CMAdvisor
Advancing Professional Construction and Program Management Worldwide
True Collaboration in Construction?
Owners Forum Offers the “Inside Scoop”
“Best Practices—Best Practitioners”
March/April 2010
Volume XXIX, No. 2
Contents
March/April 2010
Volume XXIX, No. 2
6Beyond Kumbaya: True Collaboration in Construction?
Collaboration in construction isn’t about
everybody getting along. It’s about building
a strong foundation of trust, with backing
from top management.
8“Best Practices—Best Practitioners.”
The recently announced alliance between
CMAA and the Construction Industry Institute
promises to bring powerful resources together
to improve capital projects nationwide.
CMAA PRESENTS
The first new edition of Construction Management
Standards of Practice in six years.
The 2010 Edition includes entirely new chapters on Sustainability, BIM and
Risk Management, along with extended coverage of Program Management
and other updates. For CM/PM practitioners, the new SOP defines excellent
professional practice. It can help you market your services and guide your
staff training and development. For owners, the SOP summarizes what
to expect from your service providers. There is no better authority on
what CMs do, how we do it, and how our owner clients benefit.
Columns
Feature
10Owner’s Forum Offers CMs the “Inside Scoop”
Leading owners and top executives of CM/PM
services firms will come together for a vital
strategic dialog in Atlanta in May.
CMAdvisor
Departments
12 News
17 Foundation
18Professional Practice Corner
GARY CARDAMONE, PE, DIRECTOR OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT,
PORT OF LONG BEACH, CA, AND CHAIR, CMAA SOP COMMITTEE
2
25President’s Report
By Bruce D’Agostino, CAE, FCMAA
16 Certification
“As an owner practitioner myself, I would expect every CM pursuing work
with my agency to be well versed in all areas of the Standards of Practice.”
Order your copy today online
through the CMAA website.
5Chairman’s Report
By Gary Cardamone, PE
20Legal Corner
Cover photo: Snead Hall, School of Business, and East Hall,
School of Engineering, Virginia Commonwealth University.
22 Member News
Photo courtesy of Gilbane Building Company.
23 Chapter News
24Professional Development Calendar
March/April
3
CPS offers peace of mind every phase of the way
Structured Cabling
Voice • Data • Video
Mobile Surveillance
Unit
CCTV/
Camera
Security
Trailer
Security
Officer
CMAdvisor
Chairman’s Report
Chairman of the Board
Gary Cardamone, PE
Port of Long Beach, CA
Our Alliance with CII
President and Chief Executive Officer
Bruce D’Agostino, CAE, FCMAA
By Gary Cardamone, PE
Port of Long Beach, CA
Editor
John McKeon
In this issue of CM Advisor you will read about the alliance
CMAA has recently formed with the Construction Industry
Institute (CII) at the University of Texas in Austin. I believe
this alliance is going to be extraordinarily productive and
valuable for both of us.
Contributing Writers
Sarah Black
Martha Montague
Design
TGD Communications, Inc.
800–310–5535
www.dmcommun.com
www.eCamSecure.com
www.cpssecurity.com
sales@cpssecurity.com
CA C7 825688 | ACO 6119 | PPO 11094 | GA PSC001921 | NV 741 | AZ 1003939 | FL B2100148 | UT P102088 | TX C09819 | L A 531 | AR B2005-0080 | NM 2328
The best CM/PM education in the business.
CMAA is your partner for high value professional education
for every member of your team at every level.
For new hires, our Construction Manager In Training (CMIT)
program supports the transition into the workplace. At the
high end, the Certified Construction Manager (CCM®) credential
identifies the best in the business.
Deliver SOP-based training to your entire team for as little
as $35 per hour of expert instruction with flexible licensing
of our online SOP modules. Or select from a broad menu of
events, interactive webinars, and other programs.
To learn more, visit www.cmaanet.org/pd-home.
CMAA is a construction industry
association of 6,200 firms and
professionals who provide management
services to owners who are planning,
designing and constructing capital
facilities and infrastructure projects.
Our Mission is to Promote and
Enhance Leadership, Professionalism
and Excellence in Managing the
Development and Construction
of Projects and Programs.
CM Advisor, published bi­‑monthly
by CMAA, reports on and follows
the industry as a service to its
members. Submission of articles,
ideas and suggestions is appreciated
and encouraged.
7926 Jones Branch Drive, Suite 800
McLean, Virginia 22102-3303 USA
Phone: 703.356.2622
Fax: 703.356.6388
Email: info@cmaanet.org
Web: www.cmaanet.org
CMAA ©Copyright 2010,
ISSN 1084-75327
Reproduction or redistribution in any
form is forbidden without written
permission of the publisher.
CMAA members receive this newsletter
as a member benefit. For advertising
information, contact Tom Egly at
tom.egly@tgdcom.com.
CII was founded in 1983 and now has more than 100
members, including major construction owners, contractors,
and A/E service firms, as well as working relationships with more than 40 other
universities. CII’s creation represented the first industry-government-academic
collaboration to bring rigorous research to the engineering and construction world.
This collaboration has produced valuable research on more than 150 topics,
including 14 published Best Practices in such areas as Pre-Project Planning,
Team Building, Constructability, Change Management, and Quality Management.
These are easily recognizable as the same topics CMAA has worked to address
through the development and continual improvement of our Standards of Practice
(SOP) and extensive Professional Development programs. Moreover, CII and CMAA
have long had key members in common, including owners like the General Services
Administration, the Army Corps of Engineers and Constellation Energy. In addition,
many CMAA service provider members also belong to CII.
Why would these organizations maintain two memberships? Clearly, because they
see different but complementary values in the two groups. By working together,
CII and CMAA have a clear chance to make two plus two equal five…or more!
CII’s focus is organizational, while CMAA stresses the practice of Construction and
Program Management by individual professionals. This is why the alliance theme
of “Best Practices – Best Practitioners” is so appropriate. It’s vital to identify Best
Practices, of course, but they remain just words unless owners have the support
of seasoned, skilled, and committed professionals to deliver them on actual jobs.
Early in the new alliance, CII and CMAA will deliver all the natural first steps.
We’ve established reciprocal discounts on document purchases, conference
registrations, and other transactions, and we’ve already shared promotion
of the organizations’ principal spring events: CII’s Performance Improvement
Workshop in Florida in April and CMAA’s Owners’ Forum in Atlanta in May.
CII will support and promote CCM certification. In fact, CMAA President and
CEO Bruce D’Agostino will be joined by Randy Larson, CCM, FCMAA, of PBS&J
and Chuck Hardy, CCM, of GSA at CII’s April event, in a showcased presentation
on the culture of certification.
Other initiatives will be more complex and time-intensive. We will soon launch,
for example, an effort to compare our SOP to CII’s published Best Practices, to
find areas in which the documents may differ and define ways to harmonize
them. We will also work to develop new metrics by which we can demonstrate
the tangible benefits of applying the SOPs to projects.
This is a key step toward our long-held goal of verifying the value of professional CM.
The more we talk with CII, the more exciting our shared future looks. There are a
remarkable number of ways in which these two organizations can work together
to deliver very significant value to the construction industry.
4
CMAdvisor
March/April
5
The University of Texas based Construction Industry Institute
(CII), in preparing its 2009 Strategic Plan, conducted an
Emerging Trends report that identified collaboration as
a key to the future. CII noted: “Because of complexities
inherent to modern projects as well as a drive toward
sustainability, the project manager of the future will
need to be able to communicate more effectively
with all disciplines of the project delivery process. This
communication will begin early in design development
and continue through implementation and operation.”
(See page 8 for coverage of the collaboration between
CII and CMAA.)
Collaboration can take many forms, and it’s often easier to
recognize in its absence. Fraga cites, among the symptoms of
inadequate collaboration, “poor or guarded communications
and ineffective, slow decision making.”
He adds, “Teams can collaborate grudgingly or they can
collaborate in the extreme. You see extreme collaboration
in military, firefighting and other extreme situations where
individuals are willing to risk their lives for the greater good.”
Fraga acknowledges it’s unlikely to see much life-risking
in construction, but the important step is to get past
grudging collaboration.
