Partnering Magazine March/April 2016

strategic partnershipsHelping to Build a Culture of Collaboration

page 6Unwavering

Executive Commitment

INSIDE:page 16

Emotion in Negotiation

Issue 2March/April 2016

Building a culture of partnership,one project at a time.

World-Class Innovators . Landmark Bui ld ings. I nsp i r i ng Pe r fo rmance .

www.partneringinstitute.org March/April 2016 Partnering Magazine 3

CONTENTS

Cover photo by Darryl Jacques, Jacques and Associates

INTERNATIONAL PARTNERING INSTITUTEIPI is a non-profit 501(c) 3 charitable organization that is funded by our members and supporters who wish to change the culture of construction from combative to collaborative.

Phone: (925) 447-9100

BOARD OF ADVISORSLarry Anderson, Anderson PartneringPierre Bigras, PG&E Roddy Boggus, Parsons BrinckerhoffPat Crosby, The Crosby GroupPete Davos, DeSilva Gates ConstructionLarry Eisenberg, Ovus Partners 360Steve Francis, C.C. Myers, Inc.Rachel Falsetti, CaltransMichael Ghilotti, Ghilotti Bros, Inc.Richard Grabinski, Flatiron West, Inc.Randy Iwasaki, Contra Costa Trans. AuthorityJeanne Kuttel, CA Dept. of Water ResourcesJohn Martin, San Francisco International AirportPete Matheson, Granite Construction Geoff Neumayr, San Francisco International AirportJim Pappas, Hensel Phelps Construction Co.Zigmund Rubel, AditazzIvar Satero, San Francisco International AirportStuart Seiden, County of FresnoThomas Taylor, Webcor BuildersDavid Thorman, CA Div. of the State Architect, Ret.John Thorsson, NCC Construction Sverige ABLen Vetrone, Skanska USA Building

EXECUTIVE DIRECTORDana Paz

ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF MEMBER DEVELOPMENTJoe Hu

FOUNDER & CEOSue Dyer, MBA, MIPI, MDRF

EDITORIAL OFFICE: SUBSCRIPTIONS/INFORMATIONInternational Partnering Institute 291 McLeod StreetLivermore, CA 94559Phone: (925) 447-9100 Email: [email protected]

DESIGN/CREATIVEMichelle Vejby Email: [email protected]

COPYRIGHTPartnering Magazine is published by the International Partnering Institute, 291 McLeod Street, Livermore, CA 94550. Six bi-monthly issues are published annually. Contents copyright 2016 International Partnering Institute, all rights reserved. Subscription rates for non-members, $75 for six electronic issues. Hard copy issues are available only to IPI members. Additional member subscriptions are $75 each for six issues. Postmaster please send address changes to IPI, 291 McLeod Street, Livermore, CA 94550.

IN THIS ISSUE

4Executive Director’s ReportLonging for industry-wide support of a more collaborative culture in construction

10IPI ProfileGenentech embarks on the journey towards a partnering program

12Partnering ToolsIPI’s Owner’s Guide: a tool to help your project teams know what to expect from facilitation

FeaturesMarch/April 2016 Strategic Partnerships

Facilitator’s CornerUnwavering Executive

Committment

6

Research RoundupDon’t let your emotions get

in the way of a successful

negotiation

16

Strategic PartnershipsHow a strategic partnership

has helped build a culture of

collaboration at Connecticut College

8

Building a culture of partnership,one project at a time.

World-Class Innovators . Landmark Bui ld ings. I nsp i r i ng Pe r fo rmance .

4 Partnering Magazine March/April 2016 www.partneringinstitute.org

While interviewing for our feature for this issue,

I entered into a great conversation with one of

the founders of IPI, Stephen George, regarding

the challenge of getting support industry-wide for

more collaboration in the field of construction. This is a

conversation that I’ve found myself in often, and it’s always

around the same issue: if collaboration leads to a better work

environment, facilities that are more tailored to end-users,

lower costs for better outcomes, repeat business opportunities

for industry, and significantly lower claims and litigation;

then why isn’t everybody doing it? At IPI, I’m often met with

frustration on the part of our members who “get it,” regarding

the difficulty in getting others to see the light. Which led me to

wonder, well, how many people are getting it? And for those

that aren’t, what makes it so hard for them to come around?

The Construction Industry Council in the UK has found

that the nature of project teams (fragmented groups brought

together for short periods), is a big part of why improved

business models take so long to catch on in the construction

industry. It’s a classic catch-22: it takes us longer to learn how

to be collaborative because we are so fragmented.

