Contractual Guidelines for Promoting Integrated Project Delivery
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 147, Issue 11
Abstract
Integrated project delivery (IPD) was originally developed to overcome the challenges associated with increased project complexity, high fragmentation levels of the construction industry, and inadequate interoperability among the different stakeholders. Despite its documented benefits on project performance, IPD adoption is still witnessing a slow uptake in the US. Recent research studies have tied such slow adoption—in part—to the lack of contractual understanding and implementation of IPD. This paper addresses this critical research need. To this end, the authors used an interdependent research methodology consisting of (1) selection of IPD agreements; (2) identification of the main contractual IPD issues of concern that may lead to conflicts, claims, and/or disputes between the contracting parties through analysis of seven various IPD case study projects; and (3) reviewing and analyzing the contractual provisions, relevant to the identified IPD issues of concern, under the most pertinent national IPD standard forms of contracts. It is worth noting that in order to assure the scientific rigor of this research, the authors consulted throughout all methodological steps and verified research outcomes with the construction group of a leading legal firm. Results show that the major areas of concern in relation to contractual management of IPD processes include risks and incentives; liabilities and indemnification; suspension and termination; insurance; data sharing; and, dispute resolution. This study contributes to the body of knowledge by providing (1) a comparative analysis showing how these issues have been tackled under leading IPD standard forms of contracts; and (2) contractual guidelines to promote better understanding of effective and efficient IPD practices. As such, this research offers substantial practical implications through furnishing insightful information about causes of disputes in IPD agreements as well as how the most popular IPD contracts in the US handle them, and finally, checklist questions to serve as a reference for the contracting parties in negotiating the terms governing their IPD projects. Ultimately, this research should better support changing the contracting culture to better enable and facilitate broader and wider adoption of IPD practices in the US.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
All data used and/or generated during this study are included in the published article.
References
Agarwal, R., S. Chandrasekaran, and M. Sridhar. 2016. “Imagining construction’s digital future.” McKinsey & Company. Accessed May 27, 2020. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/capital-projects-and-infrastructure/our-insights/imagining-constructions-digital-future.
AIA (American Institute of Architects). 2008. Standard form single purpose entity agreement for integrated project delivery. AIA C195. Washington, DC: AIA.
AIA (American Institute of Architects). 2009. Standard form multi-party agreement for integrated project delivery. AIA C-191. Washington, DC: AIA.
AIA (American Institute of Architects) California Council. 2007. “Integrated project delivery: A guide.” Accessed June 15, 2020. https://info.aia.org/siteobjects/files/ipd_guide_2007.pdf.
Arcadis. 2019. “Global construction disputes report, laying the foundation for success.” Accessed May 27, 2020. https://images.arcadis.com/media/5/D/1/%7B5D16141D-B883-4398-BB35-218023E1F4F6%7DRP_GCDR_AL20190620_Final.pdf?_ga=2.259975178.1280885210.1580924143-615783635.1580924143.
Assaad, R., I. H. El-adaway, A. H. El Hakea, M. J. Parker, T. I. Henderson, C. R. Salvo, and M. O. Ahmed. 2020a. “Contractual perspective for BIM utilization in US construction projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 146 (12): 04020128. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001927.
Assaad, R., I. H. El-adaway, M. Hastak, and K. L. Needy. 2020b. “Commercial and legal considerations of offsite construction projects and their hybrid transactions.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 146 (12): 05020019. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001948.
Azhar, N., Y. Kang, and I. Ahmad. 2015. “Critical look into the relationship between information and communication technology and integrated project delivery in public sector construction.” J. Manage. Eng. 31 (5): 04014091. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000334.
Bamforth, S. 2006. Insuring the integrated team. Leicestershire, UK: Society of Construction Law.
Becerik-Gerber, B., and D. Kent. 2010. “Implementation of integrated project delivery and building information modeling on a small commercial project.” Accessed June 15, 2020. https://ascpro0.ascweb.org/archives/cd/2010/paper/CEGT152002010.pdf.
Bilbo, D., B. Bigelow, E. Escamilla, and C. Lockwood. 2014. “Comparison of construction manager at risk and integrated project delivery performance on healthcare projects: A comparative case study.” Int. J. Constr. Educ. Res. 11 (1): 40–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/15578771.2013.872734.
Cheng, R., and A. Johnson. 2016. “Motivation and means: How and why IPD and lean lead to success.” Accessed July 03, 2020. https://www.leanconstruction.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/MotivationMeans_IPDA_LCI_Report.pdf.
Choi, J., S. Yun, F. Leite, and S. P. Mulva. 2019. “Team integration and owner satisfaction: Comparing integrated project delivery with construction management at risk in health care projects.” J. Manage. Eng. 35 (1): 05018014. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000654.