Dan Fauchier of the ReAlignment Group draws this comparison:
BEYOND KUMBAYA:
True Collaboration in Construction?
“A kumbaya moment” describes,
somewhat derisively, a superficial show
of goodwill and cooperation beneath
which nothing fundamental changes.
6
CMAdvisor
When it comes to true collaboration on construction
projects, leading CMs and other observers stress it’s the
fundamentals, not the window dressing, that matter.
“People keep talking about the kumbaya aspect, and you keep
looking for the substance,” says Bob Hixon, PE, CCM, FCMAA,
of Hill International. “We’re not trying to all hug each other,
but to establish a basis for trust and collaboration.”
Robert Fraga, AIA, FCMAA, of the Smithsonian Institution
puts it another way. “Collaboration is not about getting along,”
he says. “It is better to get along but it is not a prerequisite
for collaboration. In fact, there are many historical examples
where team members hated each other and collaborated
magnificently…Gilbert and Sullivan, the 1907 Detroit Tigers,
the Manhattan Project scientists…I have also participated
in projects where everybody liked each other and the
project was a failure.”
“Collaborative teams have more informal communication,
more decisions made with full buy-in by all team members,
smoother and more organized work flow evidenced by fewer
workers moving in more harmonious patterns, and generally
a less cluttered worksite because materials are flowing in as
needed rather than getting stacked up everywhere unused.
The converse is a team that puts everything in writing, floods
a site with workers playing catch-up and stacks materials
everywhere because they don’t know what activities will
have to done out of sequence and need to assure materials
are ready when needed. Collaborative teams also smile more.”
For Hixon, trust is always the key, and it’s important for
CMs, in particular, to understand how to build trust. “If
all I do is pick on the contractor, I’m of no value to him and
all he’ll do is ignore me whenever he can. You add value by
being involved early on to insure things are going properly,
so that we’ll all be successful and not just one of us.”
An early start is also essential in managing the huge
information flows that even a straightforward project can
create, says Eric Law of software vendor EADOC. “You cannot
run a sizable project these days without one or more software
tools,” he adds. “When you first assemble your team, discuss
how you are going to move information across the team,
how you are going to capture the information and finally,
how you are going to distribute and archive it when the
project is complete.
“Start when a project is in its infancy and there are only
small amounts of information,” Law says.
In addition to information flow, risk management also needs
“front-of-mind” attention early on. “If you have the mutual
trust, everybody will pick up the risk they can manage and
will not be unreasonable and expect people to manage
things they can’t control,” says Hixon.
Fauchier comments that “truly collaborative teams can
influence how risk is handled by working together to identify,
predict and mitigate risks week by week and month by
month. In fact, in our experience, teams who take time to
address risk openly increase their level of collaboration just
in doing that.”
Collaboration must work on a daily basis in the field, but also
must have the clear and strong support of top management.
In the field, it’s important that no team member be put in a
situation where financial survival is imperiled.
“It is better to get along but it is not a
prerequisite for collaboration. In fact,
there are many historical examples
where team members hated each
other and collaborated magnificently.”
“Sometimes the profit motive might be such that the more
work the contractor can get by change order, the better
compensation they get,” says Hixon. “This creates an adverse
situation. Or the subs may have been squeezed brutally in
the bidding, and they’re starting from a down position. You
can’t collaborate if you’re in survival mode. But if everybody
is on a reasonable basis, the key for collaboration has to
come from the top. It can work on the field level but mainly
it has to come from the top. The principals of the firms have
to be involved.”
In Fauchier’s experience, “collaboration can be an expectation
set early by the executives, especially the owner, or it can
well up from within project teams who, as people, know the
value of working together harmoniously. In both cases intent
must be coupled with tools and coaching. As a CM I’ve been
able to lead collaboratively by example, but for sustained
collaboration it must be “programmed” into the project.”
He also has seen teams change their character in mid-project.
“A team that starts on a less-than-collaborative project and
wants to step up and turn it around can choose to realign
itself into horizontal teams cutting across the vertical
organizational ‘silos.’ We have found realigned teams can
be coached to be very collaborative even in an atmosphere
that breeds conflict,” Fauchier says.
Whatever the delivery method or other project particulars,
Fauchier adds, “CMs must be the leaders and champions of
collaboration.”
March/April
7
“Best Practices—
Best Practitioners.”
That’s a simple and powerful promise, and making it a reality
is the mission of a new collaboration between CMAA and the
Construction Industry Institute at the University of Texas, Austin.
The alliance will provide a clear connection
between:
• CII’s carefully validated construction Best
Practices, in-depth industry research, bench‑
marking and other respected programs, and
• CMAA’s Professional Development, certification
and publications, particularly the 2010 edition of
Construction Management Standards of Practice.
CII is a consortium of more than 100 members,
including construction owners both public and
private, major engineering, construction and CM
services firms, and academic institutions. According
to CII Director Wayne Crew, the impetus for a
closer link to CMAA arose from the membership.
“Our members asked us to look at CMAA and
how some of our Professional Development
programs could fit into the certification process
that CMAA has in the CCM program,” he explains.
“As we did that we recognized that a deeper and
broader relationship with CMAA would bring to
the forefront an opportunity to disseminate on
a much wider and greater basis our research
findings that can really help improve the industry.”
Bruce D’Agostino, President and CEO of CMAA,
comments, “CII is dedicated to identifying
the factors and practices that make projects
succeed, while CMAA devotes itself to identifying
and supporting the people who deliver those
8
CMAdvisor
advantages. By working together, CII and
CMAA will provide significant value to the
entire construction community.”
CMAA is offering reciprocal discounts on
event registrations, bookstore purchases, and
educational programs to members of CII.
Among the early fruits of the new CII/CMAA
collaboration:
The CII/CMAA Memorandum of Understanding
states that the intent is “to form a strategic
alliance with the mission to improve delivery
of capital facilities in all settings by promoting
the professional practice of Construction and
Program Management in conjunction with the
broadest possible application of recognized
industry Best Practices”
• CMAA members can get a sharply discounted
registration rate for CII’s Performance
Improvement Workshop in Florida in April.
Click here for details.
• CMAA members Randy Larson, CCM, FCMAA
of PBS&J and Charles Hardy, CCM of the General
Services Administration will join President
and CEO Bruce D’Agostino, CAE, FCMAA in
a presentation at the PIW focusing on the
Culture of Certification.
• CII will present a two-hour introduction to
its Best Practices as the opening session of
the CMAA Owners Forum in Atlanta in May.
• CMAA members can obtain electronic copies
of all CII publications (around 500 publications),
including CII Education Modules, at a 45%
discount from non-CII member prices.
Click here for more information.
• CII’s Online Education courses (18 online
hours on 7 topics,) based on CII Best Practices,
are available to CMAA members at a 35%
discount from non-CII member prices.
Click here to explore these options.
Best Practices For
Best Practitioners
Bruce D’Agostino With Wayne Crew
Wayne Crew is the Director of the
Construction Industry Institute. He joined
CII in 2004 as the Associate Director of
Research. Prior to that, he served as vice
president of construction for Technip
USA Corporation in Houston, TX.
The two organizations have taken the first steps
toward a very significant long-term effort to
harmonize CII Best Practices and the CMAA
Construction Management Standards of Practice.
This effort will rely on a committee of subject
matter experts chosen from the two organizations’
members, who will review the content of both
resources and identify areas of overlap, similarity
and difference.
LISTEN NOW to the entire
CMAA Radio interview with Crew
CMAA members will also have the opportunity
to become part of CII’s benchmarking program,
which now includes data from nearly $110 billion
worth of construction projects.
“Our goal is to improve the industry and improve
capital project delivery processes and CMAA is
a really bright spot where we can disseminate
our research findings,” Crew says. “We’re excited
about it.”
March/April
9
OWNER’S FORUM OFFERS CMs THE “INSIDE SCOOP”
MAY 2– 4, 2010
For organizations and practitioners looking for solutions
to today’s business problems, reliable and authoritative
market intelligence is a must.
Owners Forum Schedule
This year will provide no better venue to gather this kind of
straight-from-the-source information than the CMAA Owners
Forum in Atlanta on May 2–4.
