Capital Project Solutions – April 2010 Integrated Project Delivery Team Selection Patrick Duke, SVP Throughout 2010, Capital Project Solutions will run a series of articles dedicated to Integrated Project Delivery (IPD). We will explore all issues related to IPD, from project identification to team selection to contract and incentive development. With three (3) IPD projects underway, we will share case studies and lessons learned throughout the series. Last month’s issue discussed how to determine if IPD is right for your project. This month, we will explore the team selection process and how it differs for IPD. If you should miss any of the articles or to learn more about other strategies to ensure your project’s success, visit KLMK Group at www.klmkgroup.com. Our experience with Integrated Project Delivery continues to provide us with valuable lessons that can be applied to any project. We constantly analyze our decisions and processes utilized on past projects, delivered via the traditional method, to determine whether an alternative approach could have yielded better outcomes. One such area is the selection and formation of project teams. Over the years, we have learned that a relational based team selection approach provides more value than a transactional approach, which is prevalent among the traditional delivery model(s). Transactional team selection is based on quantitative criteria such as the scope of the project, the team’s experience relative to the scope, and the fee. With a relational based approach, the focus is much more qualitative. Issues such as the chemistry of the team, the trust among team members, their collaborative ability and process, and the interest of the owner/team far outweigh the individual interests of each of the members. The following table highlights the differences between the two delivery methods: Project Delivery Methods Traditional Quantitative Fragmented Assembled on an “as needed” basis Strongly hierarchical Self interest/focus Distrust
Relational Qualitative Integrated Assembled early Collaborative Team/Owner focus Trust 1
Capital Project Solutions – April 2010 Because the very nature of IPD is collaborative, it is imperative to establish a selection process that allows you to witness the interaction between the team members in order to evaluate the chemistry among potential team members. Therefore, a relational based team selection approach is a natural fit. The easiest way to accomplish this is to conduct a series of “planned interactions” with select candidate teams to evaluate the integration among them. In an IPD project, selection becomes more of an art than a science as you evaluate each team member’s ability to be relational, collaborative and lean. These are not exactly quantitative elements, which is why this will most likely be different from any selection process in which the healthcare owner has been involved.
The Players Involved in IPD Prior to beginning any selection process, begin by identifying who will be selected. In IPD, the Core Team typically consists of the Owner, Architect and Contractor. However, each project is different and there may be times that Specialty Consultants should be included in the inner circle. By understanding the specific needs and goals of the project, you can develop a tailored approach that will provide the best results.
2
Capital Project Solutions – April 2010 The Team Selection Process The process for IPD team selection is broken down into four steps, culminating with the selection of the team.
Step 1: Determine the selection committee. The committee should consist of a mix of top organizational leaders and a variety of project stakeholders - project customers. Committee members should be prepared to invest quite a bit of time into the selection process as to not miss any interactions with interviewing Teams. Step 2: Develop the Team selection criteria. This is where IPD truly differentiates itself from the traditional delivery method. As stated above, IPD Team selection is something of an art. Technical competence and professional qualifications are assumed to be very high for any firm that is invited to participate. Developing criteria that allows teams to exhibit their ability to work together is very important. Step 3: Identify candidate firms. Develop a list of architects and construction managers with the skills and qualifications necessary to fulfill the scope of the project. It is also productive to add engineers or prime specialty consultants, such as medical equipment and technology planners. Local firms or firms that have been used in the past and have a relationship with the owner should be scrutinized with the same level of intensity as all others. This different approach may eliminate some of the firms that have previously worked at the facility. When the list is developed you should create a Request for Integrated Team (RFIT) that outlines the process and criteria for selection. 3
Capital Project Solutions – April 2010 Step 4: Issue the RFIT. Once the RFIT has been distributed, the following process should be implemented:
1. Conduct a pre-proposal Site Visit with all the firms on the list. This is the first and perhaps most important opportunity for the Selection Committee to evaluate the individual firms that may be involved with the project. It is worthwhile to spend a minimum of a half day with the firms being considered. In order to focus questions and conversations, the list of attendees should be divided by specialty – architect, contractor, engineer, etc. The individual groups should then be allowed to meet and engage in conversation as one another in a large group. All members of the Selection Committee should take part in this initial visit. The objective is for the Selection Committee to communicate exactly what they are looking for from each of the firms as well as the expectations for the dynamics of each team. This will also allow the Selection Committee to get to know all of the players better and observe how they interact with one another. Again, this is relational contracting with the core foundation based on trust. The Selection Committee should plan to meet immediately following the visit in order to discuss interactions with each firm 2. Request for self assembly of Teams based on cross relationships between firms listed in the RFIT. The primary firms should also include any specialty consultants necessary to deliver the requested services. Firms should be allowed to partner with companies not included in the initial RFIT list, but only after seeking the owner’s approval. By allowing firms to self assemble you will avoid conflicts and potential separation down the 4
Capital Project Solutions – April 2010 road. While not foolproof, partnerships based on past experiences and similar corporate cultures often provide the best outcomes. A time period of three weeks is advisable to allow teams to assemble. 3. Submittal of qualifications from each Team based on instructions in the RFIT. The entire Selection Committee should be involved in evaluating each firm’s Submittal of Qualifications. All evaluations should be based on previously developed selection criteria. In order to maintain a transparent process and one that can be audited, it is advisable to include the proposed evaluation tool in the RFIT. In the past, many complex weighted equations have been used to “grade” submissions. However, we recommend using no more than 10 criteria and weighing them equally. 4. Short list to 3-4 Teams to continue the process. Due to the detailed interactions that will take place during the final stages of selection, the short list should be limited to no more than four teams. Ideally, you should interview three teams. 5. Conduct half-day workshops with each of the short-listed Teams. Establish an overall goal for the deliverable expected from each Team, such as a proposed work plan for the project or option for design. Do not set a specific agenda. Instead, allow each team to develop their own plan in order to evaluate the group’s time management, organizational skills, and facilitation abilities. This session provides each Team with the opportunity to gather information and ask questions in order to complete its presentation. Again, it is important for the Selection Committee to meet after the workshops and evaluate their interactions with each Team and its individual members. They should then review the Submittal of Qualifications and compare the evaluations from each meeting. Concerns should be noted and discussed at this meeting also. If any Team does not appear to be a fit, they should be eliminated prior to the final presentation.
5
Capital Project Solutions – April 2010 6. Conduct final half-day presentations for each of the remaining Teams. Half-day workshops should be scheduled for the final presentations. As with all previous meetings, the entire Selection Committee should be present. Upon completion of the presentations, the Selection Committee should meet to evaluate the performance of each Team. Select the IPD Team. The Selection Committee should now review its selection criteria and meet one week after the final presentations. This allows time for each Committee member to fully analyze the interactions throughout the entire process. Since each Team visit was followed by a Committee assessment and recap, there should be sufficient documentation to thoroughly evaluate each group. Each Committee member should complete a final evaluation form for the different Teams and then cast a single vote for his or her choice. To keep it simple, the Team with the most votes wins. In the event of a tie, consideration should be given to the possibility of having an additional Team interaction. Relational based team selection requires a significant investment of time from both the Selection Committee and the candidate teams. Isn’t that how it should be though? This is one of the most important decisions an Owner and prospective firms will make on a project that will have lasting impact either in a negative or positive way. Spending time and spending money during this process will be a worthwhile investment if your approach is right. This is not to say that you can’t get a good team from a transactional based approach, we just happen to believe, based on our experience, your chances are better through a relational based approach.
To learn more about Integrated Project Delivery and relational based team selection, please visit our website and download our recently released white paper - Integrated Project Delivery: “The Value Proposition” An Owner’s Guide for Launching a Healthcare Capital Project via IPD. Or join the IPD Thought Leaders for Healthcare group on Linked In.
6