ConsensusDocs. 2016. ConsensusDocs 300—Standard—Multi-party integrated project delivery (IPD) agreement. Arlington, VA: ConsensusDocs.
DCC (DPR Construction Co.) v. SRMI (Shire Regenerative Medicine Inc). 2016. Civil No. 14-cv-2399-JAH (MDD). Los Angeles: US District Court Southern District of California.
Del Gallo, L., S. O’Leary, and L. Lauridas. 2010. Comparison of integrated project delivery agreements. San Francisco: Hanson Bridgett LLP.
Demetracopoulou, V., W. J. O’Brien, and N. Khwaja. 2020. “Lessons learned from selection of project delivery methods in highway projects: The Texas experience.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 12 (1): 04519040. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000340.
DNH (Department for National Heritage) v. SVM (Steensen Varming Mulchay). 1998. EWHC Technology 305. Cardiff, UK: England and Wales High Court: Technology and Construction Court.
El-adaway, I., I. Abotaleb, and S. Eteifa. 2017. “Framework for multiparty relational contracting.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 9 (3): 04517018. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000238.
El-adaway, I., I. Abotaleb, and S. Eteifa. 2018a. “A relational contractual framework for promoting collaborative project environments.” In Proc., 2018 Construction Research Congress. Reston, VA: ASCE.
El-adaway, I., S. Fawzy, M. Ahmed, and R. White. 2016. “Administering extension of time under national and international standard forms of contracts: A contractor’s perspective.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 8 (2): 04516001. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000182.
El-adaway, I. H., I. S. Abotaleb, M. S. Eid, S. May, L. Netherton, and J. Vest. 2018b. “Contract administration guidelines for public infrastructure projects in the United States and Saudi Arabia: Comparative analysis approach.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 144 (6): 04018031. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001472.
El Asmar, M., A. S. Hanna, and W. Loh. 2013. “Quantifying performance for the integrated project delivery (IPD) system as compared to established delivery systems.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 139 (11): 04013012. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000744.
Elsayegh, A., I. H. El-adaway, R. Assaad, G. Ali, I. Abotaleb, C. Smith, M. Bootwala, and S. Eteifa. 2020. “Contractual guidelines for management of infrastructure transportation projects.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 12 (3): 04520023. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000400.
Hanna, A. S. 2016. “Benchmark performance metrics for integrated project delivery.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 142 (9): 04016040. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001151.
Harper, C. M., and K. R. Molenaar. 2014. “Association between construction contracts and relational contract theory.” In Proc., Construction Research Congress 2014. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Ibrahim, M. W., A. Hanna, and D. Kievet. 2020. “Quantitative comparison of project performance between project delivery systems.” J. Manage. Eng. 36 (6): 04020082. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000837.
Johnson, T. R., P. Feng, W. Sitzabee, and M. Jernigan. 2013. “Federal acquisition regulation applied to Alliancing contract practices.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 139 (5): 480–487. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000592.
Kent, D. C., and B. Becerik-Gerber. 2010. “Understanding construction industry experience and attitudes toward integrated project delivery.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 136 (8): 815–825. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000188.
Kumaraswamy, M., and K. Yogeswaran. 1998. “Significant sources of construction claims.” Int. Constr. Law Rev. 15 (1): 144–160.
Laurent, J., and R. M. Leicht. 2019. “Practices for designing cross-functional teams for integrated project delivery.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 145 (3): 05019001. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001605.
Lee, H. W., I. D. Tommelein, and G. Ballard. 2013. “Energy-related risk management in integrated project delivery.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 139 (12): A4013001. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000753.
Levin, P. 1998. Construction contract claim, changes and dispute resolution. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Lichtig, W. A. 2006. “The integrated agreement for lean project delivery.” Constr. Lawyer 26 (3): 1–8.
Maemura, Y., E. Kim, and K. Ozawa. 2018. “Root causes of recurring contractual conflicts in international construction projects: Five case studies from Vietnam.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 144 (8): 05018008. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001523.
Manata, B., V. Miller, S. Mollaoglu, and A. J. Garcia. 2018. “Measuring key communication behaviors in integrated project delivery teams.” J. Manage. Eng. 34 (5): 06018001. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000622.
Matthews, O., and G. A. Howell. 2005. “Integrated project delivery: An example of relational contracting.” Lean Constr. J. 2 (1): 46–61.
O’Connor, P. 2009. Integrated project delivery: Collaboration through new contract forms. Minneapolis: Faegre & Benson, LLP.
Overbey, D. 2019. “Is integrated project delivery dead… or just reborn?” Accessed May 31, 2020. https://www.buildingenclosureonline.com/blogs/14-the-be-blog/post/88134-is-integrated-project-delivery-dead-or-just-reborn.