1:00 – 3:00
CII Special Session—Best Practices
3:00 – 4:30
Fellows Forum—Filling the
Leadership Gap
5:00 – 6:00
Welcome Reception
Speakers at the Forum will represent such pace-setting
organizations as:
SUNDAY
• American
Airlines
• Atlanta-Hartsfield
International Airport
• Chevron
• Georgia Aquarium
MONDAY
• MassPort
• M.C. Anderson Medical Center
7:30 – 9:00
• Procter & Gamble
• Sutter Healthcare
Breakfast with CMAA Chairman
Gary Cardamone’s Welcome Address
• Target
• Tennessee Valley Authority
9:00 – 10:30
Plenary—Buildings, featuring Target,
Georgia Aquarium, Sutter Healthcare,
M.D. Anderson Medical Center
• Virginia DOT
10:30 – 10:45
Networking Break
They’ll share their insights and plans in four segment
sessions, focusing on buildings, transportation, process
industries and the federal sector. Each speaker will brief
attendees on their programs in progress as well as in the
pipeline, and provide their own perspectives on the major
trends shaping the market today.
10:45 – 12:15
Plenary—Process Industries,
featuring Procter & Gamble,
Chevron, Tennessee Valley Authority,
Constellation Energy (invited)
12:15 – 1:30
Networking lunch
1:30 – 3:00
Plenary—Transportation and Transit,
featuring American Airlines, Atlanta
Hartsfield International Airport, Dallas
Area Rapid Transit—DART, Transurban,
Virginia DOT
3:00 – 3:30
Networking Break
3:30 – 4:45
Town Hall with Owners hosted by Mark
Bridgers, Director, FMI Corporation
5:00 – 6:00
CMAA Foundation “Old South” Reception
• U.S. General Services • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Administration
CMAA Chairman Cardamone’s special video message about the Forum:
ATLANTA, GA
“The sessions will be strategic,” stresses CMAA Chairman
Gary Cardamone, PE, director of Construction Management
at the Port of Long Beach, CA. “We won’t focus on the basics
of how to perform CM, but rather on where the business is
going and how we can improve our results.
“For CM firms and individuals,” Cardamone adds, “the Forum
will reveal what owners are planning, what they need now, and
just what additional services they will need in the future. Plus,
they will have numerous networking opportunities, including
valuable face-time with owners. For owner organizations and
individuals, the Forum is an excellent opportunity to share best
practices with each other, discuss strategies for a recovering
economy, convey their needs and concerns to service providers,
and learn what today’s marketplace has to offer.”
In addition to the four segmented sessions, the Forum will
offer two multi-speaker Town Hall meetings, as well as a
presentation on “Leadership” by the CMAA College of Fellows.
The Construction Industry Institute will open the Forum
program on Sunday afternoon with a two-hour introduction
to its construction Best Practices program. CII Director Wayne
Crew will be the featured speaker at breakfast on Tuesday.
The CMAA Foundation will host “An Evening in the Old
South” reception on Monday.
TUESDAY
7:30 – 9:00
Breakfast with featured keynote by
Wayne Crew, Executive Director, CII
9:00 – 9:30
Break
9:30 – 10:45
Plenary—Federal Markets, featuring
GSA, USACE, Department of Veteran’s
Affairs, State Department OBO (invited),
DHS Customs and Border Patrol (invited)
10:45 – 11:00
Break
11:00 – 12:00
Closing Town Hall
Advance registration for the Forum closes on April 19.
10
CMAdvisor
March/April
11
News
Water Summit Recruits Top Co-Chairs
Top executives from two of the largest and most innovative
water systems in the country have signed on as honorary
co-chairs of CMAA’s second annual Water Summit.
Harlan Kelly Jr., head of the Infrastructure Division of the
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, and Catherine
Gerali, district manager of the Metro Wastewater Reclamation
District in greater Denver, CO will help shape the program
for the Summit, which takes place in Kansas City, MO
on July 18 – 20.
CMAA has already recruited an impressive roster of both
major system owners and top executives of services firms
to explore trends and issues affecting water and wastewater
infrastructure. Among the confirmed speakers are:
• Karen Kubick, PE, wastewater enterprise capital program
director at the San Francisco PUC;
• James (Tony) Parrot, executive director of the Metropolitan
Sewer District of Great Cincinnati;
• Steve Nielsen, director of the Indianapolis Department
of Public Works;
• Jody Puckett, department director for the City of Dallas
Water Utilities;
• George Hawkins, general manager of the Washington, DC
Water and Sewer Authority; and
• Arletta Scott Williams, executive director of the Alleghany
County Sewer Authority.
Discussing water and wastewater issues from the perspective
of providers of Construction and Program Management
services will be such leaders as:
• Dick Fox, chairman and CEO of CDM;
• Bob Bailey, president of the Water Business Group
at CH2M HILL;
• Daniel McCarthy, president of the Water Division
at Black & Veatch;
• Roger Ward, vice president/Water Services at HNTB
Corporation; and
• Marty Dorward, senior vice president/Program
Management at AECOM Water.
Robert Glennon, author of Unquenchable: America’s Water
Crisis and What to Do About It, will be keynote speaker.
Online advance registration for the Summit will be
available soon.
David Gannon
Dave Creek
Paul Grosskruger
MWH Constructors, Inc.
Broomfield, CO
Barnhart, Inc.
San Diego, CA
Amy Czajkowski, PE
Webcor Builders
Honolulu, HI
McDonough
Bolyard Peck, Inc.
Atlanta, GA
Infrastructure Engineering
Corporation
Poway, CA
Roza Gurevich
Tess da Silva
Christopher Honkomp
Martin Dubroff
Larry David
Bovis Lend Lease
Los Angeles, CA
General Services
Administration
Washington, DC
Matthew Feldhaus
Analytical Planning
Services, Inc.
Irvine, CA
Charles First
Heery International, Inc.
Washington, DC
12
CMAdvisor
AECOM Design
Los Angeles, CA
Booz Allen Hamilton
San Antonio, TX
Kerns LDKC, Inc.
Jenks, OK
Jason Inki Kim
Parsons
Pasadena, CA
Girish Indru Kripalani
ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
Los Angeles, CA
Dr. John I. Messner, director of the
Computer Integrated Construction (CIC)
Research Program at the Pennsylvania
State University, will offer CMAA
members a free hour-long webinar on
“Planning the Execution of Building
Information Modeling throughout the
Design, Construction and Operation
of a Project” on April 28 at 2:00 pm.
This presentation, partially funded
by the Construction Industry Institute,
will provide an overview of a structured
procedure for integrated teams to plan
and communicate their Building Infor‑
mation Modeling (BIM) implementation
strategies on a project.
Gene Layne
McDonough
Bolyard Peck, Inc.
Richmond, VA
Krishna Loomba
Fairfax County Department
of Public Works
Fairfax, VA
Steven Eric Lorenzo
LaVerne McSwain
Brown Construction
Services, Inc.
Washington, DC
Steven Oh, PMP, LEED AP
Ken Pruett
ARCADIS-US, Inc.
Los Angeles, CA
Kevin Riley
URS Corporation
Los Angeles, CA
McDonough
Bolyard Peck, Inc.
Atlanta, GA
Paul Oleson
Leopoldo Rosas
Barton Malow Company
Southfield, MI
Department of
Veterans Affairs
North Chicago, IL
Bill Lukehart
Bradley Ott
EQT Corporation
Philadelphia, PA
M.B. Kahn
Construction Co., Inc.
Columbia, SC
Fred Marsh
Ben Pina, PE, LEED®AP
Edward Sparkman IV
ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
Tempe, AZ
McDonough
Bolyard Peck, Inc.
Fairfax, VA
D. Sean McCone
Johnson, Mirmiran &
Thompson
Sparks, MD
Timothy McDonald
The Penrose Group
Vienna, VA
United States Navy –
Civil Engineers Corps
Washington, DC
Damian Piza
CB Richard Ellis
San Pedro Garza Garcia
Ken Pruett
PinnacleOne
Irvine, CA
Heery International, Inc.
