Partnering Magazine MayJune 2016

partnering researchWhat Emerging International Research Tells Us about Trends in the Construction Industry

page 14Design-Build

Teams Benefit from Partnering

INSIDE:page 16

Collaborative Partnering and the

Perfect Team

Issue 3May/June 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 May/June 2016 Partnering Magazine 3

CONTENTS

Cover photo: “First Train to Arrive Under the New Canopy” by Ryan Dravitz Photography –Denver Union Station, IPI 2015 Diamond LevelAward Winner (Transportation Mega Projects: $250M+), Denver Union Station Project Authority,Regional Transportation District, City and Countyof Denver

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

DIRECTOR OF MEMBER DEVELOPMENTJessica Obee

MEMBER SERVICES COORDINATORLisa Mayfield

OPERATIONS COORDINATORCandice Evenson

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 ReportResearch and development is critical to our own innovation.

6Committee SpotlightIPI’s Research Working Group looks at new findings in collaboration

FeaturesMay/June 2016 IPI Research

Facilitator’s CornerHow Design-Build Teams

Benefit from Partnering

14

Research RoundupThe Perfect Team and the

five norms that successful

teams share

16

International ResearchThe International Adoption of

Partnering: How Emerging Research

In Germany, Nigeria and Iran Tell Us

About Trends In The Construction

Industry.

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 May/June 2016 www.partneringinstitute.org

Innovative teams and organizations have a longer

lifespan than stagnant ones and are also more fruitful. In

the movement toward a more collaborative construction

culture innovation plays a critical role, in that it is both the

ideal starting point and the desired endgame of the players.

Innovation begets innovation. Organizations that learn

from their challenges and successes and pioneer new ways to

get better results are innovators, and research has shown us

that they are more likely to embrace Collaborative Partnering,

or to even pilot a project. Partnering itself is conducive to

innovation; it fosters an environment of trust and open

communication, which in turn generates discussions built on

the collective wisdom in the room, so the team can find new

ways to think around corners and resolve issues.

As an organization that champions the cause of collaborative

construction, research and development is critical to our own

innovation. In serving the industry, we need to be able to

identify new trends in construction, in collaboration and in

how these intersect.

To learn, we rely on research that we conduct through

partnerships with academic institutions such as Michigan

State University, as well as research conducted by notable

organizations such as the Center for Integrated Facility

Engineering (CIFE), Construction Industry Institute, Pankow

Foundation and the Transportation Research Board. But most

important of all we learn from our members, the organizations

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S

REPORT

Dana Paz, IPI Executive Director

behind the trend lines on graphs and the numbers in statistics

columns. Through member profiles, success stories, awards

applications, educational presentations and our committees

we learn what works and what doesn’t, and what’s more,

we learn how it works, when it can be applied and why it’s

valuable. Research at IPI is a collective effort in which all of our

members and supporters play a vital role.

The most important part about research is the resulting

development of new tools and resources. For instance, when

research showed us the correlation between project risk and

the need for collaboration, we developed the IPI matrix, a

partnering scalability tool. Our training content and materials

are based on the challenges and success stories our members’

project teams have faced. All of the tools that we’ve developed

at IPI (specifications, white papers, guidebooks, standards

and more) have grown out of our members’ knowledge and

experience.

As an organization, learning is what keeps us relevant.

What we do with what we learn is what makes IPI valuable

to our members and to the industry. We are very fortunate

to be learning from the leading innovators in the field of

construction, not only in the US but throughout the world.

With the IPI Award season upon us, we’re busy gathering

data and learning about your Partnered projects of 2015. Next

up: turning these experiences and lessons learned into the

future tools and resources that the industry needs to advance

collaborative partnering to the next level.

What Research Means To IPI

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


ResearchWorking Group

Brinckerhoff, and members of the

Airports Consultants Council (ACC)

and the ACI-North America Technical

Operations Committee.

