Analysis of the Barriers to the Implementation of Integrated Project Delivery (IPD): A Meta-Synthesis Approach

Open access

Abstract

The right selection of implementation system for projects in the construction industry is critical to achieve success. Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), is a comprehensive implementation system which has in recent years been seen to play an effective role in projects improved efficiency. Implementing an IPD system to resolve various problems of traditional systems is very important; however there are several barriers to its implementation. In addition, rooting and classifying the barriers is very significant in being able to resolve them. The aim of this study is the identification of barriers to IPD basically extracted from existing case studies. In this research, the meta-synthesis qualitative method is used for identifying and classifying the IPD barriers. The results are presented in a comprehensive table, and then are illustrated as a pattern by using macro concepts. This pattern is useful for presenting barriers to IPD. Identifying the barriers and resolving them are as important as identifying the benefits of IPD in creating motivation for construction industry owners. They also serve to provide the context for required predictions in implementing this approach in the construction industry.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • AIA (2007). Integrated Project Delivery a Guide. AIA 1-57.

  • AIA (2010). Integrated Project Delivery For Public and Private Owners. AIA.

  • AIA Minnesota (2012). IPD Case Studies. School of Architecture Minnesota University by the AIA/AIA California Council 1-116.

  • Arbabi O. Saghatforoush E. Nikouravan H. A. and Mahoud M. (2017). Solutions to Overcome Barriers of Implementing Constructability Operability and Maintainability (COM) Concepts in Infrastructure Projects: A Meta-Synthesis Approach. Journal of Engineering Project and Production Management 7(2) 63-79.

  • Azhar N. (2014). Integrated Construction Project Delivery System in the U.S. Public Sector: An Information Modeling Framework. A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Published by ProQuest LLC 1-263.

  • Becerik-Gerber B. DDes and Kent D.C. (2010). Implementation of Integrated Project Delivery and Building Information Modeling on a Small Commercial Project. International Journal of Project Management 1-6.

  • Bilbo D. Bigelow B. Escamilla E. and Lockwood C. (2015). Comparison of Construction Manager at Risk and Integrated Project Delivery Performance on Healthcare Projects: A Comparative Case Study. International Journal of Construction Education and Research 11(1) 40-53.

  • Birnleitner H. (2013). Influence of Macro-environmental Factors To The Process of Integrating A Foreign Business Entity. In MIC 2013: Industry Science and Policy Makers for Sustainable Future; Proceedings of the 14th International Conference Koper 21-23 November 2013 387-400.

  • Campbell R. Pandora P. Catherine P. Nicky B. Roisin P. Myfanwy M. and Donovan J. (2003). Evaluating meta-ethnography: a synthesis of qualitative research on lay experiences of diabetes and diabetes care. Social Science & Medicine 56(4) 671-684.

  • Cohen J. (2010). Integrated project delivery: Case studies. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction 248-254.

  • Collins W. and Parrish K. (2014). The Need for Integrated Project Delivery in the Public Sector. Construction Research Congress 719-728.

  • Council A. (2008). Integrated Project Delivery Frequently Asked Questions. AIA California Council 1-4.

  • Do D. Ballard G. and Tillmann P. (2015). The Application of Target Value Design in the Design and Construction of the UHS Temecula Valley Hospital. Project Production Systems Laboratory. University of California Berkeley 1-22.

  • Duke P. Higgs S. and McMahon W. R. (2010). Integrated Project Delivery : ‘The Value Proposition’ An Owner’s Guide for Launching a Healthcare Capital Project via IPD. KLMK Group LLC February 2010 1-51.

  • Franklin D. L. and Tobin J. (2010). Integrated Project Delivery: Next-Generation BIM for Structural Engineering. Conference Information Structures Congress 2010 May 12-15 2010 | Orlando Florida United States 265-284. available at: https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/41130(369)254.

  • Ghassemi R. and Becerik-Gerber B. (2011). Transitioning to integrated Integrated Project Delivery: Potential barriers and lessons learned. Lean Construction Journal 32-52.

  • Goldberg D. E. Holland R. J. and Wing S. W. (2012). GIS + BIM = Integrated Project Delivery @ Penn State. Proceedings of the 13th Int. Conf. on Information Technology in Landscape Architecture 524-530.

  • Haque B. (2003). Problems in concurrent new product development: an in-depth comparative study of three companies. Integrated Manufacturing Systems 14(3) 191-207.

  • Hornstein H. A. (2014). The integration of project management and organizational change management is now a necessity. International Journal of Project Management 1-8.

  • Jackson M. A. (2011). Integrated project delivery - reviews related issues and the case for integrated project delivery. Part 1 Video Northern California: Hanson Bridgett.