Despite this, the movement toward collaborative

construction has gained momentum and popularity since

the 1980’s. Today, there are more collaborative tools than

ever before (from hands-on tools, like pull-planning, to

software tools, like BIM), more collaborative delivery

systems (Integrated Project Delivery, design-build), and more

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S

REPORT

Dana Paz, IPI Executive Director

collaborative processes (LEAN, Collaborative Partnering). And

importantly, more of the industry is using them. ENR conducted

a study in 2011 on the number of Construction Industry

Institute (CII) member projects implementing CII Best Practices

(including Collaborative Partnering). The study showed that

16% of owners and 11% of contractors were implementing

Partnering; and 28% of owners and 20% of contractors were

engaging in team-building activities.

Since 2010, as IPI has grown, so has Collaborative Partnering.

Our annual IPI Partnered Project of the Year Awards are a great

indicator for this momentum—the number of applications we

receive has grown by 400% since the Program was founded.

Technology also signals a trend toward collaboration.

Emerging software works best with construction teams that

work together as an integrated and collaborative team. When

a project team analyzes the BIM model for clash detection,

they are sitting shoulder to shoulder and identifying problems

and methods for resolving them—rather than focused on who

is to blame for the clash. This promising behavior points to

a better future, where in order for our industry to remain

competitive and relevant, we will have to work together in

more collaborative ways.

We are making progress. It is slower than most of us would

like, but we are steadily working towards the tipping point. And

I am looking forward to supporting the movement as we do.

Toward the Tipping Point

usa.skanska.com

Collaboration. Innovation. Sustainability.Partnering to build what matters for our customers and communities.

George Bush Intercontinental Airport, Terminal B South Side Replacement, Houston TX

Tampa International Airport, Main Terminal and Airport Concession Redevelopment Program, Tampa, FL

James B. Hunt Library, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC

Gold Line Bridge, Arcadia, CA


We are in construction. By its nature, our profession delivers difficult situations

and requires near constant problem-solving. These stressful times bring out

the best and worst in us as individuals, and push teams to either come together

or draw lines in the sand. Highly-functioning teams pull together, trust each

other and collaboratively seek fair solutions; they thrive on making the impossible happen

and respect each other in the process.

The most successful project teams and strategic partnerships also have unwavering

executive commitment—to the team, to the objective and to a culture of collaboration and

fairness. Unwavering executive commitment has five key elements:

1. Clear vision and culture expectations

2. Consistent engagement

3. Integrity monitoring

4. Team empowerment

5. Acknowledgements and celebrations

FACILITATOR’S CORNER

Empowerment

requires trusting

your teams,

and perhaps

supporting

them when

their solution

looks different

than the one

you might have

developed.

UnwaveringExecutiveCommitmentWhat teams need from executives forultimate success



1. Clear vision and culture expectations.Teams take their queues from their managers. One measure

of unwavering executive commitment is to establish (by

agreement and by example) the environment for project

implementation. Reach beyond the usual partnering charter

goals of safety, cost, schedule, quality and environment

commitments, and include elements that support the team

relationships and values. For example, one of my teams

included “upholding the values of integrity, valuing associates,

business success, quality, service, fun and fairness.” Another

team developed a set of “partnering commitments” focused on

creating an atmosphere of trust and collaboration that contains

statements such as “we will first ask ‘what is the best technical

solution for the project’ and then seek a fair distribution of

responsibility.” These written objectives establish a clear vision

for who the team will be, how the team will react to difficult

situations and the importance of the relationships.

2. Consistent engagement.To fulfill the crucial leadership role, the executive team must

be present. IPI Best Practices include establishing an executive

team that steers the project from the 40,000-foot level. At a

minimum, members of the executive team include the off-site

senior managers from the owner, contractor and designer

teams, plus an on-site representative for each. On projects

where it is working best, the executive team meets monthly,

in person, for at least two hours. After a few months, the

executives typically get into a comfortable mode where they

acknowledge any successes and milestones achieved, followed

by an honest discussion about the problems and what they

need to do (as one executive team) to support the project.

The significant trust that is established, the frequency of the

meetings and the safety of the neutral facilitator creates an

environment for concerns to be raised early and often resolved

without significant impact to project momentum.

3. Integrity monitoring.Because trust is so critical to maintaining functional

relationships, monitoring the success or failure of the team

for effective, full and timely implementation of commitments

is also an executive responsibility. To supplement the

typical management tools of observation, reports and team

discussions, our highly-functioning teams use partnering

scorecards to solicit feedback. The scorecards serve as an early

warning system for changes in mood and momentum in the

field, highlight areas for improvement and guide executives

in their roles of clearing obstacles and providing team

recognition.

4. Team empowerment.Time is money in construction, so we strive to make good,

durable decisions as quickly as possible. Typically, field teams

have the best information and understanding to solve the

technical issues. Highly successful teams empower the field

team to make decisions. Empowerment requires trusting your

teams, and perhaps supporting them when their solution looks

different than the one you might have developed. (We can peel

an orange with our fingers or with a knife, and as long as we

get to the fruit inside, does it really matter?) Empowerment

also means staying close enough to provide timely guidance

and advice, providing any criticism in private and making it

safe for teams to bump issues up the resolution ladder when

they’ve exhausted their options or reached their time limit.