Atlanta, GA
J. Andrew Simonds
Marietta, GA
Stefano Terricola
DAMS • HYDROELECTRIC • PUMP STORAGE • WATER SUPPLY • FLOOD CONTROL
Announces that the
TAUM SAUK EPCM TEAM
IS AVAILABLE FOR A NEW DAM PROJECT
IN THE SPRING OF 2010.
This multi-national, multi-lingual team is the most experienced
group of dam engineers and builders in the world.
The procedure has been developed
through a buildingSMART Alliance
project by the CIC Research Group at
Penn State, and includes four steps:
1)Identify BIM goals and uses;
2)Design the BIM process for the project;
3)Develop information exchange
requirements for interactions
between project participants; and
Congratulations New CCMs!
Glenn Barin
Penn State Expert Offers
Free BIM Webinar
4)Define the project infrastructure to
support the BIM implementation.
Webinar participants will get detailed
templates to support each of the steps.
The procedure is described in more
detail in a downloadable Guide to
Project Execution Planning for BIM. This
planning procedure has been developed
through the generous support of The
Charles Pankow Foundation, CII, the
Penn State Office of Physical Plant
and the Partnership for Achieving
Construction Excellence (PACE).
For complete information and
registration, visit the CMAA
University web pages.
SALUDA DAM REMEDIATION PROJECT
SOUTH CAROLINA
TAUM SAUK UPPER RESERVOIR REBUILD
MISSOURI
The Taum Sauk EPCM Team
– the same EPCM Team that built the OPAL Award winning Saluda Dam –
has been together for 10 years and will move to your site
regardless of how remote.
We can bring our own equipment, safety programs,
scheduling and cost control tools, field laboratory, and vehicles to your site.
Engineers
Construction Managers
Safety Engineers
Schedulers
Environmental Compliance
Geologists
Dam Designers
Estimators
Cost Managers
QA/QC Specialists
License/Permitting
Surveyors
Resident Engineers
Procurement Specialists
Cost Managers
Laboratory Technicians
Contract Administrators
CADD Specialists
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Paul C. Rizzo
President
+1 (412) 825-2021
Carl Rizzo
Vice President — EPCM
+1 (314) 206-0840
www.rizzoa ssoc.com
Hill International, Inc.
Washington, DC
Jon Westervelt
Malcolm Pirnie
Phoenix, AZ
March/April
13
News
CMAA Radio Interview: New Approaches to the Construction Industry’s Challenges
“We need to increase our focus and
attention on maintaining what we
have,” said Blaine Leonard, 2010
president of the American Society
of Civil Engineers, in an interview
with CMAA President and CEO
Bruce D’Agostino.
Leonard is Research Program
Manager at the Utah Department
of Transportation and has been
involved in ASCE since 1981, serving as the Zone IV Vice
President, a Governor of the GeoInstitute, president of the
Utah Section, and on a number of national ASCE committees.
In the interview, Leonard proposed solutions, both short
and long term, to current challenges presented by our
nation’s aging infrastructure. “If we spend a few dollars
on rehabilitation, we can save a lot of money downstream
in not having to replace things after they deteriorate
more,” said Leonard. “We need to not forget operations
and maintenance, and investing in what we have.”
Regarding our nation’s transportation infrastructure funding,
Leonard said “It’s not going to be adequate. At current
spending and investment levels, we’re soon going to be
into a negative balance to the tune of several billion dollars.
We have to increase the funding.”
Professional Development Updates
Have a New Look!
CMAA webinar and
Professional Development
program updates have a
new look. Watch for the
CMAA University banner
each week for a heads-up
on future programs.
To be certain you get these
valuable messages from
CMAA, be sure to add
mailams.cmaanet.org to
your “OK Senders” list.
In the short term, Leonard believes one answer lies in an
increase to the gas tax. “It’s not popular with a lot of folks,
but we use this infrastructure, we need to pay for it. The
National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study
Commission recommended a 5-8 cent gas tax increase per
year for the next 5 years,” said Leonard.
Leonard added that Public Private Partnerships are a viable
solution for funding some elements of our infrastructure.
“As certain areas use it successfully and demonstrate where
its proper use is, it will be seen as a good solution for some
instances. I think it will also spawn new ideas and solutions
as well,” said Leonard.
When asked what the key is to attracting smart young
professionals to engineering, Leonard raised two points.
First, he thinks the industry needs to raise the bar on
education and licensure requirements. Second, Leonard
thinks a new message to students needs to be put out.
“Instead of encouraging students who are good at math
and science to enter the engineering field, we need to focus
on outcomes,” he said. “If you want to change people’s lives,
change the world, become an engineer.” This, he believes,
is a more effective message.
LISTEN NOW to more on infrastructure, transportation
funding, and the future of the engineering profession
Upcoming SOP Courses
Every CM should make mastering CMAA’s Standards of
Practice a priority in 2010. The Standards of Practice Course is
a three-day intensive curriculum valuable for those preparing
to sit for their CCM exam, and for CMs looking to learn or
refresh their knowledge of our Standards of Practice.
Find a three-day intensive course in your region that fits
into your busy schedule. There are currently eight courses
scheduled all over the United States. For information on
how you can help get a course scheduled in your area,
please contact Dennis Doran, at ddoran@cmaanet.org.
If you are unable to travel to a course, consider mastering
CMAA’s core competencies in a self-paced environment
online. Learn more and preview the Standards of Practice
online modules here.
CMAA Sustainability Committee Corner
The National Sustainability committee
formed shortly after the 2007 National
Conference in Chicago is one of CMAA’s
best kept secrets. We meet regularly
(via conference call) with a group
of 12 – 15 participants under the
leadership of Judith Kunoff, chief
architect at MTA New York City Transit
and member of the CMAA National
Board of Directors. Since our group
began, we have participated in panel
discussions at the spring Forums in
2008 and 2009 as well as the 2008
and 2009 National Conferences.
We look forward to additional
participation at the Owner’s Forum
helping to pose sustainable questions
to the Owners who will be assembled
there, as well hosting a Sustainability
track at the 2010 Fall National Confer‑
ence. The Sustainability Committee
has also “greened” the CMAA’s SOP
Guidelines, and is currently working
on the Sustainability Module and
training materials.
As a committee, we hope to serve as
a resource to our fellow Construction
Management professionals so that
the CMAA membership is aware of
best practices, upcoming training and
learning opportunities, such as USGBC’s
USGBC’s Greenbuild Nov 16 – Nov 19 in
Chicago, IL and ACEC’s ECOBuild Dec 6 –
10 in Washington, DC. There are many
regional and local offerings as well.
Please feel free to forward information
on pertinent upcoming events which
can be featured in this Corner.
There are several advance certification
programs available including:
Refer a Friend
to CMAA!
Do you have a colleague or client
who would benefit from CMAA
membership? Visit this link to
send them a concise message
about CMAA. In the process,
you’ll be entered to win one of
two valuable prizes:
• The Green Building Certification
Institute’s LEED Professional
• The National Sustainable Building
Advisor Program
• The Green Globe’s Personnel
Certification
Construction Managers find themselves
critically positioned to help Clients/
Owners build, operate and maintain
facilities that demonstrate leadership
in high performance building opera‑
tions in today’s sustainable building
environment. In the next CM Advisor
look for the article sponsored by the
Sustainability Committee; it will
provide tools, resources and concepts
giving you a jump start ensuring you
as a CM are optimizing your potential
in delivering ongoing sustainable
projects to your clients.
• A free registration for CMAA’s
National Conference & Trade
Show in San Diego.
• A free “VIP Pass” for any and
all CMAA online webinars for
the rest of the year.
Every time you refer a friend, it’s
another entry, improving your
chances to win. Do it today!
Expertise. Technology. Results.
CMAA’s Sustainability Committee also
looks to serve as a catalyst to continue
to move our profession forward to
serve as a true advocate for the Client/
Owner by our bringing technical
expertise to the table. One way to
leverage that expertise is with a
Sustainable “Certification.”
