPC software is embodiment of the neutral collaboration platform described in Mr. Bachelder’s article, and as more projects utilize it, the end result will be a higher level of trust among participants and a greater level of success for projects.

Happily Ever After … just a dream or light on the horizon?

2010-09-29T22:42:00.000-05:00

Construction relationships have been contentious from the beginning of time. I’m quite confident that even as the first lean-to was being built, there was likely conflict involved. So is the construction industry fated to be forever plagued by unresolved conflict?

As I have mentioned before, Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) brings all of the parties in a typical construction project—owner, architect, and builder—together as early as possible in a more robust partnership than is traditionally seen in construction. IPD is a paradigm that takes steps toward healing the relationships that have historically been strained at best, and potentially disastrous for a project at worst.

A paradigm alone cannot solve the age old conflicts in the construction process. IPD has been on the scene since the mid-1990’s and implementation of the processes alone have had limited effect on project role relationships. Over the last few years, new technologies have begun to emerge that, when paired with techniques such as IPD, facilitate more amicable and productive relationships between contractors, architects and owners.

The Construction Management Association of America (CMAA) has published a whitepaper, “Managing Integrated Project Delivery”, that discusses these technologies and how they contribute to IPD in more detail. Building Information Modeling (BIM) is a key tool, of course. Another equally important technology tool, but one that has received less attention so far, is the concept of a centralized web-based database system that provides project team information, documents, workflows, reporting, and accountability.

The CMAA whitepaper refers to these web-based systems as “Project Management Information Systems” (PMIS), but I personally feel this term is misleading and too easily confused with traditional “project management” or “project information management” tools, which have come to refer to internal software that focuses primarily on one team member (like the A/E or the CM) and not the entire integrated team. Others in the industry instead use the term “Integrated Project Collaboration” (IPC) software, and I agree that this title is a better fit to describe a new class of technology.

IPC software allows all project team members to sit at the same virtual table, hosted on the Internet, with access and accountability for each participant. IPC does not replace other software solutions, but complements them by providing a central location for information generated in other systems to be shared and responded to by the full integrated project team.

How does this new technology make a difference on the ground? My company, Submittal Exchange, provides IPC software services to construction projects nationwide, and our clients have told us the transparency and accountability within the system makes an enormous difference in their day-to-day interactions. For example, the electronic document logs are shared at weekly project team meetings, and for many clients, this reduces arguments over who got what when because the document transactions and statuses are clearly documented by the system. There are no more questions or loose ends hanging.

IPC will not have everyone on a project slapping each other on the back at the end of every day, however, it’s one more step toward that elusive “perfect project”, or at least one that doesn’t end with all sides frustrated and ultimately, a project that suffers.

Measurable Time & Cost Savings from IPC Software

2010-08-31T22:59:00.000-05:00

Over the past five years, I have been able to gather data from thousands of projects using electronic submittal software to analyze the time and cost savings from Integrated Project Collaboration (IPC) software. The traditional paper process used for submittals and other construction communications is inefficient and costly.

For example, the following data was obtained from a $30 million university project utilizing our IPC software for electronic submittals. The project had a total of 1,089 submittals. The project team members were spread out geographically within an approximately 100 mile radius, with the exception of one consultant who was located in a different area of the country.

No two projects are ever exactly the same, but this data shows the possible cost savings from use of IPC software. This is from reduction of shipping costs alone. Further savings can be achieved through acceleration of the construction schedule due to improved team communications and reduction in delays. Because the numbers typically vary based on project size, we have developed a simple online calculator that allows you to view typical costs and possible savings from IPC software for projects of different sizes. My best guess is that if all commercial construction projects in the U.S. were using IPC software, over $1 billion in shipping costs alone would be saved each year.

Submittal Content + IPC Software = Faster Projects

2010-08-02T07:00:00.001-05:00

As I have mentioned in previous blog postings, seven years ago I began the process of transitioning from a full-time architectural designer to founding and running a software company. The transition was not so much an intentional career move as it was a by-product of my own frustration with antiquated, paper-based industry practices and the clear need for a better solution. In the time since then, I have continued to utilize my skills and knowledge as an architect while also learning a tremendous amount about the technology field. In addition, I’ve had the privilege of meeting and learning about many other exciting technology companies and initiatives for design and construction.