Next up for the Research Working

Group: a Quantitative Study of Four

Partnered Project Teams. This study

will be conducted in conjunction with

MSU throughout 2016 and published

in 2017. It will examine how project

partnering impacts individual, team, and

project performance mediated through

improved shared understanding across

organizations and within teams. The

study will ask how teams are developing

their shared understanding (i.e. how

are teams being trained, and how do

these training practices affect abilities to

partner effectively?).

In 2016, the Working Group will also

focus on generating more resources

IPI’s Research Working Group has

been hard at work, conducting

new research, combining

thorough new findings in

collaboration and looking for more

opportunities to fund research for

collaborative construction.

This year, the Working Group has

completed two new research studies on

Collaborative Partnering: a case study in

Partnering at San Francisco International

Airport, and a social network analysis of

the same team. Both research projects

were conducted in partnership with

Michigan State University (MSU) and will

be published later this year.

In addition, the Research Working

Group has sought to expand funding

sources for new research opportunities,

working with IPI’s Aviation Committee

to develop a problem statement for

the Airport Cooperative Research

Proposal (ACRP) to help secure funding

to examine Collaborative Partnering as

a process to improve schedule, budget,

safety and quality performance on

airport construction projects. To develop

the problem statement, the Working

Group relied on the support of experts

in airport construction, including

representatives from IPI members

SFO, Austin Commercial, WSP|Parsons

COMMITTEESPOTLIGHT

for research initiatives by launching a

fundraising campaign, seeking more

research grants and establishing

strategic alliances with research

institutions. To continue to gather data

on best practices and innovations, the

group is also developing an internal

research initiative which will focus on

the partnering efforts of IPI members.

The Research Working Group is

always looking for supporters who

can contribute with ideas, research,

and/or topics to develop a greater

understanding of Collaborative

Partnering and its impact on the

construction industry. Contact us at ed@

partneringinstitute.org to find out how

to get involved!

Do you have a project or innovation

that you’d like to submit for a case

study? Contact IPI at (925) 447-9100.

Photo Courtesy Gensler: San Francisco International Airport Boarding Area E Improvements Terminal 3 Project. IPI Ruby Level Partnering Award Winner, 2014.

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

Photo Courtesy Gensler: San Francisco International Airport Boarding Area E Improvements Terminal 3 Project. IPI Ruby Level Partnering Award Winner, 2014.


GLOBALADOPTION OFPARTNERING

The Evolution of Partnering in the US

In the early 1980s, because the industry suffered from extended productivity loss due to conflicts, litigation and fragmentation, the Reagan administration called together a sub-council made up of industry leaders to improve productivity in construction. The sub-council determined that three main areas needed attention for construction productivity to improve, and that construction programs needed to address all three in order to yield the best results:

Contracts — because traditional contracts foster fragmentation and don’t allocate risk fairly

Processes — because streamlined processes in other industries have demonstrated the need for greater efficiency and waste reduction in construction

Culture — because one of the main issues affecting productivity is inherent mistrust, and the inability of teams to communicate, collaborate and resolve issues.

The Adoption of Partnering

SINCE ITS INTRODUCTION OVER 30 YEARS AGO AS A SOLUTION

TO FALLING PRODUCTIVITY IN CONSTRUCTION, PARTNERING

HAS EVOLVED INTO A MEASURABLE PROCESS THAT LEADS

TO IMPROVED PROJECT OUTCOMES AND INNOVATIVE ISSUE

RESOLUTION, EXPANDING ACROSS THE WORLD INTO NEW

REGIONS AND MARKETS. RECENT RESEARCH ON PARTNERING

PUBLISHED IN GERMANY, NIGERIA AND IRAN DEMONSTRATES

AN INTERNATIONAL TREND TOWARD THE DESIRE TO IMPROVE

CONSTRUCTION THROUGH COLLABORATION. ALTHOUGH

THESE COUNTRIES VARY GREATLY IN TERMS OF THEIR SOCIAL,

ECONOMIC, AND BUSINESS CONTEXTS, THEIR RESEARCH NEEDS

STATEMENTS ARE REMARKABLY SIMILAR: THE ADVERSARIAL

NATURE OF THEIR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS AND THE

RESULTING COST OVERRUNS, DELAYS AND LITIGATION, HAS

CREATED A NEED FOR COLLABORATION AS A MEANS TO IMPROVE

PRODUCTIVITY AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE AS WELL AS

PROJECT SCHEDULES, SAFETY AND QUALITY.

