China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Lean Design
Published in Mark Graban, John Toussaint, Lean Hospitals, 2018
The approach used was called “Integrated Lean Project Delivery®” (ILPD®), as developed by Akron Children’s construction company, Boldt. Integrated project delivery, or IPD, is an approach that “integrates people, systems, business structures, and practices into a process that collaboratively harnesses the talents and insights of all participants to optimize project results, increase value to the owner, reduce waste, and maximize efficiency through all phases of design, fabrication, and construction.”12 IPD might already sound a lot like Lean, with the contractual collaboration and risk or gain sharing between the health system, architects, general contractor, and others. But, Boldt says they are “rigorously integrating Lean into IPD” by using Lean methods to reduce waste in building projects completed at Akron Children’s, Sutter Health, and other healthcare organizations.13 The Akron Children’s approach combined Lean operations, Lean design, and Lean construction and was inspired by a visit to Seattle Children’s Hospital and the Bellevue surgical center.14
UK industry background
Published in Ray Crotty, The Impact of Building Information Modelling, 2013
This experience will be highly valuable as BIM usage takes off in this country. For example, although implementation of BIM is currently far more advanced in the USA than it is in the UK,7 the use of collaborative forms of contract in the American industry lags behind British practice. But, leading individuals and organisations in the American industry have realised that BIM can be implemented in collaborative project organisations much more effectively than in those based on traditional, lump sum, competitive tendering. One result is that the American industry is now developing its own collaborative approach which they call integrated project delivery (IPD). Standard forms of contract and the necessary procedures documents have already been developed to support project teams attempting to carry out projects in this more collaborative way.8
Review of UNESCO’s World Heritage Nomination Files (WHNF), Building Information Modelling (BIM) and Heritage Building Information Modelling (HBIM)
Published in Ahmad Baik, Heritage Building Information Modelling for Implementing UNESCO Procedures, 2020
Through using the BIM tools, the building performance and quality can also be increased. Additionally, using a tool such as the IPD (Integrated Project Delivery) feature can improve collaboration among the project team, which allows the overall design and cost to be better understood. In the case of architects and designers, BIM can offer earlier and more accurate visualisation of the project. This would result in fewer corrections in a situation whereby changes have been made on the design. The BIM tools can also generate very high quality and accurate “2-D” drawings at any stage of the design process.
Barriers to lean implementation in engineer-to-order manufacturing with subsequent assembly on-site: state of the art and future directions
Published in Production Planning & Control, 2023
Felix Schulze, Patrick Dallasega
Regarding the ‘coordination of the supply chain’, the following Lean tools were selected in our analysis. Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) is an effective method to manage the increasing complexity, dynamic, and fast project execution of ETO and construction projects (Forero et al. 2015; Kim et al. 2016). Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) can be defined as a relational contracting and partnering strategy that sets the terms and provides the motivation for collaboration in a construction project (Cheng and Johnson 2016). According to the American Institute of Architects (2007), IPD is a method of project delivery that is characterised by a contractual arrangement that aligns business interests among the owner, the constructor, and the design professional. IPD proved to be an effective method to manage complex, dynamic, and fast projects (Cho and Ballard 2011). More in detail, IPD can be defined as a method that explicitly promotes shared risks and rewards fostering an extensive collaboration between project parties (Matthews and Howell 2005) and that increases efficiency through all phases of design, fabrication, and construction (American Institute of Architects 2007).
How relational contract theory influence management strategies and project outcomes: a systematic literature review
Published in Construction Management and Economics, 2021
The systematic literature review highlighted six main RC strategies (Table 3). As well as the difference in terminology (IPD, LPD PA, ECI, Partnering and PPP), there are different characteristics, depending on the contextual situation of each project and the state of evolution of the strategy4. First, Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) strategy has one contract containing three or more parties, whereas traditional contracts contain only two parties (El-adaway et al.2017). Studies show that IPD is used predominately in the USA and Europe. Second, Lean project delivery (LPD), primarily used in the US, is similar to IPD; however, LPD employs lean principles and tools for design management incorporated into the contracts (Mesa et al.2019). Third, Project Alliance (PA) is widely employed in the Australian and Finnish public sector (Walker and Lloyd-Walker 2015) and involves a joint contract where all parties share risk in design and construction phases. Fourth, Project Partnering (PP) involves either a legally binding contract or a voluntary non-contractual agreement between partners (Hall et al.2018, Tawalare and Laishram 2018). PP consists of two or more parties who work together to achieve specific business objectives (Eriksson 2010).
Quantifying stakeholders’ influence on energy efficiency of housing: development and application of a four-step methodology
Published in Construction Management and Economics, 2018
As stated earlier, a number of researchers acknowledge that stakeholders’ influence is better utilized at the early stages of decision-making (Pulaski et al. 2006, Williams and Dair 2007, Robichaud and Anantatmula 2010, Mollaoglu-Korkmaz et al. 2011, Aapaoja et al. 2013, Berardi 2013). Paulson (1976) developed a curve showing that the influence of stakeholders on the cost of a construction project decreases as the project progresses. He argued that the capability of influence is 100% prior to the design stage and is reduced to reach only 25% by the beginning of the construction stage. Macleamy (2004) supported this argument through developing the Macleamy curve. He suggested that stakeholders should follow an integrated project delivery (IPD) and increase their informed decision-makings efforts at an early stage of the project. Based on Macleamy and Paulson curves, the time/energy efficiency influence curve (Figure 3) is developed as a scale to calculate the time factor, which affects the overall influence of stakeholders on energy efficiency depending on the time they became involved in the project. The curve shows a reduced decrease in influence with time than the curves addressing influence on cost, since changes in the costs and expenditures of projects is more rigid than implementing energy efficiency. For instance, decisions such as adding insulation could be made during the construction stage and could have a significant influence on energy efficiency (Friess et al. 2012, Fang et al. 2014). Similarly, user behaviour and utilization of energy efficient appliances during occupancy can significantly influence energy efficiency (Andersen et al. 2007, Pilkington et al. 2011). There is a margin for adjusting the time factor depending on the degree of flexibility of stakeholders to change in the latter stages of procurement. For instance, if the owner has restrictions against any changes being made after the design stage is completed, the time factor could be changed to zero to completely cancel the influence of stakeholders who join the project after the design stage. Therefore, the time factor scale (Figure 3) should be used as a guideline that could be adjusted for each project differently after discussing the degree of flexibility that “manager stakeholders” hold for changes throughout the different stages of construction.