Baltimore Boston Richmond Houston
San Antonio Salt Lake City Honolulu
www.MOCASystems.com
14
CMAdvisor
March/April
15
Certification
Foundation
Q&A with Roy Beeson
Foundation Leadership Adapts For Greater Impact
CMAA recently interviewed Roy Beeson,
PE, CCM of McDonough Bolyard Peck,
who chairs the Board of Governors of the
Construction Management Certification
Institute, the body that administers
the Certified Construction Manager
Program. Tune in to find out what’s new
in Certification and how the program
will change and grow in 2010. Click the
audio link to hear the full interview,
and check out some highlights below:
CMAA: Roy, so far in 2010, new applications for the CCM
have been arriving at CMCI’s headquarters at a rate of two or
three each day. That represents a dramatic surge in interest
in the credential. What do you think accounts for this?
the competency of their Construction Management
team…Owners are becoming more educated and realize
that CCMs can bring a tremendous advantage and increase
the probability that their projects will be successful and
meet the program goals.
CMAA: What is a Culture of Certification?
Roy: For CMs, a culture of certification describes a business
environment in which it is assumed at all levels that the best
and most competent CMs are CCMs, and that the organization
supports employees in attaining and maintaining their
credentials…Here, we include the CCM application in the
goal setting section of the performance review. The idea is
to stress that being certified is very important to the CM,
and to the firm.
Roy: We’re in a very competitive environment. Construction
Managers are looking for ways to distinguish themselves
from the competition. Owners are looking to evaluate
LISTEN NOW to the interview
Surge of Interest in CCM Designation
PD Webinar Calendar
CMCI is experiencing a sharp increase in requests for
in-person presentations and PowerPoints from organizations
for use in-house to inform employees of the benefits of
the CCM designation, and to help guide them through the
process. This can be attributed, in part, to more and more
leaders of large companies encouraging their PMs and CMs
to get certified. Leading firms including Vanir, Booz Allen
Hamilton, PBS&J, ARCADIS, MBP, and Heery International
are among the many noteworthy organizations helping the
CCM designation gain momentum, recognition, and value.
Subcontractor Scopes of Work Series—Case Studies
in Avoiding Scope Gaps and Double Coverage
The first free webinar on “How to Become a CCM” in 2010
drew registrants at more than 80 sites around the country.
Interested in the program? Find a CCM webinar that fits
into your schedule.
Reporting & Trending: LAUSD’s $12.6 billion
New Construction Bond Program
Series Begins Thursday, April 1
This series’ concentration on the nuts and bolts of a
construction project, rather than on basic philosophies
and concepts, sets it apart. It focuses not on the mechanics
of writing subcontract scopes of work, but on why they
are written the way they are and common issues we
need to look out for.
Thursday, April 8
Attendees will learn how to balance needs of the project
reporting, usually 10 days each month (25th – 5th) with
their resources.
FREE!
Becoming a Certified Construction Manager
Thursday, April 22
The CCM Presentation is a workshop that informs
prospective applicants how to fill out the application and
ask questions about the CM Certification program.
16
CMAdvisor
By Christine
Keville, FCMAA
Chair
The CMAA
Foundation
has achieved
significant
accomplishments
in recent years,
including a library
of popular career videos and has made
major progress toward the goal of our
capital campaign.
A few recent changes to the Foundation’s
leadership structure, though modest,
will have important benefits in helping
us achieve even more in the future.
For example, the Foundation’s By-Laws
have been revised to provide that
members of the Board of Directors
will be eligible to serve two three-year
terms. This will enhance continuity and
assure that we always benefit from both
experienced leaders and new thinking.
innovative and creative ideas. The
Investment Advisory Committee
will continue to work on providing
the Foundation the best return on
our investments.
Of course, unrestricted gifts are
always welcome, providing funds
the Foundation can devote to seizing
shorter-term opportunities.
Members of the Foundation Board
are encouraged to step forward as
true leaders, both through active
participation in Foundation initiatives
and significant financial commitments
to achieve the organization’s mission.
The Foundation now provides a flexible
array of giving options, and I strongly
urge every member of CMAA to make a
gift, small or large. Members may donate
to our capital campaign, “Construction
Managers Building for the Future,”
to help build an endowment whose
earnings will support future activities.
Sponsorship of a Foundation social
event at a national CMAA gathering
offers a “multiplier” effect, since it
enables us to stage a function that
will generate contributions from
many other sources.
Finally, planned giving and other forms
of donations are available. For details,
contact Laura Blake at Foundation
headquarters. The Foundation “Thanks
you in advance” for considering a
contribution to this worthy cause.
We have also formalized and expanded
our committee structure. The Board has
organized committees on Fundraising,
Scholarships, Career Development,
and the Website, in addition to its
long-standing Investment Advisory
Committee.
In the Fundraising Committee,
subcommittees will focus on
Planned Giving, Events/Activities
and Solicitation/Recognition. Our
Scholarship committee is busy making
application process improvements,
including an electronic submission
process as well as changes to the
selection criteria which will streamline
the application, review and selection
process. The Career Development
Committee will interface with CMAA in
support of the Construction Manager
in Training (CMIT) program and the
association’s student chapters. The
Website Committee will be working
with student chapters seeking their
feedback in how to appeal to a younger
audience and looking for additional
COMPREHENSIVE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES
Program Management - Constructibility Review - Construction Inspection
Cost Estimating - Commissioning - CPM Scheduling - Risk Management - Training
WWW.MBPCE.COM
800-898-9088
March/April
17
Professional Practice Corner
Incentives to Promote Collaboration
By CMAA College of Fellows
All contracts involve incentives. The choice is not between
having incentives or not, it is about which incentives operate
on the project team members and how to frame those
incentives to communicate what is important to the owner.
Consider the conventional GMP contract, often used in a
CM-At-Risk environment. When subcontracted work on GMP
projects is competitively bid, the low bidding subcontractors
are given incentives to price their work with a suboptimal
margin in order to win the bid. This in turn gives the
subcontractor economic incentives to recoup some of
that lost profit through change orders or claims.
For most IPD projects, the owner seeks to avoid these
traditional incentives to adversarial behavior by procuring
on the basis of qualifications, and using negotiations, target
value design and an incentive program to get value-formoney from the project team in an environment of good
will and collaboration.
An effective incentive program focuses on a few key areas
(e.g., cost, schedule, quality, safety, customer satisfaction)
that comprise a “successful” project as a whole, keeping
these areas in balance so as not to skew the project
inadvertently towards one area.
Use incentives wisely for areas of project performance
where participants normally need added motivation and
to create a complementary set of incentives that keep
key project goals in balance.
Most people are not solely motivated by money. Social
science posits that project participants have basically two
types of motivation: economic and intrinsic. Economic
motivation arises from compensation terms while intrinsic
motivation arises from the performer’s own internal
values and preferences. Financial incentives can motivate
a performer, but only when he or she feels that the payout
is worth the effort. Intrinsic motivation, on the other hand,
often provides performers with non-economic reasons to
perform beyond the bare minimum a contract requires.
In situations where one normally acts as a result of intrinsic
motivation, providing economic incentives for that same
behavior can displace the intrinsic motivation, sometimes
with adverse results. However, contract incentives generally
do not undermine intrinsic motivation when:
• The incentive is implemented in a way that makes
performers responsible for the means and outcome
of their performance. This reinforces their autonomy
and helps satisfy the need for self-determination.
An incentive should not be too prescriptive.
18
CMAdvisor
• The principal and performer discuss the results in person.
Face-to-face communication signals the principal’s respect
to the performer, and thus reinforces autonomy and
self-esteem. Discussing performance also gives feedback
that allows for improvement.
• Performers participate with the principal in setting goals.
By involving the performer in the formulation of project
goals, the principal enhances the performer’s sense of
autonomy and communicates respect for the performer
as a collaborator.
Moreover, it is important to consider who participates in
the incentive program, and to what degree. Projects may
include some participants in the award fee program, but not
in the painsharing/gainsharing program. Or they could have
different award fee programs for different types of project
players. Not all project players have a significant effect on
the outcome of a project.
Painsharing/Gainsharing
Painsharing generally operates through the mechanism
of a pool of profit contributed by each of the participating
members of the design and construction team. Often, only
the major players participate. The profit pool is available to
pay for cost overruns. Once the pool is exhausted, the owner
typically bears the risk of further cost overruns, unless done
in the context of a GMP, where the CM would share the costs
of overruns with other project team members up to a point,
with further overruns borne by the CM alone.