What emerging research in Germany, Nigeria and Iran tell us about trends in the construction industry.


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

The push to improve contracts has given rise to less fragmented contract forms such as Integrated Forms of Agreement (IFoA) and Integrated Project Delivery (IPD). The need to improve construction team processes has led to the adoption of practices such as pull-planning and value chain mapping used in Lean Construction. And the need to improve team culture has led to the practice of Partnering—finding ways to develop team relationships and collaboration. Understandably, this has proven to be as highly nuanced and complex as individual teams, and Partnering has evolved over time into a structured process as the industry has learned more about the science of team culture.

A report on Partnering written by David Dombkins in 1993 for the Construction Industry Development Agency described it thus:

Partnering is not a contract, but a recognition that every contract includes an implied covenant of good faith. While the contract establishes legal relationships, the Partnering process establishes working relationships between the parties. Partnering provides an environment where trust and teamwork proactively avoid problems, prevent disputes and foster innovation, continuous improvement and good working relationships.

In the US, this process consists of regularly bringing the construction team together to, with the aid of a neutral facilitator:

The Adoption of Partnering

Finding ways to develop team relationships

and collaboration has proven to be as

highly nuanced and complex as the

individual teams themselves.



• Co-create project goals and strategies to meet them in a signed charter

• Measure the goals and hold the team accountable to them through team surveys

• Identify barriers and opportunities for project success in quarterly partnering sessions

• Resolve issues and prevent disputes with a defined issue resolution procedure

• Gather lessons learned from the project with a closeout partnering session

Research has shown that, with this structured process, teams have been able to develop greater cohesion, which in turn results in improved budgets, schedules, safety and quality.

Partnering InternationallyThe research coming out of international construction markets is based on the same lessons learned and documents that have been used to develop Collaborative Partnering in the US. But because the context in each of these regions varies so much, so do the models they’ve ended up with. Research in Iran shows an incipient level of partnering that is still working out how to engage all stakeholders in the collaborative process, while Nigeria has seen an increasing trend toward Partnering and is now poised to adopt a more structured process. Germany is further along the path, having identified and published specific guidelines for successful structured partnering.

Sucess Factors and Barriers to Partnering in IranAn increasingly complex environment in Iran, with significant time pressures, uncertainty due to turmoil in the region and limited access to resources, has led a growing number of organizations to implement Partnering on their construction projects. Researchers performed case studies of six partnered projects, interviewing the project teams to identify their level of satisfaction regarding time, cost, quality, client satisfaction and claim performance through Partnering.

Partnering in Iran is at a very early stage in its development and thus far refers to partnerships between contracting agencies. Contractors are motivated to partner in order to improve construction and quality, reduce cost, gain market advantages, mitigate any weaknesses and enhance strengths, share risk, and innovate.

The partnering practices implemented in the projects were not uniform, and neither were the project outcomes. Projects were split pretty evenly, with half seeing better than expected outcomes regarding cost, schedule and quality; and the other half seeing few measurable improvements.

