By: Bruce Adib-Yazdi, AIA, LEED AP

Integrated Project Delivery and ABC's Home Makeover

So applying these ideas to the current AEC industry, I believe that the new approach to designing and constructing projects is on the horizon. But, not immediately, as the recession has the industry deep in the throws of price wars. Interestingly though, right now would be the BEST time to try to advance and adopt new ideas. Many firms are already in the process of utilizing new tools and new delivery models for projects.

In a new delivery model, the role of the owner is not much different than it is now, except that they would be part of the entity that designs and builds the project, not just the owner that contracts the work. The role of the architect will be to the design (branding) of the building; be responsible for life safety concerns and to use Building Information Modeling to select the proper building systems that will create the best combination of use of land, aesthetic design, efficient construction, envelope protection and quality indoor environment. The contractor would be responsible for taking that information and working with suppliers and subcontractors to create the detailed plan of how the building actually goes together and constructing the building.

Actually, this method is not new, it just has not gained ground yet. It is called 'Integrated Project Delivery,' and is coming. Check out http://www.aia.org/contractdocs/AIAS076706.

You may think I'm nuts, but I think the most of what happens on ABC's Extreme Home Makeover applies to this discussion of Lean, Mean and Green and Integrated Project Delivery. For one, the short duration of construction (1 week) requires an awful lot of pre-planning, design and prefabrication. Of course, they leave some of the final touches of design till the end, so they can really take time to make it personal. Many of the projects incorporate sustainable design elements such as smart use of existing land, daylighting, high performance envelopes, and high efficiency systems. And these are custom designed projects - not 'cookie cutter' homes. So they are delivering a high quality product, with great design and in a short time frame. Of course, if it were not for volunteers and donations, these houses would be very expensive.

But let's say we gave them two months to build it - longer than the very short one week period, but substantially shorter than a normal home building cycle - I'd wager that using some of the same tactics of planning, design and fabrication tactics, the home could be built for a reasonable cost, with a high level of quality, a custom design, and in a shorter time frame. I know this may not be totally accurate, but it makes you wonder:

'What is possible when you create a team that REALLY works together, each contributing what they do best, in a truly collaborative process?'

I think the answer is: 'Anything.'

By: Bruce Adib-Yazdi, AIA, LEED AP

Green Economics: Oxymoron or Symbiotic Relationship

We have been leading up to this - the part where 'the rubber meets the road." And you probably are ready to hear that you have to spend more money than 'normal' for a 'Green' building, but that you'll recoup the costs 'over time.' Well, I'm here to tell you to forget all that. Besides, that is just part of doing good design and making value judgements on capital expenses compared to maintenance and utility costs.

Think about the relationship between a better process, a simple concept, and challenging the status quo on standard assumptions we have developed in the AEC industry. A better process places a higher value, and putting more effort into developing better information from which to make decisions early in the project. We should challenge assumptions like:

The architect is the only expert, and is supposed to know how to execute every detail. We should be looking to engaging suppliers and subcontractors in the design process to discover what systems make the most sense for a particular project.

Sustainability practices in the AEC environment are simply 'add on' expenses. Another way to look at this is to simply identify ideas and practices that make sense for a particular project and client; then integrate them into the project program and budget.

More drawings are always better. I believe that through working within the boundaries of traditional systems, we can reduce the amount of necessary detailing. Where we need more detail in the 'science' of the building - envelope design, mechanical and lighting systems - as well as the 'psychology' of the spaces - how do they make people feel, and how much more productive can they be as a result?

Interestingly, these are the things that European designers look at as baseline design requirements. For them it's not about 'being green' as much as it is about doing the right thing. Somewhere we have missed that, and are now working our way back in that direction.

The economics of this kind of thinking can't always be measured, but if we start developing baselines, and use BIM and energy modeling to review and check our design against baselines, we can work toward continual improvement. I'm thinking of numbers like BTUH per Square Foot per Year. And yards of concrete or pounds of stell per Square Foot. And employee productivity gains.

If you have not, you might consider picking up the book called "Natural Capitalism - Creating the Next Industrial Revolution.' If you're like me, you will read it and think 'wow, this is all good stuff' and you will walk away feeling good about your new found knowledge...that is until you realize the book was actually written in 1999 and you're 10 years behind the curve.

In the last seciton of this series, we'll bring all of the previous posts together and talk about the future of the AEC team and what it means to all of us.

On Being Mean (Uh, I mean Passionate)

By Bruce Adib-Yazdi, AIA, LEED AP

Once you start thinking about designing projects in such a way as to minimize materials and resources, then you can start thinking about being tough on the issues that will make a difference.  Once all the ‘fat’ is stripped from the design and construction, you are left with what matters the most.  Life safety and code compliance, the expression of the building, and systems that make it work. 

The design team has great influence on all three of these factors.  They all work together to make a building that is safe, makes a visual statement and operates as efficiently (and effectively) as possible.  It takes a certain dedication to stay focused on the desired results, which were documented in the program of the project. 

Of course, there are ways to simply meet the requirements.  But, one of the things we all need to keep in mind is that ‘meeting goal’ is not what we want engraved on our headstone.  So balancing ‘tried and true’ methods, along with some creative thinking, and breaking some bit of new ground on every project helps the whole industry move forward.