  • Jayasena H. S. and Senevirathna N. S. (2012). Adaptability of integrated project delivery in a construction industry. Proceedings of World Construction Symposium 2012: Global Challenges in Construction Industry 28-30 June 2012 Colombo Sri Lanka 188-195.

  • Kahvandi Z. Saghatforoush E. Alinezhad M. and Noghli F. (2017). Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) Research Trends. Journal of Engineering Project and Production Management 7(2) 99-114.

  • Kahvandi Z. Saghatforoush E. Alinezhad M. and Preece C. (2016). Analysis of Research Trends on Benefits of Implementing Integrated Project Delivery (IPD). In International Conference on Civil Mechanical Engineering & Construction Management (CMC 2016) Kuala Lumpur Malaysia.

  • Kent D. and Becerik-Gerber B. (2010). Understanding Construction Industry Experience and Attitudes toward Integrated Project Delivery. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 136 815-825.

  • Kiani I. and Khalili Ghomi S. (2013). The Barriers and Implementation of Building Information Modeling (BIM) based on Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) In the Construction Industry. IGCESH 2013.

  • Korkmaz S. Swarup L. and Riley D. (2013). Delivering Sustainable High-Performance Buildings: Influence of Project Delivery Methods on Integration and Project Outcomes. Journal of Management in Engineering 29 71-78.

  • Li Y. and Taylor T. R. (2011). The Impact of Design Rework on Construction Project Performance. The 29th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society Washington D.C. 25-35.

  • Manning R. T. (2012). Challenges Benefits and Risks Associated with Integrated Project Delivery and Building Information Modeling. The University of Kansas in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master’s of Science 1-98.

  • Kenig M. Allison M. Black B. Burdi L. Colella C. Davis H. and Williams M. (2010). Integrated project delivery for public and private owners. National Association of State Facilities Administrators (NASFA) Construction Owners Association of America (COAA) The Association of Higher Education Facilities Officers (APPA) Associated General Contractors of America (AGC) and American Institute of Architects (AIA).

  • Nejati I. Javidruzi M. and Mohebifar A. H. (2014). Feasibility of Using an Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) in Mass Housing Collaborative Projects. Advances in Environmental Biology 8(25) 211-218.

  • Noblit G. W. and Hare R. D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies. Vol. Newbury Pa 38-56.

  • Parfitt M. K. Holland R. J. and Solnosky R. L. (2013). Results of a pilot multidisciplinary bim-enhanced integrated project delivery capstone engineering design course in architectural engineering. AEI 2013: Building Solutions for Architectural Engineering - Proceedings of the 2013 Architectural Engineering National Conference 43-52.

  • Popic Z. and Moselhi O. (2014). Project Delivery Systems Selection for Capital Projects Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process and the Analytical Network Process. Construction Research Congress 2014 1339-1348.

  • Rached F. Hraoui Y. Karam A. and Hamzeh F. (2014). Implementation of IPD in the Middle East and its Challenges. Proceedings International Group for Lean Construction Olso Norway Proceedings IGLC- 22 June 2014 293-304.

  • Sandelowski M. and Barroso J. (2006). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. Springer Publishing Company.

  • Shahhosseini V. (2013). Barriers of Implementation of Integrated Project Delivery in IRAN. 9th Internationl Project Management Conference IRAN 45-52.

  • Sive T. (2009). No Title Integrated Project Delivery:Reality and Promise A Strategist’s Guide to Understanding and Marketing IPD. Society for Marketing Professional Services Foundation 800 292-7677.

  • Stern P. N. and Harris C. C. (1985). Women’s Health and The self-Care Paradox: a Model to Guide Self-Care Readiness - Clash Between the Client and Nurse. Health Care for Women International 6(1-3) 151-163.

  • Syariazulfa T. (2016). Barriers and Impact of Mechanisation and Automation in Construction to Achieve Better Quality Products. Social and Behavioral Sciences 222 111-120.

  • Walsh D. and Downe S. (2005). Meta synthesis method for qualitative research: a literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing 50(2) 204-211.

  • Weed M. E. (2006). Sports Tourism Research 2000-2004: A Systematic Review of Knowledge and A Meta-Evaluation of Methods. Journal of Sport and Tourism 11 (1) 5-30.

  • Xue X. L. Shen Q. P. and Ren Z. M. (2010). Critical Review of Collaborative Working in Construction Projects: Business Environment and Human Behaviors. Journal of Management in Engineering 26(4) 196-208.

  • Yahyapour S. (2012). The Conceptual Framework Knowledge Management Benefits of Using Meta-Synthesis. 67-92.

  • Zhang L. and Li F. (2014). Risk/Reward Compensation Model for Integrated Project Delivery. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics 25(5) 558-567.

Search
Journal information
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 245 245 38
PDF Downloads 158 158 16