In our search for ways to continuously improve our Integration Project Collaboration (IPC) solution, one of the companies that I’ve gotten to know is BuildSite, based out of Oakland, California. BuildSite launched in 2001 and provides the design and construction industry with a practical, single-source of product and technical information about building materials that can be used for both design decisions and construction submittal content. The President and CEO of BuildSite, Ned Trainor, has a strong vision for the future of this segment of the industry, and he and his team are passionate about improving industry processes and access to information.

As I learned more about BuildSite, it became clear that we had many mutual interests. The Submittal Exchange system provides the industry-leading solution for electronic construction communications, including digital submittals. BuildSite provides a comprehensive database of possible submittal content, searchable by manufacturer, product type, or other criteria. In addition, BuildSite recently launched a new Green Data component that allows designers and builders to search for green building products using LEED® attributes such as VOC content, recycled content, or other LEED considerations. Their focus on supporting sustainability matches Submittal Exchange’s commitment to helping the industry become greener, faster, better.

BuildSite's database includes over 20,000 building products from over 350 manufacturers; now subcontractors can search this database for submittal content from within Submittal Exchange's IPC software

On June 30 we announced a partnership with BuildSite with the goal of improving submittal process efficiency. Submittal Exchange users, particularly subcontractors, can now use features within Submittal Exchange to search the BuildSite product information database and upload documents from BuildSite directly into their projects on Submittal Exchange. This is an exciting innovation that allows quick access within Submittal Exchange to information on more than 20,000 products from over 350 manufacturers.

My goal, and our mission at Submittal Exchange, is to be a driving force for continuous improvement in the commercial construction industry, delivering innovative technology products with exceptional service and care. Our team works hard every day to provide outstanding new features and ideas to help our clients, and the new BuildSite partnership and feature integration is a great example of this. We’re very pleased to announce the partnership with BuildSite. If you have questions or comments about how the integration works, please contact me.

IPD and IPC – The Perfect Marriage for Faster Projects

2010-07-12T10:24:00.001-05:00

Speed matters. That is a fundamental fact of the construction business. In my years as an architect, I don’t recall ever meeting a single client who said, “It doesn’t matter when my building gets completed.” Every project has deadlines, and every deadline is important. If the owner is financing the work through a construction loan, then the faster the building is completed, the sooner they can complete the loan. If the owner is a school district or an expanding business, then there may be hard deadlines that must be met, such as the day that the new school needs to be open for students or when the business owner needs the space for additional equipment or employees.

Unfortunately, the complexity of construction can make the scheduling process challenging to say the least. In 2009 Markku Allison, AIA, conducted a presentation called “AIA Update on Integrated Project Delivery” at the Lean Construction Institute Design Forum. His presentation showed that in a recent study of approximately 1,000 commercial construction projects, over 30% of the projects were behind schedule. If you’re a designer, a builder, or an owner trying to meet an important deadline for your own project, this is a frightening percentage.

Data source: AIA Update on Integrated Project Delivery, 2009

The good news is that new delivery models based on Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) are showing tangible results in improving project schedules. The same presentation showed that projects using IPD are far more likely to be on schedule, with only 10% of IPD projects behind schedule. The increased collaboration and early involvement of key stakeholders in IPD provides a greater level of accuracy and commitment to the project scheduling process.

Advances in technology have also played a critical role in improving the speed of project delivery. Building Information Modeling (BIM) and Integrated Project Collaboration (IPC) software facilitate faster sharing of information between all project participants, resulting in better decisions and less opportunity for delays. Earlier this year we conducted a survey of general contractors and construction managers using Submittal Exchange’s IPC software for electronic project communications. The results clearly showed the real benefits that IPC software can provide when it comes to project speed.

