Mortenson Construction has released "Integrated Delivery: A Catalyst for Collaboration and Teamwork." The free report summarizes findings from a large group seminar conducted by the contractor at the 2013 AIA Public Architect Workshop, which was held in conjunction with this year's AIA National Convention. Hand-held polling devices were used for collecting feedback and real-time tabulations.
According to the report, interest in IPD is high, but public owners don't always agree on the meaning of the term, and are unsure whether formal multiparty agreements are necessary to achieve the desired goals. Some of the seminar participants said that sharing of risks and rewards is what distinguishes a true integrated delivery model. Others believed the general principles can be applied to multiple types of delivery methods. In general, the idea of integrated delivery involves trust, communication, and a high level of commitment among all involved parties.
The study examines the differences between a contractually defined version of IPD and a version that incorporates the basic principles but not the contracual approach (labeled "ipd.") Regardless of what a method is called, the report indicates that stakeholders for public projects are increasingly interested in methods beyond traditional design-bid-build, with CM at Risk and IPD both selected as the method of "greatest growth in interest" by more than 30% of the respondents.
Despite the attendees' lack of clarity regarding the definition of IPD/ipd, about three quarters believe some type of nontraditional approach will increase the level of teamwork on a project (73%). They also tend to believe IPD will increase collaborative innovation and decisionmaking (64%), shared benefit and reward (55%), mutual respect and trust among participants (55%), harnessing of the talents, expertise, and information of the participants (55%), and shared risks and downside (50%). Only 36% thought IPD would increase the use of VDC/BIM.