5. Acknowledgement and celebrations.People and teams thrive on appreciation and

acknowledgement. One of my “ah-ha” moments occurred

when I read a sticky note pasted on the wall of my worker’s

office that said “Great job! Thank you;” the note ended with

my initials. What a humbling experience to realize that I had

been so stingy with my compliments and appreciation that it

became wall art. Find ways to recognize your team and their

accomplishments—big ways and little ways, public and private.

For example, write a sincere thank you note that briefly details

what you appreciate about a specific approach, such as, “Thank

you for handling the situation with grace; your approach

demonstrates the qualities of integrity and respect that we

value in this company.” Or, establish an innovation award to

publically recognize new ideas and contributions.

The bottom line: Unwavering executive commitment—

as demonstrated in the five key areas—will contribute

significantly to successful teams and successful outcomes.

Cinda Bond, Partnering Facilitator, OrgMetrics

Cinda Bond is an IPI Senior Certified Partnering

Facilitator and has worked in the construction

industry for over 30 years. She specializes in

facilitating large, complex projects. You can

contact Cinda at [email protected] or

directly at (925) 640-9007.

UnwaveringExecutiveCommitmentWhat teams need from executives forultimate success

Reach beyond the usual partnering charter goals for safety, cost, schedule, quality and

environment commitments, and include elements that support the team relationships and values.


STRATEGY

STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS

There’s been a lot of buzz about strategic partnerships and alliances in both the construction industry and business in general. That’s because we’ve learned that we can do better by aligning ourselves with other organizations to maximize our reach and impact. In construction, organizations who consistently work together to deliver construction projects may choose to form a strategic partnership to be more efficient and establish a better working relationship.

In the early 1990s, Connecticut College had a struggling construction program, and many of the projects finished late and over budget. Tired of struggling and wasting time with lawyer-driven negotiations, the College embraced a Partnering program in 1995. Then, as part of their $53 million Asset Reinvestment Program in 2005, they launched a strategic partnership with their construction management firm, KBE Building Corporation, and various design firms, specialty contractors and vendors. This approach made a lot of sense, given that each year the private college faces the same challenge: to deliver an average of $2-6 million of construction in the 10 week period when its 2,000 students are not on campus.

Stephen George, who has been Manager of Planning, Design and Construction at Connecticut College since before the shift, recalls the changes in the very nature of construction over time. “It used to be a handshake; that was the contract. Then it went to competitive, low bids, where contractors have to bid low to get the job, and then hope to make back their profit through change orders. So the whole project becomes focused on contentious negotiation. It’s a very damaging way to do business.”

In addition to being damaging and unproductive, adversarial

Long-Term Success at Connecticut College: How a strategic partnership has helped build a culture of collaborationTRUST IS ESSENTIAL TO A HIGH-FUNCTIONING

TEAM. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A TEAM AND

A GROUP OF PEOPLE WORKING TOGETHER, IS

TRUST. IT IS BECAUSE OF THE TRUST FACTOR THAT

STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS CAN BE SO BENEFICIAL

IN OUR INDUSTRY—CONSTRUCTION TEAMS ARE

INCREASINGLY FRAGMENTED, AND TEAMS ARE

BROUGHT TOGETHER FOR BRIEF AND INTENSE

PROJECT LIFESPANS. A STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP

HOWEVER, IS MORE LIKE A LONG-TERM

RELATIONSHIP: OVER TIME AND OVER SEVERAL

PROJECTS, YOU CAN FOSTER A LEVEL OF TRUST,

COMMUNICATION AND EMPOWERMENT THAT IS

SIMPLY NOT POSSIBLE TO DEVELOP IN A SINGLE

PROJECT. THIS IS WHAT CONNECTICUT COLLEGE

HAS DISCOVERED OVER A STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP

OF MORE THAN 10 YEARS WITH KBE BUILDING

CORPORATION.


STRATEGYnegotiation was not in keeping with the general philosophy of the College, which prides itself on values of excellence, equity and innovation. Establishing a Partnering Program allowed them to remain true to these values in a way that a low-bid policy did not allow. Since 2005, the strategic partnership between Connecticut College and KBE has delivered more than 250 projects without any claims, and they have all come in on-time and on-budget. That is an incredible success story! Particularly when you consider that the majority of construction programs on University campuses across the U.S. garner media attention because of litigation, severed contracts and delayed projects.

“We’re on a bit of an island here,” says Stephen. “And not everyone gets it. During the financial crisis of 2008, our board of trustees held our program under a lot of scrutiny. But ultimately, as long as we continue to get results, everyone is satisfied with the outcomes. There are not many who can argue with the basic premise of Partnering, which is to come together and resolve issues as a team rather than in court.”

