Pharma’s Conundrum Part 2: Ensuring Value Through Integrated Project Delivery | The Dyson Blog

In my last blog, I explored how innovative, value-driven conceptual design can be shepherded through basic / scheme design. I believe that submitting a project to a sausage-machine-design approach at any point will allow much of the value to be lost or worse. The question is how you can move into detailed design, construction and beyond while firmly keeping hold of that conceptual value.

Integrated Project Delivery (IPD)

Integrated Project Delivery is not a new idea and there are many flavours of it available in the world of infrastructure, some with more demonstrated success than others. There is a lot of evidence that well-implemented IPD has significant benefits in project management terms i.e. projects get delivered more reliably to scope, cost and time. While this is an important measure the big prize is in securing the delivery to a wider set of value drivers.

Never a fan of extolling a particular flavour or brand of approach, I am much more interested in the ingredients and the principles of any approach. For me, there are a number of foundations that make IPD valuable: -

Each party does what they are best at and this includes the client

Having spent many years in projects I realised that our allocation of work is so often skewed by a mode of thinking and processes that ultimately destroys value. We design detailed pipework with a one-stop-shop engineering company only to go through the ignominy of having it completely redesigned by the fabricator with the knowledge of manufacturing and construction. We allow designers to make educated guesses for design decisions only for subject matter experts to critique and change. Finding ways to get the right people to do the right work at the right time is the first principle of an integrated approach.

Design is not a linear and regressive process

My second principle is the same principle that I have written about in relation to AI and general intelligence. Any intelligent system cannot be left to operate in isolation or disconnected from the owner without regular checking-in; it is like leaving an AI-robot in-charge of your children. No matter how detailed or how explicit you are with information, data and rules there will be some critical implicit knowledge input that is constantly required to deliver success. The design process needs to be formed and managed with frequent check-ins across the design spectrum. Many times, have I experienced very unpleasant shocks on projects which have not deliberately iterated in this way. The other reason, this is required is that we cannot pretend that, even in the more detailed levels of design, ideas, drivers and decisions, will not continue to evolve. You can call it changing-minds or scope-creep or natural emergence; whatever it is called this will be handled much more cost and time effectively through managed iteration.

The design process needs to remain integrated

This iteration is a part of ensuring the design is and remains integrated. Although different parties become engaged with design and delivery, it is the integration of the design which leads to the required outcomes. There is little value in ten high-quality design packages if they do not interface and deliver efficiency in construction and effectiveness in operation. The integrated team need to be much more proactive and collaborative than design-coordination, which is a lagging process, detecting and correcting clashes. Instead we need a design integration approach which progressively and iteratively develops the design philosophy that will deliver the value in construction and operations.

Shared value

All the parties involved in the IPD need to share in the value of the project. The core project management KPI’s are scope, cost and time however purely focusing on these has two fundamental contra-indications. Firstly, they provide a limit to the value which can be delivered to the client: - as long as we get, arguably, close to the time, cost and scope we have done a good enough job. If we shoot for the moon and get into orbit we have done well enough.

Secondly, there will be direct antagonism in the value sought by each delivery organisation, the parties will not be aligned in value drivers.

Open discussions and agreements need to be had about what value means firstly for the intent of the endeavour e.g. patients looking for access to medicines; secondly for the party who own the endeavour e.g. profitability of the client; and, often missed, the parties who will deliver the endeavour with the client. These different measures of value need to be expressed not so narrowly as purely financial e.g. margin and profit; but expansively including kudos and marketing from the work, with larger social and environmental impacts important to each organisation and the wellbeing, growth and development of the people involved.

Providing such a web of value interconnects and energises the whole project community into the generation of shared value.

In the words of Michael Porter

“Shared value is fundamentally about aligning the success of your company with the success of your community — through the recognition that you have a responsibility — and an economic opportunity — to improve the business environment and the fundamental health of the supporting community structure.”

Cornerstones

As value is realised conceptually, cornerstones of the design, delivery approach and culture need to be established. These ecosystem-conditions, design-features, delivery and operational principles; along with construction approaches, e.g. DfMA, will represent the decisions required to hold onto and deliver the value. Somebody needs to watch these carefully.  That does not mean that they will not or cannot be changed, it does mean that any shifting of the cornerstones is picked up quickly and holistic problem solving is kicked-off to retain or increase the value. Project management is often focused on physical scope change and can be blind to shifts in approach and people dynamics which can have profound impacts.

If market demand starts to increase, is there an opportunity to take advantage or vice versa. If a construction partner finds a cheaper way to deliver a part of the project does that put holistic value at risk or maybe it allows investment elsewhere where more value can be delivered.

As design moves towards construction and beyond, an integrated approach needs to ensure that all parties are doing the job that fits their capability best and decisions are made with a focus on delivering shared value, to client, the client’s customers, the widest project team and society.

Of course, the way the work is contracted needs to be aligned to sharing value, of which financial risks and opportunities play a significant role; but that is another story…