The project managers and other construction professionals responding to our survey reported that, on average, use of Submittal Exchange’s IPC solution had saved 20 days from their project schedule. (Individual answers varied, but this was the average across seventy different project managers who responded.) This is an exciting statistic, but let’s take it a step further by translating this into real dollars. On a $3 million construction project with a construction loan at prime + .5% (using today’s rates), the owner is paying interest charges of about $300 per day. Saving 20 days off the project schedule would save the owner approximately $6,000 in interest. On a $30 million project, 20 days could translate to $60,000 in interest savings, and on a $300 million project, those 20 days may be worth $600,000. And that’s the just the loan interest; depending on the project and the owner, there may be other circumstances that make those schedule savings even more valuable.

Source: Submittal Exchange survey of construction project managers, 2010

Speed matters in construction. Integrated Project Collaboration (IPC) software helps project teams complete construction faster while enhancing quality, not sacrificing it. In an era of tight timelines and tighter budgets, it only makes sense for our industry to make the shift to IPC software.

Note: Due to upcoming travels, the Integrated Project Collaboration blog will be taking a brief summer hiatus. My next regular blog posting will be on Monday, August 2.

Five Signs Your Software Solution is Not Designed for IPD

2010-07-06T08:12:00.000-05:00

What does the word “Integrated” in “Integrated Project Delivery” (IPD) mean? While there is no single, authoritative definition of IPD, interpretations can be taken from the IPD report published by McGraw-Hill Construction and AIA California Council, along with looking up the definition of the word “integrated” on dictionary.com:

   in•te•grat•ed   [in-ti-grey-tid]
     –adjective
     combining or coordinating separate elements so as to
     provide a harmonious, interrelated whole

Unfortunately, some attempts at digital solutions for project team communications have overlooked the important and interdependent role that all of the project team members play in the process. For example, some digital systems implemented by general contractors or construction managers have not included means for the architect to route the documents between their design consultants and subconsultants. I have spoken with many architects in recent years who have been frustrated with use of “project management” systems by GCs or CMs that have this limitation. The architect is able to remotely access the contractor’s system to download a new document or upload a reviewed submittal, but still must maintain their own separate submittal log and exchange documents with their consultants and subconsultants by email or other means.

In other cases, architect-centric systems have failed to recognize the role that subcontractors play. For example, in 2006 AIArchitect published an article titled “According to Hoyle: The Submittal Process”. It was an excellent article with many good points about managing the submittal process from an architect’s perspective. It also included a diagram showing submittal routing that involved the general contractor, architect, and consultant—without any reference to the important role of subcontractors and suppliers.

Overlooking the roles of certain participants was common with paper-based communications, but in an era of integrated practice and increased collaboration, a more holistic view is needed. For a construction communications process to be truly integrated, it must include all of the project team members. It cannot be considered truly integrated or efficient if digital documents are being exchanged between two of the parties—for example, the construction manager and the architect—but the other parties are still exchanging inefficient paper copies.

Here are warning signs that a project communications software solution is not designed for Integrated Project Delivery or truly collaborative project team communications:

The software is hosted on servers located inside one of the project team member’s offices, and the other team members are granted limited access to it through a firewall or web portal.
You are expected to download and email copies of submittals or other documents to other team members (for example, subcontractors or design consultants) because the software does not allow them to have direct access.
You must keep your own submittal log in a spreadsheet or other format, manually updating it as the project progresses, because you don’t have access to a shared log through the software or the software’s log doesn’t include all of the different exchanges.
It takes you more than five clicks to upload or download a document.
The software doesn’t allow you to create a transmittal or cover page for your documents on your own letterhead or using the project’s standard template.

Information Portability for Construction

2010-06-28T07:13:00.000-05:00

Unlike many other industries, the construction industry is, by nature, required to be highly mobile and portable. In major commercial construction projects, hundreds or thousands of workers converge on a specific geographic location for a period of time lasting from a few months to a few years. Then, everything is packed up and relocated to a completely different location. Due to the dynamic nature of industry relationships and projects, many of the workers will actually be spreading their time across multiple job sites at any one time.