Mike Guidera, a Project Manager at KBE who has been involved in the partnership with Connecticut College since 2005, shared the key benefits that KBE has found through Partnering. “Our Partnering efforts have enabled us to have a really high level of trust with our trade contractors, which leads to a streamlined issue resolution process when unforeseen conditions come up on a project. We can resolve issues at cost, which we couldn’t do if that high trust wasn’t there.”

That said, a successful strategic partnership is not effortless. The partners

at Connecticut College have been diligent in their follow up, and their relationship has continued to be healthy and productive for more than ten years.

GETTING THE MOST OUT OF YOUR STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS

“We’ve been Partnering for so long, we’ve established a friendship with KBE,” says Stephen. “So it’s easy to talk things out and resolve issues.” That said, the best way to maintain that friendship is to follow up. This means applying structured Collaborative Partnering, with executive oversight, co-created goals, periodic Partnering sessions, surveys to monitor progress, and an issue resolution process.

Each year, the members of the strategic partnership between Connecticut College and KBE conduct a round of pre-qualifications so that key trades and subcontractors who are going to work at Connecticut College understand their Partnering program.

“One of the lessons we’ve learned is

that it’s important to ensure that we partner with sub-contractors who share our core values; so it’s most effective to select self-performing contractors,” says Mike. “If we have too many second-tier contractors, they don’t necessarily share the same values. If we do have second-tier contractors, we make sure to invite them to our Partnering workshops. We’ve also learned that we get the most success if we engage sub-contractor leadership in Partnering.”

Stephen agreed that there are some practices that need to be there to ensure success. “We have a council made up of key partners. The council meets each month to address issues and resolve questions. At the beginning of each construction season, we establish our Charter (which includes our mission and goals) and our issue resolution process. This is the follow-up that we do to keep things on track.”

“We get together and ask, ‘What will make this a successful project?’” Mike added. “Everybody is there to outline the goals: the owner, trade contractors, design team, end users, and the foreman. So this charter becomes our Mission statement, and everyone on the project is part of creating it.”

Additionally, Stephen shared some best practices to make sure that Partnering stays productive:

______________________________

2015 IPI Award Winning Team for the Connecticut College Boiler Plant. Pictured, left to right: Adam Moore, Senior Project Manager at KBE; Bob Norton, Superintendent at KBE; Mike Kolakowski, President and CEO of KBE; Jim Norton, Director of Facilities Management of Connecticut College; Stephen George, Manager of Planning Design & Construction of Con-necticut College; Toni Phillips, Senior Project Engineer of KBE Photo Courtesy of KBE Building Corp/Paul Burk Photography.

There are not many who can argue with the basic

premise of Partnering, which is to come together

and resolve issues as a team rather than in court.” – Stephen George, Manager of Planning, Design and

Construction at Connecticut College


STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS

1. Establish meeting tenets (ground rules) – Meetings can lose control pretty easily, so the College posts meeting tenets that define how a meeting is going to function.

2. Take the temperature – The team is surveyed to gauge how useful a meeting was. Making sure the meeting is useful means more people will attend consistently.

3. Empower people to speak up – No shooting the messenger. If people don’t speak up there’s no way to know what’s really going on.

“Partnering has made me very successful,” says Stephen. “We have always been on time and on budget since we started our Partnering program. That doesn’t mean we don’t have issues. We’ve had some close calls. But when we’ve had big issues, Partnering is what has saved us.”

One such close call came when the team was creating the college Science Center within the walls of the oldest building on campus in 2013. Keeping water out of the 100-year-old stone and slate building was a constant problem. About three months prior to opening the building, a major storm revealed that water was coming in through the roof, walls and around the windows. Three major specialty contractors as well as the designer and envelope consultant participated in a multiple-session issue resolution process, where the team was able to resolve the issue with no lost time and still coming in under budget and ahead of schedule.

In addition to excellent outcomes on their projects, Connecticut College Planning, Design and Construction and their Partners KBE

2015 IPI Award Winners: The Connecticut College Boiler Plant Project Team

Over the course of the past year, Genentech, a member of the Roche Group, has been in the process of revamping its capital projects program, researching and benchmarking industry best practices to develop a capital program that routinely delivers predictable quality projects. In so doing, they gravitated toward Partnering, based on what they learned about what it can achieve. Because many of the vendors who deliver their capital projects are long-term, Genentech sought to optimize their relationship with their vendors in order to improve their capital program outcomes and efficiency. In the course of their research, Genentech joined IPI, and has actively sought and used IPI tools and resources including the IPI Sample Specification to improve their capital program and partnerships. Hattie Chen, Procurement Manager for Global Engineering

Genentech, A Member of the Roche Group, Embarks on the Journey Toward a Partnering Program

have won 20 major awards, including three IPI Partnered Project of the Year Awards (2010, 2013 and 2015), two IPI Industry Awards (2008 and 2010), and the Marvin M. Black Partnering Excellence Award.

