Bryan Franz

Impact of Team Integration and Group Cohesion on Project Delivery Performance

AbstractThe architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry is often criticized for its fragmented approach to project delivery. Traditional procurement and contracting intentionally serves to isolate designers from contractors to provide checks and balances, but limits opportunities for collaboration. This research presents a structural modeling approach to studying the role of integration in the performance of building construction projects. A sample data set of 204 completed projects was collected to compare cost, schedule, and quality performance under different delivery methods. Integration of project teams was proposed and tested in the form of two latent constructs—team integration and group cohesion—that mediate the link between delivery methods and performance. More integrated teams interacted with more participants from all levels of the building construction process, from designers to specialty trade contractors. These interactions included design charrettes, joint goal setting, and ...

Project Impacts of Specialty Mechanical Contractor Design Involvement in the Health Care Industry: Comparative Case Study

AbstractRecent research efforts on project delivery have been heavily focused on using project-level indicators to predict cost and schedule outcomes. However, specialty contractors performing at the system level have an increasingly important role in the design and construction of healthcare and other high-performance facilities. From curtain wall assemblies to HVAC systems, specialty contractors possess the system knowledge and field expertise to support delivery of energy-efficient, cost-effective systems. Therefore, this research adapted the use of existing metrics from broader, project-level applications to a narrower building system, focused to contextualize the importance of system delivery. A comparative case study analysis was conducted to collect quantitative data on schedule and cost outcomes, construction safety, and building energy performance on two large healthcare facilities. By comparing a design-build and design-assist case, this paper demonstrates how increasing design involvement of me...

An alternative classification of project delivery methods used in the United States building construction industry

Although many sources describe the project delivery methods available to owners, there is little empirical data on their defining characteristics. The objective of this research was to examine patterns in contract arrangements, procurement practices and compensation terms used in the US building construction industry. Survey data were collected for projects completed between 2008 and 2013 (N = 204) from owners and contractors belonging to large US professional organizations. A latent class analysis was used to identify five distinct patterns or ‘classes’ based upon eight characteristics of the project delivery process. These classes were defined as: (I) late builder and trade involvement, with an open, cost-based selection and lump sum contract (9% of projects in sample); (II) late builder and trade involvement, with a prequalified, cost-based selection and lump sum contract (19%); (III) early builder and late trade involvement, with a prequalified non-cost based selection and guaranteed maximum price (GMP) contract (26%); (IV) early builder and trade involvement, with a prequalified, cost-based selection and lump sum design-build (DB) contract (27%); (V) early builder and trade involvement, with a prequalified, non-cost based selection and GMP DB contract (18%). Compared to existing classifications of project delivery methods, these classes are data-driven typologies that represent how participants are procured and organized into a project team. The findings have implications as an alternative classification system in project delivery research and as guidance to owners considering their project delivery options.

Exploring the role of team environment in building project performance

Design and construction projects incorporate stakeholders from many different organizations, often with conflicting goals, overlapping responsibilities and differing areas of expertise. With an increasing interest in improving the ‘integration’ and collaboration on construction projects, there is a need for empirical research to understand the contributions of project team interactions to project-level performance. The purpose of this paper is to explore the correlations between several indicators of the collaborative team environment and traditional measures of project success. With the assistance of an industry advisory board, a survey questionnaire was developed to collect detailed information for recently completed building projects in the United States. The questionnaire was distributed via mailing lists, conferences and industry contacts to reach a diverse set of respondents. Using this large data set of 124 projects, bivariate Spearman rho correlation coefficients are calculated and reported. Significant correlations suggest the role of on-time communication in reducing construction cost growth, higher team chemistry in reducing overall schedule growth and larger administrative burdens in increasing construction cost growth and final unit cost. Multicollinearity among the measures of team environment suggests the presence of latent variables and need for future multivariate analyses.