If there are cost underruns, some portion is usually added
to the profit pool and distributed in accordance with
the negotiated percentages in the incentive program
(“gainsharing”). Frequently, the percentages are based
on the parties’ estimated compensation in relation to the
estimated construction cost of the project, although the
percentages might be weighted to provide a greater share
to the designers, since their raw percentage might be viewed
as disproportionate to their influence on project outcome.
The main purpose is to provide a commercial structure
that promotes team behavior rather than simply individual
behavior. By requiring at least the major players to share in
the risks and benefits resulting from a common fund, the
key project players now have financial interest in helping
each other. In addition, putting profit at risk gives all key
team members—not just the CM—“skin in the game” to
keep them focused.
Award fees
Besides providing for the possibility of sharing in cost
savings, many IPD projects have some kind of bonus system
for achieving non-cost goals, often called award fees. Award
fee programs greatly vary. Some are funded from project
savings and contingency preservation, others by a dedicated
fund set aside by the owner outside the construction cost
estimate. Some particularly clever owners tie the team’s
ability to share in cost savings to their success in achieving
award fees on non-cost performance areas, promoting more
balanced outcomes.
them during the project. Embedded, recurring problems
don’t get fixed. However, a well designed award fee program
forces IPD teams to reflect and share their assessments
of current performance, with an eye towards learning
and improvement.
Performance evaluations need to be done frequently in
order for the project to take advantage of lessons learned
DURING the project. An owner who sets an award fee
based upon qualitative criteria must stipulate that there
is a subjective element in the evaluation and that the
owner’s decision is final. The corollary is that owners
must be transparent, respectful and fair.
Measuring performance
Traditional economic theory assumes people act primarily
(or solely) out of self-interest. Thus, traditional economists
suggest structuring contract incentives to provide either
a bonus or a penalty based on a defined quantum of
performance.
However, social science shows that incentives that depend
on fairness (both in terms of the performer’s effort and the
principal’s award) result in better performance. By using a
compensation system dependent on fairness, the principal
and performer develop greater trust, which reinforces
intrinsic motivation. It also benefits the collaborative frame‑
work an IPD project seeks to foster. Why would trust-based
award fees result in better performance than award fees
based on quantitative results? In trust-based scenarios, both
parties act fairly because they know the other will respond
negatively toward unfair treatment, which would ultimately
hurt project performance.
Consider, however, the results when incentives depend
solely on meeting a quantified objective. In general, the
performer provides the amount of effort needed to meet
the level of award fee that maximizes his or her own
cost-benefit tradeoff. The end result is that a principal will
rarely get performance that exceeds the defined quantitative
level, and may get much less if the cost-benefit trade-off
fails to align with the quantitative goal.
While certain performance goals may be usefully set at a
quantitative amount, qualitative metrics generally provide
better incentives.
Performance evaluations and payouts
One benefit of an award fee program is simply that it
requires a formal performance evaluation. Too often owners
wait until the end of the job to express their (dis)satisfaction.
Some owners believe they must get along with the team
members so they don’t want to alienate them by criticizing
“Use incentives wisely for areas of project performance
where participants normally need added motivation
and to create a complementary set of incentives that
keep key project goals in balance.”
Some projects have incorporated self-evaluations as a
precursor to the owner evaluation. In many cases, an
owner may be able to simply agree with the team member’s
own evaluation, which would certainly contribute to
good project relations, build trust and support the team
member’s desire for autonomy. Peer evaluations may
also be useful. However structured, it is essential that
the evaluation is fair and timely, so “lessons learned”
can be implemented immediately.
Who?
The meetings should include the project team management
from any organization being evaluated, and could also include
the principal executive management of the organization.
Developing a brass-to-brass relationship is crucial. The
fee-determining person is typically someone senior in
the owner’s organization.
When should award fees be paid?
The award fees should be determined at the performance
evaluations and at least some portion of the earned
fee should be distributed to the IPD team periodically.
A good approach is to parcel out a portion of the fee as
the project progresses and indicate what portion will be
earned at the end of the project if the project finishes
with current performance.
Continued on page 21
March/April
19
Legal Corner
Design-Phase Collaboration Provisions in the New AIA and
ConsensusDOCS Contracts for Integrated Project Delivery
Derek A. Simpson, Morris Polich &
Purdy LLP, Los Angeles, CA
Tantalized by reports of significant cost
savings, increased quality, and reduced
completion time, some facility owners
are clamoring for their next project to
be fully collaborative, using building
information modeling (“BIM”) and
entering into innovative multi-party
contracts for integrated project delivery
(“IPD”). Of course, the technological
wizardry BIM offers is only as effective
as the collaborative effort of the
team using it.
That’s where the IPD contract can
support the project’s goals, by clarifying
the approach to the project and making
each team member’s responsibilities
explicit. Many foresee a future where
construction managers with expertise
in this new delivery method will have
a competitive advantage. To help
construction managers hit the ground
running on their next collaborative
project, a thorough understanding of
the provisions regarding early designphase collaboration found in the model
IPD contracts issued by the American
Institute of Architects is essential.
The Critique of the Design
Phase in Traditional Project
Delivery Methods and IPD’s
Collaborative Solution
An age-old gripe about the traditional
design-bid-build delivery method is
the inevitable finger-pointing between
the designer, contractor, and subcon‑
tractors over errors in the plans and
constructability. For example, if a
mechanical design calls for a duct
going through structural steel, work
must stop, and the design must be
amended in the heat of battle. The
work is impeded, costs increase,
and performance of the mechanical
system may suffer.
20
CMAdvisor
In contrast, IPD calls for the owner,
architect, general contractor, and
the key subconsultants and trades to
convene as early as possible during
the design phase and work as a team
to create a digital three-dimensional
model. With each participant providing
unique knowledge and experience,
the team in essence builds the project
digitally before anyone orders materials
and starts construction. Instead of
discovering collisions, other errors, and
opportunities for improvement during
construction, the team identifies issues
and collaborates to solve them in the
3D model during the design phase.
The AIA’s Transitional
Documents and Single Purpose
Entity Agreement for IPD
The AIA offers two packages of contract
documents for IPD projects. The Tran‑
sitional Agreements consist of A2952008 (general conditions), B195-2008
(owner-architect agreement), A195-2008
(owner-contractor agreement), and
an amendment to A195-2008. While
these agreements differ sharply from
traditional construction contracts, they
stop short of clearly obligating all of the
project participants to collaborate as a
team in the design-phase.
Generally, the contractor must “advise”
the owner and the architect during
the entire development of the design
documents, on constructability, the
availability of materials and labor, and
construction costs. Additionally, the
contractor must “obtain information”
from subcontractors regarding the pro‑
posed systems and products, but only to
validate estimates, schedules, tolerances,
and prefabrication opportunities. During
the initial conceptualization and criteria
design phases, no provision explicitly
requires the architect, contractor, and
key subcontractors to exchange ideas
and collaboratively develop the design.
In the following detailed design phase,
the agreement mandates the architect
to work “in consultation” with the
contractor. These terms do not invoke
a high level of collaboration. In the
final implementation documents phase,
however, the agreement requires both
the architect and contractor to prepare
the design documents. This provision,
more than the others, implicitly con‑
templates the architect and contractor
collaborating. Additionally, the contrac‑
tor is required to coordinate with the
subcontractors and suppliers, at the
implementation documents phase, to
ensure the design documents “include
sufficient and unambiguous informa‑
tion for completion of the work.” This
provision addresses the goal of spotting
design errors before construction, but it
does not declare outright that the key
subcontractors must collaborate during
the design phase.
The second AIA form contract for
IPD is C195-2008, Standard Form
Single Purpose Entity Agreement for
Integrated Project Delivery. Just as
collaborative construction projects
mark a distinct break with tradition,
so does this form contract. Under
this agreement, the owner, architect,
and contractor form a limited liability
company, of which they are all members.
The company is then funded by the
owner and all design and construction
activities are conducted under separate
contracts with the company.
This contract goes further than the
Transition Documents in declaring
the participants’ duties to collaborate
during the design phases of the project.