For Stephen, the next step is spreading the word. “I want to take Partnering beyond Connecticut College. I’ve been doing this a long time, and I know it works, so I want other schools to use it. And I think we’re at a point where the construction industry nation-wide really needs to do better.”

The desire to share their success and experience led Stephen and Mike Kolakowski, the President and CEO of KBE, to support IPI as founding Board of Advisor members, where they have been instrumental in creating tools and resources for the benefit of the industry.

Procurement, described their efforts this way, “We have been researching different practices, and as we develop our program, we are assessing and fine-tuning it, to continually make it better. That’s why we’re calling it a journey.”

IPI

PRO

FILE

:

The Genentech GEPA/PTAA Partnering Core Team, (from left to right) Steve Girkout, Doug DeVeny, Mark Wheeler, Hattie Chen, Charlie Bisbee, Alisha Bachan, Britt Wolf, and Neil Bickel


Best Partnering PracticesO Garnering internal endorsement and alignment

as the first step toward establishing a collaborative culture

O Seeking guidance and mentorship from those with experience in establishing a Partnering program

O Seeing the shift toward a collaborative culture as a journey, that requires frequent assessment and reflection to make sure things are tracking.

Initially, Genentech used a “preferred vendor” system, with different pools of vendors per category. They have four categories: Architecture and Design, Commission and Qualification, Project Service and Construction. Each category followed its own bidding and procurement system.

Beginning in 2015, Genentech began taking steps toward the IPI Best Practice of ensuring Strategic Internal Alignment, the first step in creating a culture of partnership. They’ve done this by developing a single governance model to oversee all four categories of the capital program. The governance model is a three-layered structure: the top (executive) level consists of the executive leaders from the capital project department, the middle level (program) is comprised of core team members with representatives from each of the four categories, and the foundational level is comprised of project site teams.

IPI connected Genentech with NCC Construction in Sweden, winners of the IPI 2014 Strategic Alliance Achievement Award. One key lesson learned that NCC shared with Genentech: make sure to assign a sponsor (champion) to each category and/or area, and that each sponsor knows that the partnership is a high-priority.

Competing priorities can often undermine the success of an alliance partnership.

Genentech has also developed a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Matrix to track progress across all of the categories in their program, and have included collaborative indicators within it.

As Genentech continues to develop its Partnering program, internal alignment should progress to external alignment, followed by project specific partnering - resulting in a culture in which projects routinely achieve optimized outcomes.

( 9 2 5 ) 8 2 9 - 9 2 2 0

11555 Dublin Boulevard, Dublin, California 94568-2909 925-829-9220

w w w . d e s i l v a g a t e s . c o m

Contractors License No. 704195A

B U I L D I N G C A L I F O R N I A F O R S E V E N T Y- F I V E Y E A R S

P A V I N G • R O A D / H I G H W A Y •G R A D I N G • D E M O L I T I O N / E X C A V A T I N G

INTERNATIONAL PARTNERING INSTITUTE JOHN L. MARTIN 2015 PARTNERED PROJECT OF THE YEAR - DIAMOND LEVEL

SFO RUNWAYS 1-19S RSA IMPROVEMENTS

WINNER OF THE 2014 CALTRANS EXCELLENCE IN PARTNERING AWARD“BEST IN CLASS” FOR PROJECTS GREATER THAN $50 MILLION

Highway 65 Lincoln Bypass Project


Over the past thirty years of

partnering, construction

teams have learned that

hiring a professional

neutral partnering facilitator is the

best way to cultivate a culture of

collaboration on projects, regardless

of the delivery method. However,

although the profession of Facilitation

and the structure of Partnering have

advanced a great deal since 1987, only a

small number of owners have developed

criteria for what their construction

teams should expect from partnering

facilitation on their projects.

IPI developed The IPI Owner’s Guide:

Facilitator Standards with the support

of the IPI Vertical, Horizontal, and

Aviation Committees and the IPI

Facilitator PEG. The Guide establishes

baseline standards of practice for

Professional Neutral Partnering

PARTNERING TOOLS

Facilitators (Facilitators) as they work

with construction project teams and

organizations, worldwide. It defines

the role of the Facilitator; discusses

how to select the right Facilitator

for your project; highlights the IPI

Facilitator Certification Program;

recommends contract mechanisms

for hiring a Facilitator; and outlines

the Collaborative Partnering Model

and Advanced Partnering Techniques.

There is also an Appendix with some

helpful tools including IPI Facilitator

Evaluation forms and the IPI Matrices.

THE IPI OWNER’S GUIDE: FACILITATOR STANDARDSThe five-part guide serves two

objectives: First, it establishes

guidelines for Owner agencies who

are piloting a partnering program on

how to best select and retain qualified

professional partnering facilitators.

IPI Owner’s Guide:Facilitator Standards

A tool to help your project teams know what to expect from facilitation

Second, it helps outline required and

recommended best practices in the field

of professional construction partnering

facilitation that have been developed by

expert Facilitators. This article will cover

the highlights.

