e-Mail

Print

The IPD structure was intended to remove as many of the traditional barriers between design and construction as possible to see how a project might proceed in a relatively frictionless context.

Has IPD achieved its goals of a faster, better project at a lower cost with less litigation? And does collaboration make a project more complicated or less so?

Phil Bernstein, an architect and vice president at Autodesk who teaches at the Yale School of Architecture, feels some concepts foreign to many in the building process — like open-book accounting, trust-based relationships and jointly achieved outcomes and profits — will become more familiar over time as integrated processes take hold. Is a willingness to try new ideas and collaborate closely with project partners—and trust that good results for them are good results for you—the most challenging idea to come from IPD?

Do you believe many of the previously adversarial relationships that characterize typical projects are completely and thoroughly abandoned with the introduction of IPD? Does IPD promote more cooperative behaviors, or does IPD tempt designers of the built environment to exhibit more self-protective behavior?

Scott Simpson of KlingStubbins Architects suggests that IPD’s challenges are not so much technical (contracts, compensation, risk management, project control) as sociological. Do you agree? Please participate in the short survey.