For instance, the parties must prepare
a matrix termed an Integrated Scope
of Services, listing the tasks required
to plan, design, and construct the
project. While the participants must
assign to one member the primary
responsibility to complete the task,
all of the other members agree to
“assist in the performance of the task
to the extent of the [participant’s]
knowledge, skill, and expertise.”
topic of collaborative principles. In the
section the parties agree to “integrate
their respective roles, responsibilities,
and expertise” and commit to “proactive
and non-adversarial interaction,
problem-solving, the sharing of ideas,
to continuously seek to improve
the Project planning, design, and
construction processes….”
contractor the discretion to bring trade
contractors into the project in the early
design phase to collaborate with the
other project participants. Owners
looking to maximize the benefits of IPD
and BIM may be interested in making
the trade contractors’ early involvement
in the design phase mandatory.
Conclusion
The ConsensusDOCS 300
and 301 for Collaborative
Project Delivery and the
BIM Addendum
Going a step further than either AIA
contract, ConsensusDOCS 300 explicitly
requires both the designer and the
contractor to work collaboratively
during the design process. In another
provision regarding preconstruction
services, the designer again promises
to work collaboratively with the other
members of the project team. For the
contractor and trade contractors’ part,
they agree to notify the management
group of any errors and omissions they
discover in the design documents.
The ConsensusDOCS 300 Standard
Form of Tri-Party Agreement for
Collaborative Project Delivery also
differs sharply from the traditional
design-bid-build agreements. It is a
multi-party agreement between the
owner, architect, and contractor and
it dedicates a four-page section to the
A similar provision requiring the
contractor and trades to promptly
notify the project participants of
errors in the digital design model
is found in ConsensusDOCS 301,
Building Information Modeling (BIM)
Addendum. Finally, another provision
of ConsensusDOCS 300 provides the
Also, all parties acknowledge in the
agreement that everyone must “provide
services in a highly collaborative and
integrated environment envisioned
for the Project and the requirement to
obligate similarly any subcontractor and
consultants retained.” While these terms
admittedly are new to construction
contracts and have not been subject
to an extensive history of judicial
interpretation, they certainly go a long
way toward making the collaborative
nature of the project explicit.
In addition to design-phase collaboration
using BIM, IPD contemplates several
other sea changes from traditional
project delivery methods. The list
is long, but it includes aligning the
participants’ interests to share in the
risks and rewards of the project, open
communication, and collaborative
budgeting and scheduling. By
understanding these principles,
and being aware of the contractual
provisions invoking them, construction
managers can position themselves to
meet owners’ demands to use IPD in
their next projects.
Derek Simpson is an attorney with
Morris Polich & Purdy LLP in Los
Angeles. He can be reached at
dsimpson@mpplaw.com.
Professional Practice Corner, Continued from page 19
How much?
The biggest incentive
Normally, the award fees should not be a windfall. Very large
amounts will attract attention from multiple sources, draw
significant pressures to justify paying it and force the owner’s
management team to justify some subjective decisions.
Perhaps the biggest incentive has nothing to do with cost
savings or award fees. In many cases, the biggest incentive
is repeat business. Good people want repeat work and will
work hard to build or uphold their reputation. But since
repeat work is unlikely to be a matter of contract, there must
be a strong perception that repeat work will follow good
performance.
Even a modest award fee will still have a good effect. The
people working on the project are now conscious that there
is a report card. If they earn the bonus, there is clear evidence
of their good performance within their organizations.
Flexibility
Incentives are complex business. What “should” work may
not, or it may not work on the next project even if it did on
the last. The owner and IPD team should be flexible regarding
the incentive program so they can adjust it mid-project to
address changed project conditions. Otherwise, incentives
that motivated good behavior under one set of circumstances
may motivate problematic behavior under a new set.
This Professional Practice Corner article was adapted from
the White Paper, Managing Integrated Project Delivery
written for the CMAA College of Fellows by Chuck Thomsen,
FAIA, FCMAA; Joel Darrington, Esq.; Dennis Dunne, FCMAA;
Will Lichtig, Esq. Joel Darrington is the principal author of
the Incentives section. The entire White Paper can be found
online. Comments on the paper and the topic are welcome,
and should be sent to John McKeon at CMAA.
March/April
21
Member News
Alpha Corporation To Manage
El Dorado International
Airport Project
Alpha Corporation, a Dulles, VA
based Professional Engineering and
Construction Management firm, has
been awarded a contract to provide
Project Management services for
the $650 million expansion and
modernization of the El Dorado
International Airport (renamed El
Nuevo Dorado International Airport)
in Bogota, Colombia.
This expansion includes the demolition
of the existing passenger terminal
and new construction of a combined
domestic and international terminal.
The 160,000 square meter development
will increase the capacity of Colombia’s
largest airport to 16 million passengers
each year when it is completed in 2013.
El Nuevo Dorado International Airport is
the most important airport in Colombia
and serves as the nation’s primary
international gateway.
Balfour Beatty Construction
Named One of the Country’s
Best Employers
Fortune magazine has recognized
Balfour Beatty Construction for its
commitment to employees by placing
the company on its prestigious “100
Best Companies to Work For” list. The
distinction is a first for the company,
which ranked 76th on the list, and it
reflects how a company’s culture can
help it thrive in a tough economy.
“We are honored to be recognized for
what we know is true of our company,”
said Robert Van Cleave, Chairman and
CEO. “We strive to give our employees
the best work environment possible
and to stand true to our company
philosophy. And we’ve seen this
investment in our culture pay off.”
ICRC Awarded
Contract from GSA
SCS To Provide PM/CM
Services for News Ed Projects
Integrated Concepts and Research
Corporation (ICRC), a wholly owned
subsidiary of VSE Corporation, was
awarded an IDIQ contract for CM
services by GSA’s Management
Services Center in Auburn, WA.
SCS, based in Pasadena, CA, has been
selected to provide Program and
Construction Management Services
for both the Southwestern College
District’s $500 million Proposition AA
and R Bond Program in San Diego, CA
and the Colton Joint Unified School
District’s $327 million Measure B
and G Bond Program in Colton, CA.
“Construction Management customer
agencies may utilize PES Construction
Managers to advise or manage a
construction project regardless of
the project delivery method used,”
said ICRC President Carl Williams.
Brightwell Hired at
Montgomery & Barnes, Inc.
Wendell “Buddy” Barnes, President of
Montgomery & Barnes, Inc., a Houston
based civil engineering and consulting
services firm, is pleased to announce
that Hugh Brightwell has been
named vice president, Construction
Management.
CMAdvisor
City of Berkeley Selects
KWAME as CM for New
Municipal Complex
Mehula Joins Parsons
as Vice President and
Program Executive
Parsons has
announced that
Guy Mehula has
joined the firm as
vice president and
program executive.
Mr. Mehula comes
to Parsons with
more than 30 years of experience in the
construction industry, including 25 years
in the United States Navy. Culminating
his career as a captain in the Navy Civil
Engineer Corps, Mr. Mehula commanded
the 30th Naval Construction Regiment,
known as the Seabees, responsible for
the operation of Naval construction units
throughout the Pacific.
Most recently, he was chief facilities
executive at the Los Angeles Unified
School District.
22
SCS was also awarded two new projects
providing CM, CM Multi-Prime and staff
augmentation services for the Rancho
Santiago Community College District’s
$337 million, Measure E Bond Program;
the $30 million Humanities Building
and the $20 million Physical Education
Athletic and Aquatic Complex.
on Friday, February 12, 2010, in
Sacramento following recent major
surgery. He was 75.
Dennis left behind a tremendous legacy.
His early use of Agency CM as an owner
and innovative thinking on integrated
project delivery and collaboration has
had a major impact on CMAA and the
CM industry. He balanced his career with
a great love and commitment to family.
If you wish to make a contribution to
the CMAA Foundation in memory of
Dennis, sign in to your CMAA account
and select “CMAA Foundation” from
the list of menu items. The CMAA
Foundation has already received more
than $5,000 in individual donations
in his honor.
STV Selected For Major Needs
Survey In Massachusetts
STV, Inc. has been awarded a contract
from the Massachusetts School Building
Authority (MSBA) to conduct a needs
survey of more than 1,800 public
elementary, secondary and vocational
schools throughout the Commonwealth.