Part 1: The Collaborative Partnering ModelIn this section, we define the structured

Collaborative Partnering Model, which

is a structured process that works to

develop a culture of partnership between

the organizations and teams that must

work together to successfully deliver

construction projects. The process works

with all contract delivery methods

(including design-bid-build, design-

build, Construction Manager at Risk and

Integrated Project Delivery).

Part One also defines specific elements

of the process, such as the Kick-off


Partnering Workshop, where a project team develops a

Charter. The Charter includes a set of goals for the successful

outcomes of the project, a partnering follow-up plan, a dispute

resolution process, and a signature page verifying commitment

to the jointly developed charter.

In this section we also share several of the demonstrated team

and economic benefits of partnering.

Part 2: Role of the Professional Neutral Partnering FacilitatorSection Two outlines the role of the Facilitator and details

the Professional Partnering Code of Ethics. The role of the

Facilitator is to own the Collaborative Partnering process

and to create an environment that allows project teams to

communicate more effectively and improve the working

relationship—ultimately leading to improved project outcomes.

It is essential that the Facilitator is considered neutral by the

team, understands construction, balances the power dynamics

in the room, is facilitative (guides the team so they can resolve

their own issues), and is ethical (maintains confidentiality, can

be a trusted advisor, etc.).

The IPI Code of Ethics defines five key principals to which

Facilitators should adhere to: Collaboration, Honesty,

Neutrality, Professionalism, and Stewardship. It is critical

that the Facilitator guiding your team’s partnering effort

demonstrates the values of partnering as they work with your

team. The Facilitator should be equipped to handle project

issues and crises as they arise and enable the team to focus on

resolving construction issues rather than get entrenched in

positions as issues fester.

As one of North America’s largest transportation and infrastructure contractors, our commitment to building the best is demonstrated in the projects we build and the partnerships we develop. Our success is dependent upon our relationships with owners, partners, designers, subcontractors and community members. Flatiron works closely with our partners to develop innovative solutions that benefi t everyone, and we’re proud of what we’ve created together. The more than 20 partnering awards Flatiron has won in the past decade serve as recognition of these relationships and

the resulting successful projects.

To learn more about Flatiron’s innovation in partnering visit

www.fl atironcorp.com

Interstate 880/State Route 92 Interchange Reconstruction

Hayward, CA

2012 IPI Partnered Project of the Year, Diamond Level

Continued on next page


Part 3: Selecting the Right FacilitatorWith so much at stake on a construction project, it is essential

to select the facilitator with the right experience for the context

of the project. Typically, the Facilitator will be jointly selected

by the Owner’s Project Manager (or Resident Engineer) by the

Contractor’s Project Manager. This section covers the criteria

that your team should use when identifying a Facilitator,

including: experience in design and construction, Partnering

facilitation experience, and their approach to facilitation. Also,

before you consider price, take a moment to recognize the

investment involved in a single partnering event. Typically, the

facilitator fee is dwarfed by the cost of the salaries involved

in holding the meeting, so selecting the low-cost firm may not

provide the most value to your team.

Part 3 also covers the IPI Partnering Facilitator Certification.

This is a three-tiered Certification focused on professional

experience (Certified (IPI) 25 sessions; Senior Certified (SIPI)

100 sessions; Master Level Certified (MIPI) 250 sessions. When

you pilot a Partnering Project or are setting up Partnering to

improve alignment within your organization, retain a high

quality professional consultant who understands construction

and has proven themselves in the marketplace. IPI Member

Facilitators who hold a Certification have done just that. Our

panel of professional facilitators have signed the Code of Ethics,

completed an application, provided letters of reference and have

shared Partnering Charters with IPI, demonstrating mastery of

the process. Visit (http://partneringinstitute.org/membership/

find-a-facilitator/) or contact us for more information.

Part 4: Hiring a Professional Neutral Partnering FacilitatorIPI is frequently asked how to best retain a Facilitator. In our

experience, the Contract Change Order is the easiest way to

handle hiring a Facilitator, because there is no learning curve

for the project team to do so and the cost of professional

facilitation is minimal—often .01% of the overall contract

budget. Other common methods for engaging a Facilitator

include a project allowance, developing a pre-approved list, or

requesting a Request for Qualification or Request for Proposal.

We have found that the simple solution (i.e. the contract

change order or an allowance) is usually the best, because it

ensures that the amount of paperwork required to contract the

facilitator is proportional to the services rendered and the cost.

Part 5: Advanced Partnering TechniquesThe last section of the guide discusses several advanced

techniques including Facilitated Dispute Resolution, partnering

within Alternative Delivery Methods and Partnering

troubleshooting. It also provides basic guidance like pre-

partnering and other important tools for Facilitators and the

owners, architects and contractors who work with them to

deliver successfully partnered Projects.