Among the successful projects, the researchers identified these determining factors: a) commitment to a win-win attitudeb) selection of an appropriate partnerc) top management supportd) long-term perspective e) regular monitoring of partnerships through meetings f) the use of information technologiesg) integrated team agreements

Poorer performance, on the other hand, was attributed to several barriers to partnering:a) dealing with large bureaucratic organizations; slow decision-

makingb) difference in partners’ workcultures; c) stakeholders not developing a ”win-win” attituded) lack of training and guidance in project partneringe) little experience with the partnering approach f) risks or rewards not shared among the team

The study went on to recommend improvements to the partnering process, finding that conceptual changes require a change in behavior as well as the adoption of specific tools. Teams for instance, need to develop openness, trust, commitment and compromise; and adopt tools that facilitate collaboration, such as BIM. The research team also recommended adopting facilitative management techniques and frequent meetings to achieve better collaboration and cooperation. Project managers of the studied projects

Design Kick-Off

To Establish:

• Project Charter

• Dispute Resolution Ladder

Construction

Follow Up Workshops:

• Update Charter

• Monthly Scorecards

• Identify Issues

Close Out

LessonsLearned

Collaborative Partnering Process


recommended that the partnering team prepare a partnering agreement, choose appropriate project delivery methods, develop a project organization chart, clearly define roles and responsibilities and allocate risk more equitably.

Good Practice in Nigerian ConstructionIn Nigeria, project partnering has increasingly been seen as an innovative practice to improve quality on construction projects and respond to the shortcomings of adversarial construction, which has been characterized by exploitation, rigid specifications, unfounded decision-making and a focus on short term gains. This study sought to assess the factors contributing to partnering success, and analyze the benefits of implementing Partnering more broadly.

The team surveyed various owners, contractors, designers and consultants, and found that many companies had already partnered a project.

The survey respondents agreed that certain requirements were needed for Partnering to succeed in the Nigerian construction industry; specifically, mutual trust, good and effective communication, commitment from all parties, a clear understanding of roles, consistency and a flexible attitude.

They also generally agreed that all contracting parties, including clients, consultants, project managers, main contractors, sub-contractors, and on-site staff benefit from Partnering, while the establishment of a collaborative relationship increased customer satisfaction, streamlined project implementation, and improved all parties’ understanding of how to improve poor performance and ineffective communication.

The partnering process empowered teams to accept responsibility, delegate decision-making and resolve issues at the lowest level. When properly implemented, Partnering could generate a workable model for people to communicate more effectively and efficiently, eliminating unnecessary misunderstandings and possible conflicts.

Partnering Guidelines in GermanyGermany conducted research on Partnering due to their context of consistent cost and time overruns on construction projects, and because of complaints from both owners and contractors regarding adversarial work environments. They assessed partnering efforts in the US and in the UK to develop Partnering guidelines for publicly financed infrastructure projects, and found that, in order to meet their construction

For career opportunities visit wsp-pb.com/usa

For the latest news visit: insights.wsp-pb.com

Airports face numerous challenges today, but thoseissues also represent opportunities. WSP | Parsons Brinckerho� brings years of experience and a full range of services to enable airport owners to envision the future … and then create it. Partner with us to advance the future of aviation.

ENVISIONING THE FUTURE


needs, their Partnering model needed to incorporate eight main elements: 1. A Preamble

• A meeting that precedes construction, where the team addresses principles like trust, open communication and willingness to cooperate. Leaders of both parties sign the preamble document

2. Clear project specifications3. A defined process for handling project changes4. Risk management

• The use of a risk register and the understanding that risk handling and all relevant decisions are to be handled jointly between the owner and contractor

5. Sharing documents6. Clearly defined roles and responsibilities7. Conflict prevention

• Through a defined issue resolution process, with the recommendation to resolve issues jointly and at the lowest possible level

( 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

8. Contractual incentive regulations• Pain share, gain share

Once established, the research team field tested the guidelines on two highway projects, to prove the practicality of the recommendations and fine-tune the final version. They found that the projects that implemented the guidelines saw: • More open communication between client and contractor• Fairer risk allocation• Faster problem solving without litigation



• Cost savings due to incentives, at a rate .4 – 2.3%• Optimization of project quality• More trust and higher satisfaction of the participants• Overall budget savings (of over € 1 million)

The field test also showed that the guidelines alone did not immediately result in the behavior change of project team members. Some situations caused one or both parties to revert to hostile behavior, for instance when one party violated the agreements and the other party felt mistrust, or during the bidding process when negotiating cost. In Germany, proliferation of small and medium-sized construction companies contributes to a competitive market, so many will bid low and rely on change orders during the construction phase to fill the gap. Sound familiar?