The survey will identify the general
condition of the facilities. STV has
assembled a highly qualified team
Kwame Building Group has been
selected by the City of Berkeley,
MO as construction manager for the
new multi-million dollar Berkeley
Municipal Complex. KWAME is
overseeing design and construction
of a new city hall and fire station,
as well as renovation of the existing
police station. A groundbreaking
ceremony is planned for Spring 2010.
CMAA Remembers
Dennis Dunne, FCMAA
Dennis Dunne, a
highly respected
innovator and leader
in California state
government and
the Construction
Management industry
died unexpectedly
PBS&J Lands Large
Contract with U.S. Air
and Army National Guard
with a successful history of providing
services to the MSBA including senior
studies, facilities assessments and
technical assistance. STV is a 100
percent employee-owned firm with
more than 1,700 employees in 34
offices in North America.
KBR Awarded Construction
Contract for U.S. Federal
Building and Courthouse
KBR’s Building Group has been awarded
a $46.96 million contract by the U.S.
General Services Administration to
provide Construction Management
services for a new United States Federal
Building and Courthouse in Tuscaloosa,
AL. The building, designed to achieve
LEED® Silver certification, replaces an
outdated existing facility.
“This award reflects the confidence
which clients continue to place in
the Building Group, and gives us
great optimism for their continued
growth,” said David Zimmerman,
president of KBR Services. “Downtown
Tuscaloosa is in the midst of a major
urban revitalization project, and
we look forward to the successful
construction of what is to become the
focal point of the area’s revitalization.”
PBS&J has been awarded an IDIQ
contract with the National Guard
Bureau to support the Air National
Guard (ANG) and Army National
Guard (ARNG) missions. Under the
IDIQ contract, PBS&J will provide
professional architectural, engineering,
and environmental consulting services
throughout the United States, Guam,
the Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico. The
contract is for two years (2010-2012)
with three option years, and totals $95
million with a $10 million per-task order
limit and no limit on per-year awards.
“We are proud to continue supporting
the National Guard,” said PBS&J senior
program manager Gregory Wilk, AIA.
“This contract allows PBS&J to assist the
ANG and ARNG in meeting their most
complex challenges for the next five
years, with our full suite of planning,
design, environmental, and construction
management services.”
Chapter News
National Capital Chapter
The Chapter’s November meeting featured a tour of the GSA’s
Food & Drug Administration Consolidation Project. More than
40 members took part in the informative presentation and
guided tour of this massive project. The $1 billion-plus FDA
Consolidation project is situated on 130 acres at the Federal
Research Center at White Oak, MD and will house 8,889
employees. GSA will provide approximately 3.4 million gross
square feet of office and laboratory space, and approximately
2.2 million gross square feet of parking and infrastructure.
The FDA programs to be located at White Oak include:
• Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER)
• Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH)
• Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER)
• Office of the Commissioner and Regulatory Affairs (OC/ORA)
• Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) (Office)
Continued on page 24
March/April
23
President’s Corner
Chapter News, Continued from page 23
The chapter’s Annual Awards Dinner & Silent Auction will
be held on Thursday, April 15 from 6:30pm – 9:30pm at
the Reagan National Airport Historic Terminal A Lobby. This
evening benefits the NCC Scholarship Fund. The evening
features the presentation of the 2009 chapter Project
Achievement Awards and the 2010 Scholarship Recipients,
and, of course, the Silent Auction. All CMAA members
planning to be in Washington, DC at that time are invited to
attend! Please visit the NCC website for registration details.
Illinois Institute of Technology Student Chapter
Starting in September 2009, the CMAA Student Chapter has
been working to deliver better career and technical expertise
to its membership, which has tripled since then. The chapter
took advantage of the Chicagoland area by organizing site
visits to several construction sites hosted by companies such
as Turner Construction, Walsh Construction, Cotter
Consulting, Bovis Lend Lease, and Parsons Brinckerhoff,
where the students were exposed to best practices on
some very large and important projects.
The on-campus guest lecture schedule has concentrated on
current hot topics such as BIM, Green Project Management,
and IPD. Social events included professional golf instruction
and practice, to be held again in April. The chapter sent
four student members to CMAA’s National Conference in
Tampa, FL. What is new to the chapter is the concentration
on providing extracurricular accreditation training to the
student members. Starting this semester, LEED-GA and CMIT
training are offered and plans include adding OSHA and BIM
training. All the chapter’s activities are driven by constantly
growing membership and active support of the host regional
CMAA Chicago Chapter.
Professional Development Calendar
National Meetings:
Water Summit
Owners Forum
July 18–20
Kansas City, MO
May 2–4
Atlanta, GA
This new event will put the views, interests, priorities
and needs of owners in the spotlight. Attend and find
out what’s on the minds of leading owners, and what
they expect from their CM service providers.
Hear directly from the experts, including leading
system owners, what they expect and need to manage
and expand their systems in the years ahead.
See the full schedule of CMAA webinars.
Succeeding through “Prudent Persistence”
By Bruce D’Agostino, CAE, FCMAA
Perseverance is good…or at least
that is one opinion. We all learned
in childhood that if at first we don’t
succeed, we should “try, try again.”
But we’re also familiar with the saying
that doing the same thing the same way
over and over, while expecting different
results, is a definition of insanity.
We must find a middle ground—think of it as prudent
persistence. Consultant and author James Mapes notes that
persistence can be a curse as well as a blessing, if you’re
actually pursuing goals that are inappropriate, unrealistic
and unattainable. “The bottom line,” he says, “is that you
must choose a reasonable and realistic goal that you can
reach, that you really want and that will challenge you.”
For CMAA, selecting goals is a highly collaborative activity
that proceeds on several levels. At the highest level, we
have our mission to “promote and enhance leadership,
professionalism, and excellence in managing the development
and construction of projects and programs.” At the opposite
end of the spectrum—the tactical end, so to speak—are the
specific objectives we set in each year’s business plan and
the activities by which we mean to achieve those objectives.
The area in between these poles is critical. It includes the
sustained, multi-year efforts by which CMAA builds its
value to members and to the industry.
We think of perseverance as an individual quality; we admire
individuals who achieve great things by persisting in the face
of discouragement. But organizations also have to learn to
persevere, and to persist prudently.
What enables an association to succeed through prudent
persistence is the steady, committed participation of
members. CMAA has enjoyed this resource in abundance.
Our members serve on committees, take part in conferences,
offer their expertise as webinar leaders, submit content for
publications, give generously to the CMAA Foundation, and
are generally prepared to collaborate any time, in any way,
for the common good.
We work toward a long-term goal of establishing the
Certified Construction Manager credential as the sign
that distinguishes the industry’s leading practitioners.
After two decades of spreading the word about CCM, the
program has achieved a striking momentum. During January
and February, normally a “dead zone” following the holidays,
we actually logged in two new applications per day.
A growing number of owner organizations now state
their preference for CCM in their RFPs. The fact that
owners recognize the credential as a differentiator is
a strong incentive to practitioners to pursue the CCM.
This acceleration of acceptance for the CCM is good for
owners, good for projects, and good for the whole industry
as it enhances our professionalism and opens doors to
business opportunities.
We also have a long-term goal of delivering powerful and
flexible Professional Development programs.
About three years ago, the CMAA Board of Directors decided
to launch a major effort to move our Professional Development
programming into the electronic, online environment. We
knew this would be a complex, long-term project requiring
dedication and agility.
Today, with a library of high-quality online products and a
growing number of members using them in diverse ways, it’s
fair to say this investment has borne fruit. But this has not
been a straightforward, linear process in which we simply
“tried, tried again.”
Instead, we have maintained our willingness to adjust, to
change course, and to adapt the products we were creating
to the actual needs and priorities of members. The result is
a career-long educational resource that members can use in
an impressive number of ways.
The lesson is simple: Persist, yes. Persevere, yes. But also
learn as you go.
Our members are effective, collaborative professionals
who give their best to every project and program. CMAA’s
mandate, which can only be achieved by prudent persistence,
is to help members enhance that value and give a “best”
that’s better all the time.
CMAA’s experiences over the last several years offer some
good examples.
24
CMAdvisor
March/April
25