As a result, information portability is critical. How do the team members ensure they have access to project information when they need it, regardless of where they are physically located at any given moment? In the past, construction information portability typically meant carrying giant rolls of plans and a box or two full of spec manuals with you in your car or truck wherever you went, along with maintaining copies of the same documents in a job site trailer if possible.

Traditional "information portability" in construction

With today’s technological advances, additional options are now available for design and construction team members. Web-based Integrated Project Collaboration (IPC) software provides a central location for project team members to share information and documents needed for their project. The information is then available any time from any location for all team members who need it.

Many examples of the value of this portability of information can be seen by talking to customers of Submittal Exchange, the web-based construction communications solution that I started seven years ago out of frustration with limits of traditional industry communication processes during construction. Today our solution has grown to be in use by thousands of design and construction professionals worldwide, demonstrating clear benefits and savings for their projects. Recently one Submittal Exchange client, Adam Hahn with Knutson Construction, met with us to discuss how information portability is critical for the projects their company manages where the parties are spread across the U.S. in different states along with other benefits of IPC software. Click here to watch the four minute video.

Project managers with Knutson Construction, Iowa City discussing their

use of Integrated Project Collaboration software (click to view video)

In another good example, I recall talking at some point in the past few years to one of our clients, a construction administrator for an architectural firm, who shared a story about driving to a project site several hundred miles away in a neighboring state. He talked about receiving a phone call with a question related to the project. He had his laptop in the car, and he was able to pull open the Submittal Exchange website while driving to quickly lookup the submittal or RFI information needed to answer the question. (I’m assuming he was not behind the wheel while this was happening, that someone else was driving, but he did not say.) In previous years, answering a question like this may have required waiting until he had returned back to his office hours or days later. Today, web-based IPC software can put all of your project information at your fingertips when you need it, embodying the potential of true information portability.

Software as a Service for Design and Construction - Building in "The Cloud"

2010-06-21T17:41:00.004-05:00

What is "cloud computing" or "software as a service", and what do these terms mean for the AEC industry? While many people have heard of the term "cloud computing", or can conceptualize how working online can be considered working in "the cloud", many in the design and construction industry are still unclear about what this means for the future of our work.

Cloud computing itself can be difficult to define, but in general, it is using resources through the Internet to create a flexible environment that can add additional computing power as needed without investments in expensive in-house hardware and software. In addition to its flexibility, cloud computing allows for greater levels of collaboration between users, a huge advantage to multi-disciplinary teams. Here is an example of twenty-one different technology experts each providing their own definition of cloud computing. One of the definitions that caught my attention was this one (credited to Jeff Kaplan):

Cloud computing [is] a broad array of web-based services aimed at allowing users to obtain a wide range of functional capabilities on a 'pay-as-you-go' basis that previously required tremendous hardware/software investments and professional skills to acquire.

Software as a Service (SaaS) is a particular subset of cloud computing that allows individuals and companies to lease software and access it through the Internet without installing it on local IT hardware and without purchasing a local version that will be out of date and need replaced in a few years anyway.

Software as a Service is a major movement in the software industry as a whole, and due to the reduced costs and increased efficiencies, it simply makes sense for many applications. There are fifteen major publicly traded SaaS companies, thousands of smaller providers, Microsoft has recently launched new web-based versions of their standard Office products, the federal government has launched a major expansion into use of SaaS, and a recent study suggests that 20% of all private companies will own no in-house IT resources by 2012 as SaaS and other cloud offerings become increasingly more prevalent.

Source: "What Cloud Computing Really Means..."

Unfortunately, while government, finance, and other sectors are moving quickly to take advantage of the benefits offered by cloud computing and SaaS systems, the AEC industry is still in the very early stages of learning about the opportunity this technology shift presents. While the results are clearly unscientific, I did my own quick assessment of AEC industry knowledge about this technology change while I was traveling and speaking at regional AIA conferences last fall. At each presentation, as part of my introductory questions, I would ask the audience members, "Please raise your hand if you have heard of the term Software as a Service before". Out of several hundred architects that I spoke with in those presentations, I never saw anyone raise their hand.