In the end, the research team concluded that public infrastructure projects would benefit greatly from the guidelines they developed, but that this was not a magic bullet. True behavior change would come from building trust and relationships over time.

In ConclusionPartnering research from across the globe covers widely varied cultural and market contexts, but there are common threads in what makes for successful partnering. Across the spectrum, owners, contractors, and designers want the same things: projects that are high-quality, that don’t go over budget, that are completed on time and that create rewarding work environments. Organizations also agree that clearly defined roles and responsibilities, executive commitment, and a pre-defined issue resolution process are needed to improve construction project outcomes. All teams respond to the basic requirements of collaboration: trust, fairness, and open communication. But because these behaviors are not the norm in the industry, teams need a structured process to get there.

Different regions are at varying junctures in collaboration, with some at the beginning of the spectrum and others closer to standardizing Partnering across the board. Understanding where different construction markets are on this path helps us validate the development of our own best practices, while shedding light on our role at the forefront of collaborative construction as we strive for the next innovations in Collaborative Partnering.

_____________________________________________________Sources: Collaborative procurement in construction projects performance measures, Case Study: Partnering in Iranian construction industry. S. M. Hasanzadeha, M. Hosseinalipour, and M. R. Hafezi, 2014

An Assessment of Success Factors and Benefits of Project Partnering in Nigerian Construc-tion Industry. O.A. Awodele, and D.R. Ogunsemi, 2010

Partnering in infrastructure projects in Germany. K. Spang and S. Riemann, 2014.( 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

How do we know Partnering works?

Even high functioning teams will experience conflict on construction projects. If we want to

maximize the effects of collaboration to achieve exceptional results, we must increase

our own understanding through research. Sponsoring IPI’s research efforts is the best way to make your teams, and the industry

more efficient, safe and with higher quality.

Sponsor IPI’s research efforts today!

Contact us! Call: 925-447-9100

or email: [email protected]


Partnering is a tremendous tool for enabling cooperation and teamwork on projects

of any size or type. Although Partnering originally emerged from the traditional

design-bid-build contract structure, it can be equally beneficial when applied to

projects that use alternative delivery methods, such as design-build. All project

teams, including design-build teams, need to find alignment, have a common mission and

goals, resolve issues and engage stakeholders regardless of the delivery method. In some

cases owners may need to demonstrate the success of design-build as a delivery method to

external influencers and decision-makers. Regardless of the reason for utilizing Partnering,

the process can help the design-build project team deliver a successful project and reduce

overall project risk.

Here are five very important ways a design-build team can benefit from collaborative

partnering.

FACILITATOR’S CORNER

Partnering can

help to address

issues in an

open and honest

manner and

gives the design-

build team an

opportunity to

acknowledge the

concerns of the

owner.

How Design-Build Teams Benefit from Partnering



Ensuring design-build team alignmentCertainly one of the advantages to owners using design-build

project delivery is having a single team and point of contact

to work with throughout the project. But just because a

contracting team has been procured using the design-build

delivery method doesn’t mean they have experience actually

working together. Many design-build teams are formed

only for a specific pursuit. In fact, even if their companies

have worked together in the past, it is not unusual for the

individuals in a design-build team to not have any direct

work experience together at all. The first time that the

actual individuals on the design-build team sit down to work

together outside of putting together the proposal may be in a

project partnering session. In cases like these, the structured

Partnering process can be instrumental to the team in

developing the trust, respect and collaborative environment

that they need to move forward.