Included in the guide are hands-on tools, such as sample

Facilitator Evaluations, the IPI Matrices for Vertical, Horizontal,

and Aviation Construction and other resources. All in all,

this guide is a complete and well-rounded tool to take your

Partnering program to the next level!

IPI’s new Owners’ Guide: Facilitator Standards is now available.

Visit the IPI Store or email [email protected] to get

your copy.

PARTNERING TOOLS

Van Ness and Geary Campus, San Francisco, California

By creating opportunities for innovation and collaboration, we pursue continuous improvements to make each project our best one yet.

INTEGRATED PROJECT DELIVERY

southlandind.com

COLLABORATE

+1.800.613.6240For more information, visit southlandind.com/IPD

Over the past 30 years, construction teams have learned

that hiring a professional neutral partnering facilitator

is the best way to cultivate a culture of collaboration on

projects, regardless of the delivery method.


Q&D’s experienced aviation team has the know-how, collaborative approach and proven preconstruction processes to integrate your project’s construction into your facility or operation without negatively impacting your day-to-day.

Q&D’s capabilities include:

qdconstruction.com(775) 786-2677Member, IPIDuane BorehamVP Aviation Division

WITH Q&D ON YOUR TEAM, YOU CAN KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE SKIES.

Large Projects• Terminal Revisions• Terminal Buildings• Airport Expansions• Security Upgrades• Baggage Handling

Systems

Support Facilities• Ground-up Construction• Equipment Storage

Buildings• FBO’s• Service Buildings• Maintenance Buildings• Hangars• Runways / Barriers

• Utilities

Improvements• Equipment Upgrades and

Relocations• Tenant Improvements• Gate Relocations• Security Revisions• Concession Build-Outs• Finish Upgrades• Support Spaces• Full Program Support• Branding Updates

Project Delivery• CM-at-Risk• Design-Build• Full Preconstruction

Services• Partnering

qdc_ipi-2016b.indd 1 12/21/2015 10:48:49 AM


Think of the last time you negotiated a potential

claim. Was it a contentious negotiation? Did you

get frustrated, angry, or nervous? Was it cordial

and professional?

Alison Wood Brooks, an Assistant Professor at Harvard Business

School, likes to run an exercise with her classes. She splits the

students into pairs and provides them a scenario where they

will perform a negotiation. In the scenario, the parties had

signed a detailed contract earlier in the year, but are at odds

over several of the elements including sales volumes, pricing,

reliability, and performance of the specs—Sound familiar?

She then puts a wrinkle in the negotiation. For certain teams,

one person is instructed to act angry at the other party for 10

minutes. They are told to yell and accuse the other person of

lying, cheating, stealing, etc. Then they conduct the negotiation.

What do you suppose the anger and accusations did to the

negotiation? Most of them fall apart and end at an impasse,

unable to reach an agreement. Anger acts like a bomb being

dropped on the negotiation and has a profound effect on the

outcome.

Historically, negotiation scholars have focused on strategy,

tactics and methods for maximizing the results for individual

parties to the negotiation. Early negotiation research has tended

to focus on transactional negotiation where the relationships

are short term (i.e. purchasing a car, renting an event space,

etc.). More recently, researchers have focused on specific

emotions and how they impact negotiation. Anger, sadness,

disappointment, anxiety, envy, regret—all of them impact

performance in negotiation, particularly when the parties are

involved in longer-term relationships. The emotional state of

your field team and managers will have a profound impact on

your team’s outcomes in the field.

Emotion In Negotiation

To maximize your outcomes, focus on these key emotional

states:

Anxiety Anxiety is defined as the “state of distress in reaction to

threatening, novel stimuli.” When we experience new stimuli

we tend to have either a fight response (to engage, which is

more common in anger), or a flight response (to flee—more

common in anxious responses). Anxiety hurts your outcomes

more than any other emotional state, and novice negotiators

often struggle with it!

How much does anxiety affect negotiation? In a 2011 study,

negotiators who listened to three-minute clips of the theme

from the movie Psycho (which raises heart rate and anxiety),

performed 12% worse than those who listened to no music.

RESEARCH ROUNDUP

Overcoming Anxiety:Try to eliminate feelings of anxiety when you are

negotiating. How do you do this? Train, rehearse, and

sharpen your negotiation skills. We are typically most

anxious about new stimuli—so if you are nervous about a

negotiation, practice will make you less nervous. To apply

this, train your PM’s in non-adversarial negotiation and let

them rep it out. Your outcomes will be greatly enhanced.


For a real world example, just tune in to the show Shark

Tank. In the show, entrepreneurs are placed in a high-stakes

room with professional negotiators (sharks). During the

show, anxiety producing music is pumped into the room and

the sharks work together to throw them off balance. The

contestants who can manage the anxiety, often get the best

results.