Don’t think you have to design a detail a certain way just ‘because that’s how we have always done it’.  Keep looking for ways to make the detail less complicated, or require less materials, or work better.  Pushing the edge takes a certain ‘mean streak’ from time to time, and that’s where breakthroughs are made.  Not following the collective thoughts of the group sometimes brings us new ways of viewing old problems, and new solutions to those problems that may not have been discovered otherwise. 

Sometimes it’s simply a matter of going beyond the symptom to fully understand the real problem.  For instance, sometimes we work really hard to design the building HVAC systems to be as efficient as possible, when we really need to take a hard look at the envelope to ensure it is as effective as it can be before we attack the HVAC.  Looking for breaks in the insulation, leaks in vapor barriers and keeping the elements out before they become a problem will likely yield better results. 

Then, looking at the big picture, pick the critical elements on the project that need to be the best they can be, spending the time, effort and resources to make them right.  Then simply allow the rest to be ‘baseline’ or ‘industry standard’.  By spending the effort in the right places, we can impact the most important parts of the project. And let the rest be what it needs to be. 

So, don’t be afraid to show your ‘mean streak’ when it needs to be expressed, and when it will benefit the project or team.  Then, allow the rest of your time to simply fall into place.  You’ll need it to start thinking about the next installment of this blog:  Green Economics.

Get Lean

By: Bruce Adib-Yazdi, AIA, LEED AP

So with the background behind us, now we get to the heart of the Lean Mean and Green topic – starting with Lean. When I think of lean, I don’t consider shortcuts, ‘value engineering’ or reducing the functionality of the project. Instead, it’s like a body builder. You try to eliminate fat by doing the right exercises and eating good food. As a result, you expose the strength, beauty and efficiency of the human body.

For the built environment that process begins with the end in mind. I think about both the effort and steps it takes to manage the design process, as well as the materials and methods it takes to construct the building. The first step in that process is to extract the vision of the ‘place’ the client has in their mind, and a program (functional requirements) that meets the needs of the client and the building occupants. Establishing the baseline program is an extremely important part of the process – it will be the test of design solutions and what holds the team in balance throughout the design process.

Elimination of wasted steps in the design process might mean having difficult discussion about particular issues before moving on to the next step. We seem to get caught up in saying things like ‘we’ll figure that out in the next phase.’ The reality is that costs more time and money.

Looking at construction sequencing and details WHILE designing takes the knowledge and experience of seeing it done in the field. It takes many years of field observations, discussions with subcontractors, craftsmen and seasoned field superintendents to accumulate the broad knowledge in order to apply critical thinking to the details. This is where the ‘generation gap’ previously described starts to become evident.

Ultimately, if our design process can get to the essence of what’s important, and we work to make details simpler, and allow the materials to do what they were intended, I believe we can get by with LESS drawings and generate more clarity.

On the contracting side, it seems that contractors should be thinking through their material orders, and trying to minimize field work. Ordering pre-cut material, having materials delivered in batches that relate to the sequencing, and placing material onsite where it reduces the number of steps necessary to put it in the right place are all factors to becoming more lean.

One resource I found recently was the Lean Construction Institute. http://www.leanconstruction.org. This organization, founded in 1997, is dedicated to developing knowledge about project-based production management for design, engineering and construction.

One thing is for sure. Recessionary times help us ‘lean up’ our organizations. The good news is that when business does pick up again, we’ll know how to operate leaner. The questions is, will we know how to operate BETTER?

Stay tuned.

When I first started in the profession, we were still hand drafting and we did some class work on PCs. At that time, the fastest PC available to us was a 286 MHz system. We worked through design issues, alignment of materials, and clarity of drawings by thinking through how all the lines on the paper came together. It forced a certain depth of thinking that CAD has taken away.

Moving into CAD, we forgot why it was important to plan the set of drawings - because you could change the layout or sheet number witha click (or two) of a mouse. We thought we could get more efficient by not having to hand draft - and re-use details, etc. What we learned was that this system allowed us to get a little lazy and not think so much about the project.

During this period, a gap grew in the seasoned principles who did not really pick up on the CAD systems, and the young professionals who embraced it. The job of the seasoned architect then became to teach the younger staff how they arrived at design solutions, and help them figure out how to depict it in CAD. We lost much of the 'art of drafting' in this process.

At the same time, contractors started doing less 'self performed' work and more subcontracting. And more 'Project Management,' less hands-on training. And the further advent of PCs, email and project-based software caused - believe it or not - more paperwork. So the architect started spending more time 'defending' the drawings and answering RFI's from contractors who were getting less field experience and more office time. This effort, coupled with the technology gap that grew between the younger and more experienced architects, caused a shift in the time we saved using CAD being used for more project coordination and administration.

Now we have begun another shift - one that has taken a complete mindset shift, and requires more in-depth thinking of the building systems. Building Information Modeling has given us a tool to actually draw the building. Not a 2-dimensional representation of the building, but the actual building and all it's sytems and parts. It allows the model to hold intelligent information about material quantities, energy efficiency and conflict detection of various systems.

It also opens the door for subcontractors and material suppliers to be engaged, using their design and fabrication software to 'contribute' to the model. This starts the conversation about how we can work together to minimize duplication of design work through engaging the subcontractors and fabricators earlier in the design process.

This sets the stage for the meat of this series, and will lead us into the next installment which will discuss the practice of 'Getting Lean.'