The design and construction industry, like most industries, has a major reliance on software to run its businesses and projects, so while the coming of cloud computing for AEC may be slow, it will happen. Major opportunities exist to deliver CAD, BIM, and other design software in a SaaS format, and major industry leaders are just beginning to acknowledge this. In addition, with an increased industry focus on Integrated Project Delivery, software services like Integrated Project Collaboration systems can improve the ways that project teams partner together and communicate with each other.

"IPD-ish" and More ... Reflections from AIA2010

2010-06-15T08:01:00.001-05:00

Last week I attended the AIA 2010 National Convention, "Design in the New Decade", in Miami. It was a terrific conference and show, with numerous educational sessions, a great exhibit hall, and the opportunity to meet some fellow architects and designers from all over the country.

I've attended several other AIA national conventions in the past few years, and each time, I have learned a tremendous amount. As I look back on the 2010 convention, a few points stick with me the most. First, I attended several educational sessions on Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and architect-contractor collaboration. One of the sessions focused mostly on legal structure options for IPD, including multi-party agreements and single purpose entities. The topic is complicated, and one of the speakers made a comment about these types of IPD arrangements only being used by a small number of the most sophisticated firms. I left the session wondering about how other projects that did not desire the complicated legal structures could still benefit from IPD.

I found my answer in a later session, where a panel of architects spoke about architect-contractor collaboration. One of the panelists was Barbara White Bryson, FAIA, with Rice University. She spoke about the the university's campus construction program and their desire to increase collaboration on the project teams to improve project delivery. Specifically, she said that the university has adopted an "IPD-ish" approach that seeks to bring in elements of IPD and greater collaboration without adopting the full legal structure. I found this to be a great term to describe the overall trend occurring in the industry: greater collaboration, bringing participants to the table earlier and sharing more information. I think it would be fair to say that our industry as a whole is increasingly becoming more "IPD-ish", and that this IPD-ish trend has a major impact on how project teams communicate and the technology tools they choose.

Another topic that I learned about at AIA 2010 was the U.S. government's increasing focus on sustainable construction projects. I knew the government was doing more in this area, but until I attended several workshops at the conference, I did realize the extent of the government's leadership in this area. For example, NAVFAC, the second largest facilities contractor in the Department of Defense (after the Army Corps of Engineers) has over 300 projects currently registered to pursue LEED certification, and the GSA has set a goal of new buildings being net zero energy starting in 2020. This is a very challenging goal that will without a doubt move the industry forward as architects, engineers, and builders collaborate on how to make their projects more efficient and more environmentally friendly.

Above: Myself and two members of the Submittal Exchange marketing team, Erica Kiefer and Jeremy Schmidt, at the AIA 2010 national convention in Miami

I left Miami with a sense of the opportunities and challenges ahead for design and construction in the new decade. I also look forward to continuing the dialog on these topics in the months ahead and at the AIA 2011 convention in New Orleans.

Green Construction in the Cloud

2010-06-07T21:52:00.007-05:00

Much focus is being given in the design and construction industry to making projects greener. As an architect myself, I feel an obligation to be conscious of the impact my work and the work of my peers has on the future of our environment. Architects, engineers, builders, and facility owners play a vital role in creating a greener future. Architecture 2030 estimates that in the US alone, buildings are responsible for 48% of greenhouse gas emissions annually and consume 76% of all electricity generated by power plants.

There is no single solution to make an individual project or the AEC industry as a whole greener. Rather, there are ten thousand individual solutions, each forming a piece of the puzzle. It is the job of the project team and of industry leaders to put those pieces together as appropriate for each circumstance.

One item that should be on the list of solutions is the use of Internet-based cloud computing software. Also known as Integrated Project Collaboration (IPC) software, web-based information sharing solutions play an important role in the "greening" of our industry.