Developing comfort for the ownerIf an owner does not have experience with design-build

projects, there may be a paradigm shift in not having as much

direct control over the design, or in not having a representative

looking out for their interests exclusively. Partnering can help

to address these issues in an open and honest manner and

gives the design-build team an opportunity to acknowledge

the concerns of the owner. Through the Partnering process,

the owner can develop a better understanding of roles and

responsibilities and clarity on how issues will be resolved. By

engaging the owner in a collaborative partnering process, the

design-build team can work with the owner throughout the

project to identify and resolve any specific concerns, to make

the transition to design-build a smooth and positive experience.

If an owner already has experience with alternative project

delivery, they will certainly appreciate the improved

performance and results of a highly collaborative team.

Overcoming challengesOne of the reasons to engage in the partnering process is to

enable a culture of problem solving and collaboration for when

problems arise. No contract methodology can eliminate all of

the challenges that might occur on a project. All of the same

issues, risks and challenges may still exist. Each project needs

a clearly defined process for overcoming challenges, an issue

escalation ladder and guidelines to enable efficient problem

resolution. Design-build teams that utilize collaborative

partnering are taking the critical steps necessary to resolve

them proactively and keep the project moving forward. In the

face of a challenge, the team will demonstrate the strength of

collaboration, rather than fall apart.

Additional stakeholdersMost projects have additional stakeholders that can influence

the project in some manner. These may include end users,

suppliers, vendors, other departments, permitting agencies,

and others. Any one of these may have just as much influence

on a project as the parties to the main contract. By utilizing

collaborative partnering with the owner, the design-build

team can better engage these influencers and help gain their

alignment. In addition, the owner may view the design-

build team as being more proactive and creative in utilizing

collaborative partnering to engage these other stakeholders.

Modified sequenceDesign-build projects utilize a modified sequence of events

vs the traditional design-bid-build process. While the intent

of design-build is for construction to occur concurrently with

design, it does not do so in exact lock-step. Frequently, the

design is brought to a specific point before the construction

starts, and/or specific design packages are produced first to

allow the contractor to begin work more immediately. These

may include site development and civil construction activities.

Also, in a progressive design-build process, the design of the

project is developed to a point at which the design-build team

and the owner can agree to a GMP or guaranteed maximum

price for the project. These variations of sequence provide

an excellent opportunity to utilize Partnering in the various

phases of the project. In the traditional design-bid-build

process, Partnering is used at the beginning of construction

activities. With design-build, Partnering kickoff can take place

at the beginning of the design process so that the charter can

address issues specific to the design phase. The team can

then re-adjust the Partnering initiative at the beginning of

the construction phase to address evolving goals, new team

members, and any new challenges. This is an important

adaptation of the Partnering process that is unique to design-

build projects and further highlights the benefit of the creative

application of Partnering principles.

The bottom line is that Partnering helps all teams thrive by

creating a culture of collaboration, communication and trust.

By committing to the partnering process, design-build teams

can build upon the benefits inherent in design-build and,

through collaboration, rise to even greater heights.

Eric Sanderson, Red Rocks AdvisorsEric Sanderson, MBA, MIPI President of Red Rocks

Advisors, LLC. Based in Arizona, Eric is an Award-

winning Partnering Faciliatator who specializes in

Wastewater, Horizontal and Vertical Construction.

RedRocksAdvisors.com


In 2015 Google People

Operations Analyst,

Julia Rozovsky,

published the results

of “Project Aristotle” on

Google’s re:Work blog.

The research project

dedicated more than two

years to studying teams at

Google and determining

what it is that makes the

great ones great.

In pursuit of this “magical

algorithm,” as Rozovsky calls

it, researchers interviewed

over 200 employees at Google

and analyzed more than

250 attributes of about 180

Google teams. But patterns

continued to elude them.