Initiating IPD Concepts on Campus Facilities with a "Collaboration Addendum"

Integrated project delivery (IPD) is attracting the attention of owners, seeking a more collaborative, shared risk, design and construction environment for high-performance building projects. However, the administration of a tri-party or multi-party contract requires a high level of owner involvement and experienced contractors. For owners considering an IPD approach, but unable or unprepared to pursue a multi-party agreement, several “IPD-lite” options are being tested within the construction industry. This research uses quasi-experimental observational case studies of four campus facility projects to follow the progress of the Pennsylvania State University’s facility management organization, the Office of Physical Plant (OPP), through the development and implementation of a Collaboration Addendum as a supplementary contract attachment. Since the selected case studies are planned using traditional delivery methods, the Addendum was designed to integrate desired characteristics of an IPD approach, including: early involvement of project participants, collaborative decision-making, collocation and a performance-based incentive program. The development of the attachment followed a three step procedure of (1) defining the collaborative intent, (2) refining the intent on a project or teamspecific basis and (3) outlining the desired process for achieving meaningful collaboration. Metrics for assessing the success of the Addendum were developed to determine the effectiveness of achieved levels of collaboration and included performance measures of timeliness of communication and meeting effectiveness. This paper reports the development and in-process implementation of the Addendum on selected case study facilities, as a means of promoting collaborative team behavior.

Successful University Research Programs with Extensive Industry Involvement

AbstractResearch spending by the private industry within the construction, engineering, and management domain is notably low. This paper explores the domain of academic–industry alliances, or research centers, which are wholly funded through private sector support. Through semistructured interviews with both industry and academic representatives from three such affiliations, which have been in existence for more than 15 years, critical factors affecting their success and longevity are explored. The interviewees represent academics with more than 10 years of experience in a leading role, or industry members with 10 or more years participating on an advisory board or similar capacity. The issues discussed include the following: consistent characteristics of the academics and programs, which lead to creation of a sustainable model; methods of integrating industry involvement; appropriate research topics; and the opportunities and obstacles of starting an industry research program. The results suggest that su...

In Memoriam: Dr. Michael Horman

JOURNAL OF CONSTRUCT cially those who were involved in his research endeavors. We will always feel privileged for the opportunity to have him as our graduate adviser and friend. Dr. Horman was born in 1971 in Melbourne, Australia. He earned his bachelor’s degree in building construction in 1994 and a doctorate in construction project management in 2000, both from the University of Melbourne. Dr. Horman began teaching at Penn State in 2000, focusing his research on developing innovative processes for high performance buildings. He specialized in the delivery of green buildings and the application of lean production principles to streamline project delivery processes and advance sustainability. Dr. Horman was also the director of the Lean and Green Research Initiative at Penn State. In memory of his work, we are striving toward future advancements in this area of research at Penn State. Dr. Horman built strong connections with the construction industry, and his research allowed him to be involved in projects such as the Pentagon Renovation Project, Toyota Real Estate and Facilities, NAVFAC, and the local Penn State Office of the Physical Plant on campus projects, as well as in the endeavors of many other companies. He helped projects advance green building goals while also applying lean principles to their processes. In 2006 Dr. Horman was recognized with a CAREER Award from the National Science Foundation for his contribution to building industry research. While he advanced his career, Dr. Horman’s family provided counterbalance and support to his life. He cherished every moment with his wife and children, often speaking fondly of them during weekly research meetings and recalling the happiness they brought him. Dr. Horman played an influential role for all of us and many of his previous graduate students; he always offered sympathy and support in our personal and professional lives. He was our mentor, adviser, and teacher—but most importantly, he was a caring and jovial friend. Dr. Horman was passionate about his work, energetic, funny, caring, loving, exceptionally smart, and genuine. We always looked forward to weekly Lean and Green Research meetings and, more regularly, to one-on-one research meetings. We would leave each encounter with him excited, motivated, and inspired to continue research. Dr. Horman knew how to balance work with fun regardless of the circumstances and was always willing to set aside his current projects to share a laugh or life lesson. His memory is kept alive through our continued work, and he is greatly missed by all!