Anger Anger is typically thought of as a negative emotion that

is usually directed towards someone else. Keith Allred, a

former Harvard Kennedy School of Government researcher

demonstrated that anger often harms the process of

negotiation by “escalating conflict, biasing perceptions and

making impasses more likely. It also reduces joint gains,

decreases cooperation, intensifies competitive behavior and

increases the rate at which offers are rejected.”

Despite this, many people see advantages to feeling or

appearing angry (and researchers have found that people

think that demonstrating anger will help). According to Gerber

van Kleef at the University of Amsterdam, in a one-time,

transactional negotiation (buying a car for example), an angry

negotiator can occasionally get a better deal. In construction,

however, we tend to have longer-term relationships. Over time,

anger tends to damage relationships and erode trust, which

ultimately leads to worse outcomes.

Disappointment and Regret Disappointment is similar to anger in that it is a negative

emotion. However, disappointment and regret are more

frequently expressed at the end of a negotiation. Each of these

emotions are typically brought up when one of the party

in the negotiation feels wronged. The benefit of expressing

disappointment is that while anger often leads to defensiveness

or increases odds of impasse, disappointment leaves the door

open to continue working toward resolution. One typical cause

of disappointment is when a negotiation occurs too fast—

leaving participants feeling dissatisfied.

Regret is slightly different, due in large part to timing. Regret

is sadness relating to an outcome or the ultimate outcome of

the negotiation and involves looking a little further upstream.

According to the author, research demonstrates that people

regret actions they DID NOT take. Errors of omission are often

a much larger problem than errors of commission.

Overcoming Anger:Develop a strategy for your negotiation and recognize

whether this is a long-term, relationship-based

negotiation or a short-term win-lose scenario. Anger

can provide small, short term benefits in certain types

of negotiations, but leads to more frequent impasses

and reduces trust and positive feelings in the team.

Over the course of a project, team members have many

opportunities to negotiate, and finding win-win solutions

is difficult when one party is angry.

Disappointment and Regret:Disappointment and Regret tend to show up later in

negotiations. Expressing disappointment is a way to

inform the other party that you are dissatisfied with how

the negotiation has taken place and provides them the

opportunity to adjust their tactics or approach without

expressing outright anger.

Regret often crops up at the end of a negotiation and

comes from the path not taken. In order to prevent regret,

negotiators should ask LOTS of questions, and be creative;

seeing the negotiation as an exploration and creative

exercise.


RESEARCH ROUNDUP

Happiness and Excitement Although research into happiness and excitement in

negotiation is very limited, it is important to maintain

composure when you are completing the negotiation.

Researchers have learned that expressing too much excitement

may make your counterpart feel like they have been taken

advantage of, and lead them to rescinding on the deal. It can

also lead to overlooking quality. The author cites the example

of the Challenger rocket, which NASA scientists knew had

faulty O rings, but excitement over the space mission caused

them to push on ahead, leading ultimately to an explosion and

seven fatalities.

So the next time you and your team are starting a negotiation,

check in with your emotional state. If you feel anxiety when

you are negotiating, take additional time to plan your strategy

and anticipate what your counterpart’s likely tactics will be.

When it feels familiar, your anxiety will lessen. If you are

feeling angry, consider substituting yourself for someone who

is less emotionally invested. In construction, Issue Resolution

Ladders were invented specifically so people who are less

invested in the specific issue can assist with its resolution.

If you are getting to the end of a negotiation and are feeling

disappointment or regret, slow the process down...you do not

have to sign any deal until you are ready. Often times, parties

who feel that they left something on the table will rescind on

a deal. And finally, when you do get your deal—be happy...

but don’t be too happy. Over-celebration may lead to the deal

falling through or to one party feeling like they are being taken

advantage of. Best of luck!

_____________________________

Source: Alison Wood Brooks, “Emotion and the Art of

Negotiation...How to use your feelings to your advantage,”

Harvard Business Review, December 2015, pp. 57-64.

Happiness and Excitement:When you are finishing your deal, you can be excited

or happy, but be considerate of your counterpart. If you

celebrate too much, your counterpart may take offense

and rescind on the deal entirely.

What separates master negotiators from everyone else is

their ability to get outstanding terms for themselves while

having their counterpart also be excited (even if they do

not get an optimum outcome).

ENVISIONTHE FUTUREAirports face numerous challenges today, however, they represent endless opportunities.

WSP | Parsons Brinckerho� brings years of expertise and a full range of services enabling airport owners to envision the future … and create it.

Partner with us to advance the future of aviation.

For career opportunities visitwsp-pb.com/usa

Making SFO’sPartnering Program FlyFor almost two decades OrgMetrics has been providing Partnering Services for San Francisco International Airport’srenowned Partnering Program

Partnering Program Development/Facilitation • Project Partnering Facilitation • Strategic Partnering Facilitation • Facilitated Dispute Resolution • Project Scorecards

www.orgmet.com | (925) 449-8300

Documents

Partnering Magazine March/April 2016