In fact, no combination of

temperament, skill, and/or

background experience was

consistently more successful

than any other. Teams

comprised of shy individuals

might be just as successful, or

just as unsuccessful, as their

outgoing counterparts. The

same could be said of teams

who did or did not share the

same hobbies, who socialized

outside of work, or who

had the same educational

backgrounds. What the

researchers concluded

was that who was on the

team made no discernable

The Perfect TeamGoogle Determines the 5 Norms Successful Teams Share

Psychological SafetyAccording to the data

collected by Project Aristotle,

psychological safety was

by far the most important

of these five norms. As the

very foundation of trust,

psychological safety enables

optimal collaboration.

Harvard Business School

professor Amy Edmondson

published an article in

Administrative Science

Quarterly on Psychological

Safety in 1999, which defines

the concept as the “shared

belief held by members of a

team that the team is safe for

interpersonal risk-taking.”

She goes on to explain how

psychological safety is “a

sense of confidence” and “a

team climate” that allows

everyone to speak their mind,

ask questions, and share

ideas without fear of being

discouraged or looked down

upon. On the other hand, if

they do not feel this safety is

a given— a norm—and if the

factors contributing to their

discomfort go unaddressed,

barriers to communication

and trust lead to weaker

teams regardless of who may

comprise them.

So what can be done to

RESEARCH ROUNDUP

difference when it came

to performance. Rather,

success can be attributed to

5 key norms of team culture

that determine how a team

relates to their work and to

one another.

The Five Norms that Make for the Perfect Team

1. Psychological Safety —trust between team-

mates

2. Meaning of Work — personal fulfillment

3. Dependability —

reliable quality and

effort from teammates

4. Structure/Clarity — clearly established

norms

5. Impact of Work — the

sense that there is a

purpose to our work

The good news is that these

findings mean that any

team has the potential to

be successful, if their team

culture is founded upon the

right norms. As Laszlo Bock,

head of People Operations at

Google, put it, “You can take a

team of average performers,

and if you teach them to

interact the right way, they’ll

do things no superstar could

ever accomplish.”

increase psychological

safety? It starts with team

leaders recognizing the

power of norms and the

need to establish good ones.

Charles Duhigg emphasizes

this in his book Smarter

Faster Better – The Secrets

of Being Productive in Life

and Business. Good norms,

states Duhigg, create “a sense

of togetherness while also

encouraging people to take a

chance.”

One element that creates an

environment of psychological

safety is the guarantee of

“equal conversational turn

taking.” Sometimes all

people need to participate

during meetings and voice

any questions or concerns

is encouragement. Team

leaders can create positive

norms during meetings

and establish and support

a climate of psychological


safety by listening well, giving

everyone an equal chance to

speak, encouraging the team

to express their frustrations,

and addressing conflicts

through open discussion.

Special attention must be

given to the structure of

meetings to ensure everyone

on the team is heard.

According to Duhigg, “Teams

succeed when everyone feels

like they can speak up and

when members show they are

is the energy that a team

puts into it. They might ask

themselves, “It doesn’t matter

to me, so why try?” When

meaning goes missing it

may be a sign that the team

feels ignored and unvalued.

Morale will inevitably

decrease as this sense of

insignificance grows, and

increase as they feel that their

contributions to team goals

and accomplishments are

respected.

sensitive to how one another

feels”—and that is the mark

of the right norms being

modeled by leadership.

Meaning of WorkTeam members who see their

work as being personally

meaningful do better. That

makes sense, given the fact

that the hours we spend at

work constitute such a large

part of life. When meaning

is drained from work, so too

DependabilityThe research team also found

that teams are more effective

if each team member can

depend upon reliable

quality and effort from their

teammates. Dependability

is a norm directly related to

commitment and must be

enabled and encouraged by

team leaders. When all team

members are committed, they

are held accountable and

will be more involved in the

success of a project.

Therefore, successful teams

are not only made up of

hardworking individuals

but are characterized by

teams that actively value

dependability, making it a

point on a regular basis to

stay on task, communicate

on the project’s progress, and

recognize contributions.