Perlberg, B. E. 2009. “Contracting for integrated project delivery: ConsensusDocs.” In Proc., 48th Annual Meeting of Invited Attorneys. Bethesda, MD: Victor O. Schinnerer & Company.
Roy, D., S. Malsane, and P. K. Samanta. 2018. “Identification of critical challenges for adoption of IPD.” Lean Constr. J. 1–15.
Sive, T., and M. Hays. 2009. “Integrated project delivery: Reality and promise.” Society for Marketing Professional Services Foundation. Accessed November 11, 2020. https://www.tedsive.com/docs/Sive_White_Paper_IPD.pdf.
Teng, Y., X. Li, P. Wu, and X. Wang. 2017. “Using cooperative game theory to determine profit distribution in IPD projects.” Int. J. Constr. Manage. 19 (1): 32–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2017.1358075.
University of Minnesota. 2012. “IPD case studies.” AIA, AIA Minnesota, School of Architecture Univ. of Minnesota. Accessed June 23, 2020. https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/201408/aia_2012_issued.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
Viana, M. L., B. H. W. Hadikusumo, M. Z. Mohammad, and Z. Kahvandi. 2020. “Integrated project delivery (IPD): An updated review and analysis case study.” J. Eng. Project Prod. Manage. 10 (2): 147–161. https://doi.org/10.2478/jeppm-2020-0017.
Xie, H., and H. Liu. 2017. “Studying contract provisions of shared responsibilities for integrated project delivery under National and International Standard Forms.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 9 (3): 04517009. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000220.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 147 • Issue 11 • November 2021
Copyright
© 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Mar 16, 2021
Accepted: Jun 29, 2021
Published online: Aug 27, 2021
Published in print: Nov 1, 2021
Discussion open until: Jan 27, 2022
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
Cited by
- Bahaa Chammout, Islam H. El-adaway, Mohammad Abdul Nabi, Rayan H. Assaad, Price Escalation in Construction Projects: Examining National and International Contracts, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 10.1061/JCEMD4.COENG-13918, 150, 9, (2024).
- Radwa Eissa, Mohamad Abdul Nabi, Islam H. El-adaway, Risk–Reward Share Allocation under Different Integrated Project Delivery Relational Structures: A Monte-Carlo Simulation and Cooperative Game Theoretic Solutions Approach, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 10.1061/JCEMD4.COENG-13181, 150, 4, (2024).
- Yomna Emad, Mohamed S. Eid, Hesham A. Bassioni, Division of Cost Deviations in Integrated Project Delivery Systems Using Cooperative Game Theory, Construction Research Congress 2024, 10.1061/9780784485286.004, (31-41), (2024).
- Mohamad Abdul Nabi, Islam H. El-adaway, Studying Contribution of Associated Stakeholders in Risk Control of Modularized Construction under Different Project Delivery Methods: A Graph-Restricted Cooperative Games Approach, Computing in Civil Engineering 2023, 10.1061/9780784485231.027, (221-230), (2024).
- Radwa Eissa, Mohamad Abdul Nabi, Islam H. El-adaway, Risk-Reward Allocation among Integrated Project Delivery Method Stakeholders: A Gamified Cooperative Data Simulation Approach, Computing in Civil Engineering 2023, 10.1061/9780784485231.011, (87-95), (2024).
- Muaz O. Ahmed, Islam H. El-adaway, Data-Driven Analysis of Construction Bidding Stage–Related Causes of Disputes, Journal of Management in Engineering, 10.1061/JMENEA.MEENG-5426, 39, 5, (2023).
- Tingting Mei, Zeng Guo, Peng Li, Kaixian Fang, Shuda Zhong, Influence of Integrated Project Delivery Principles on Project Performance in China: An SEM-Based Approach, Sustainability, 10.3390/su14084381, 14, 8, (4381), (2022).
- Hassan Ghaleb, Hamed Hamdan Alhajlah, Abdul Aziz Bin Abdullah, Mukhtar A. Kassem, Mohammed A. Al-Sharafi, A Scientometric Analysis and Systematic Literature Review for Construction Project Complexity, Buildings, 10.3390/buildings12040482, 12, 4, (482), (2022).
- Sara Rankohi, Mario Bourgault, Ivanka Iordanova, The latest operational, contractual and organizational trends in IPD literature: review and future directions, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 10.1108/ECAM-02-2022-0170, (2022).
- Ramy Khalef, Gasser G. Ali, Islam H. El-adaway, Ghada M. Gad, Managing construction projects impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic: a contractual perspective, Construction Management and Economics, 10.1080/01446193.2022.2031238, 40, 4, (313-330), (2022).
- See more