72The Military Engineer ? July-August ? 2010 mains a continuing challenge. Nonethe- less, actions can be taken to help derive full advantage of the move towards alter- native delivery adoption. Match the Right Delivery Method to Desired Outcome. The debate over one project delivery system versus another is too often based on the perceived advan- tage for the individual entity. Each method comes with a particular set of advantages and potential drawbacks. As a ?rst step, contracting authorities must examine closely the constraints and desired out- comes for the speci?c project needs, and solicit recommendations on selecting the right project delivery method. On the New Orleans Inner Harbor Navi- gation Canal (IHNC) project performed for the USACE Hurricane Protection Of?ce, the desired outcome and accompanying constraint was clear. Congress mandated a 2011 completion for the hurricane de- fense systems for New Orleans. A design- build delivery system, where design and construction could occur simultaneously to meet the mandated delivery date, was the proper choice. Based on both the diligent procurement of USACE, and the efforts made by the selected contractor team, the project is on schedule to meet the mandated completion date. Another alternative delivery method utilized to expedite overall project delivery is the early contractor involvement (ECI) method, which allows the owner to engage the services of a general contractor to pro- vide preconstruction services concurrent with the ongoing design effort. Many pro- curement departments are seeing greater acceptance of ECI because it offers the early participation of a construction expert and the ability to delay setting a ?xed price until more is known about preexisting site conditions and other project risks. Cultural and Behavioral Change. Any project delivery system is only as effec- tive as the ability of the individual team members to make it work successfully. A primary obstacle to success with alterna- tive delivery methods remains the ability to integrate the entrenched cultural dif- ferences between the designer and the contractor. Indeed, in some cases, these cultural differences may exhibit outright disrespect and hostility, alongside signi?- cantly different expectations about how to communicate on speci?c project needs and objectives. Both disciplines are used to autono- my, and are generally staffed with Type- A personalities, with strong wills and an ability to act decisively. Designers are not always open to and comfortable with contractor input during the design process. Contractors are reluctant to contend with the ambiguity of the de- sign process, and may feel that design- ers lack the sense of urgency inherent in the design-build or ECI process. Given the enormous changes taking place with technology, energy conservation and sustainability, ?rms looking to par- ticipate on public projects must invest in improving collaboration skills and over- coming systemic resistance so that disci- plined integration occurs on all fronts. Invest in Responsive Contracting Sup- port. The speed and ?exibility of alterna- tive delivery systems relies heavily on a strong partnership between the owners contracting and administration team and the hired design and construction team. Progress must continue in aligning owner and contractor expectations, and public agency leaders should invest in preparing their delivery systems and staff for contin- ual improvement in project delivery. One helpful step is to ensure that key individuals have the bene?t of an in-per- son connection. In this fast-paced world, it can be easy to let e-mail carry the load in communicating. But when the admin- istrative and support team can meet and build rapport with service provider teams, a greater understanding of the needs and preferences on all sides emerges. For this reason, the co-location of the parties un- der one roof often helps to facilitate com- munication in ways that greatly enhance and expedite understanding. During the planning and negotiation of infrastructure projects, a healthy and edu- cational dialogue on contract support and the response time needs also should take place. Expectations can only be met once they are fully understood. Once this foun- dation of mutual understanding, respect and aligned expectations is built, tremen- dous results can follow. The IHNC project in New Orleans started with extensive in- person outreach and coordination with the pool of potential bidders, and continued through formal partnering sessions with the chosen contractor and daily personal interaction between USACE and the engi- neering and construction team members. Integrate Sustainability and Eco- logical Innovation. USACE has estab- lished a greenhouse gas reduction target calling for a 23 percent decrease to be achieved by 2020. Reaching or exceed- ing this target is a key metric of meet- ing the requirements of Executive Order 13514, the sustainability directive issued by President Obama guiding federal leadership in environmental and energy performance. Virtually all public-sector owners are implementing similar strate- gies for sustainable outcomes. Alternative delivery systems, with their emphasis on up-front scoping and what- if analysis, offer an ideal opportunity to consider ecology ?rst on every project. Renewable energy provides a perfect opportunity to ful?ll the promise of col- laboration inherent in alternative project delivery systems. The size and signi?cant land impact of most infrastructure proj- ects provides ample room for integrating alternative energy innovation including solar, wind power, geothermal and hy- droelectric power. However, constraints exist that may interfere with the selection process, for instance, when a design-build proposal has higher up-front costs that are intended to save operation expenses and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Summary With the new wave of alternative proj- ect delivery systems gaining mainstream acceptance, owners will increasingly rely on engineers, consultants, con- tracting of?cers and constructors who are able to take projects from cradle to grave while providing innovative turn- key results. The sooner stakeholders can shed traditional project thinking and di- vest singular self interest, the better we can meet the infrastructure challenges of this and future generations. Anthony Ferruccio, P.E., is Executive Vice Presi- dent and Division Manager, MACTEC Inc.; 770- 360-0619, or tcferruccio@mactec.com. Douglas Smith is Chief Operating Of?cer, Bio- engineering Group; 978-740-0096, or dsmith@ bioengineering.com. Candice Somerville, M.SAME, is President, Out- side the Box LLC; 804-347-8803, or candice.otb@ gmail.com.
If you would like to view publication without flash plugin, please click on link below