PsychologicalSafety,Dependability,StructureandClarity,MeaningofWorkandImpactofWork

Equalturns,trust,guidance,structure,communication

NeutralFacilitation

Follow-UpPartneringSessions

Empowerment,commitment,trust,collaboration,efEiciency,accountability

Co-CreatedGoals

IssueResolutionProcess

Surveys

Collaborative Partnering and the 5 Norms of the Perfect Team


RESEARCH ROUNDUP

A dependable team is efficient because each member is aware

of his or her roles and responsibilities. It is much harder for a

team to depend on one another if their goals are vague, their

values conflicting, and their roles under-defined.

Structure/ClarityUnderstanding the team’s goals and values, and where one fits

into it all, is critical to a team’s success. It is significant here

that this research puts structure and clarity together as a norm

that will provide support to that end. Structure must be made

a priority. Where it is given appropriate importance, clarity

emerges—which in turn builds confidence and trust. Structure

plays a role in establishing psychological safety because it

provides the team not only with a shared identity but with many

cultural norms.

These norms, be they written or spoken, must be clear so that

all team members understand expectations and can adapt to the

team environment. After all, norms change from team to team,

so even if someone has worked well in some teams, they might

still have troubles in another. Without proper structure (and

without feeling enough psychological safety to ask questions)

one runs the risk of breaking the same norms again and again.

Impact of WorkBeyond the personal level, the impact of a project should be no

secret. When teams are proud of their work, and when they are

reminded of the concrete effects their work has on the world

and on their community, their job becomes that much more

fulfilling and they become that much more productive. Team

leaders should ensure that the team regularly articulates what

impact their project will have, and that the team connects with

the greater community to see this impact clearly.

HOW CAN YOU KNOW WHERE YOU STAND?Google researchers found that even teams that seem to be

content may in fact be keeping their dissention silent. Abeer

Dubey, a Google People Analytics Director, told Duhigg that after

150 hours’ worth of interviews they found, “One team might

appear like it’s working really well from the outside, but, inside,

everyone is miserable.” This gives the team leader the illusion

that nothing needs to be changed, which further illustrates the

role of surveys and open discussions in strengthening a team.

Matt Sakaguchi, a mid-level team manager at Google,

experienced this illusion firsthand. Sakaguchi explained to

Duhigg that he contributed to Project Aristotle by bringing a

survey before his new team. The survey results showed that

this team, which he believed to be a strong one, did not clearly

understand “the roles of the team” and “whether the team had

impact.” Suddenly, he knew what invisible weaknesses needed

to be addressed.

The TakeawayThe data collected by this research highlights the important roles

that leadership, commitment, communication and trust play

in a successful team. Contracts and process in construction do

not result in exceptional outcomes or issue resolution—these

are achieved by the team. Whether you are facilitating team

meetings, or you are an executive leader responsible for ensuring

that your teams succeed, take action to establish the culture that

your teams need to thrive. Structured Collaborative Partnering

takes the vagueness out of the concept of collaboration and can

help you ensure that your teams develop the five key norms

so that, in construction, we can see the level of innovation and

productivity that is being seen in other sectors._____________________________________________________Sources: - https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/five-keys-to-a-successful-google-team/- http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/magazine/what-google-learned-from-its-quest- to-build-the-perfect-team.html?mwrsm=Email&_r=0- Duhigg, Charles. (2016). Smarter Faster Better – The Secrets of Being Productive in Life and Business- Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2),350.doi:10.2307/2666999

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

OrgMetrics is DRIVEN to make a difference for your people, your projects, your programs and ultimately YOUR SUCCESS. We aim to give you a competitive advantage by creating a collaborative working environment for your projects. With a commitment to co-creating solutions, common goals, and fair resolutions

you magnify your ability to thrive in a highly competitive industry.

We COLLABORATETo Unify Teams

Celebrating 30 Years

OrgMetrics – Building extraordinary project outcomes since 1986.We Are DRIVEN For You!

291 McLeod Street, Livermore, CA 94550 | www.orgmet.com | 925-449-8300

Documents

Partnering Magazine MayJune 2016