First, from a technology perspective, web-based software systems allow firms to utilize the best technology without the hard costs or environmental burden of adding to in-house servers. When done properly, web-based software is inherently greener than in-house servers and software due to a more efficient utilization of resources. Most in-house servers are never fully utilized; meaning energy is being wasted to maintain computing power that is not needed. In addition, the servers will eventually end up in a landfill, creating environmental waste. In contrast, companies can be much more efficient with resources by using a "Software as a Service" (SaaS) approach where they lease software delivered through the Internet, instead of purchasing software that will be outdated and need replaced in two years as well as continually adding to their in-house hardware collection to run the software. Additional information can be found in a great article written by Curt Finch, "Go SaaS, Go Green".

Second, from an AEC project perspective, web-based software systems allow you to place critical project information in a shared location where all project team members have equal access. This results in transparency and better decision making, as well as increasing accountability, since all team members can see what is happening and when decisions are made or feedback is shared.

Smarter decision making is fundamental to making sure your project is as green as possible. In the past, information sharing has consisted of a select few members of the project team finding ways to provide external parties limited access to their internal "project management" or "project information management" systems. While a step in the right direction, these limited portals are not the same as having all team members seated as the same virtual table with equal access to the same information.

As our industry continues its walk down a greener path, integrated project collaboration software and cloud computing will be a vital tool for successful organizations.

Integrated Project Collaboration software … the missing link for IPD

2010-06-01T23:27:00.008-05:00

Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) is the new paradigm in design and construction. At its core, IPD means bringing all of the parties in a typical construction project—owner, architect, and builder—together as early as possible in a more robust partnership than is traditionally seen in construction. A true IPD partnership involves changing how the project team is configured, how contracts are written, how risk is shared, how decisions are made, and the tools that are used to communicate information. Today some projects are implementing IPD in its pure form, while others are making incremental steps towards it.

Much attention has also been given to the role of Building Information Modeling (BIM) in the IPD process. BIM is a technology tool for creating three dimensional, object-based building designs that contain embedded information about the products and assemblies included in the building. BIM is a major shift from the traditional design methodology of two dimensional drawings and CAD. BIM can be very useful in the IPD process, but it also can be used outside of IPD. Ultimately BIM is a tool that helps project participants have more information about what the final building is intended to include, and when used properly it can help to identify conflicts and resolve design questions sooner rather than later.

While BIM is an incredibly valuable tool, it is not the end-all and be-all of technology needed to design and construct a building, and certainly not the only technology needed to practice IPD. Project teams using BIM software must still find a way to share and collaborate on their model files between different team members and offices. During design, there is a wealth of additional information that needs communicated beyond just a BIM file, including documentation of existing site or building conditions, studies, budgets, schedules, meeting minutes, and more. During construction, the information flow continues with submittals, RFIs, change proposals, and more.

Current industry practice is to communicate this information using a variety of methods including, but not limited to, mail, shipping services, fax, email, FTP, and internal servers configured to allow limited access to external parties through a firewall. While functional, these methods can lead to a confusing blur of communication without clear organization or accountability.

The Missing Link

Integrated Project Collaboration (IPC) is the process of leveraging another new paradigm in technology, cloud computing, to provide a central location for project team members to exchange all of the needed project information. IPC software, also known as “Integrated Project Delivery in the Cloud”, allows all project team members to sit at the same virtual table, hosted on the Internet, with access and accountability for each participant. IPC software is designed for shared use, in contrast to other systems that are designed primarily for the benefit of only one part of the project team. IPC does not replace other software solutions, but complements them by providing a central location for information generated in other systems to be shared and responded to by the full integrated project team.

Seven years ago I was a designer at an architectural firm, enthusiastic about the promise of design and construction but frustrated with the cumbersome nature of existing communications process, particularly when it came to sharing information such as submittals and other documents between the design team, construction team, and owner. I did not realize it at first, but my frustration was shared by thousands of others in the industry. Integrated Project Delivery offers an opportunity to reform the relationships between team members and how projects are delivered. Integrated Project Collaboration software, powerful web-based systems designed for sharing by all team members, is a critical component of the IPD process by bringing all parties together at a common virtual table to collaborate and share information needed for a successful construction project.