These methods can all work on smaller projects. It does depend on the sophistication on the contractors accounting and billing systems. There is also extra work to keep the financials clean. The smaller and more simple a project, the less value in open book contracting and pre construction. You may get as much if not more benefit from lump sum if it’s clear what you are building and you don’t make any changes mid project.

@@LeanIPD I was thinking you'd have to open a bank account specially for the project. Then fund it and give the contractor a debit card. Is that right? Would you allow the builder to work hourly on the project AND get a portion of profits? Or would the builder need to only be incentivized with just profit share and taking that risk? I've been thinking, IPD seems like a generous thing for the owners to partake in.

Awesome, best wishes and buena suerte.

Hello, please check out leanipd.com for a good overview. You can send a note through the contact us link and we’ll help you out. Cheers, James

@@LeanIPD Thank you so much, Dear James. Yes, I will definitely seek help from LEANIPD.

IPD is still growing, although slowly. There is significant among public projects in Canada and growing interest in Fortune 100 firms that have complicated large capital programs. Traditional methods aren't meeting their business needs and they are willing to try something new.

I hope you did well on the test and happy to help.

Thank you Villa. What additional videos would you like to see?

@@LeanIPD I would love to hear about your experience in IPD facilitations, what worked really well and what not? Did you hire a facilitator on your projects to help with team integration? Thank you:)

Hello, You raise valid points. Many of these are issues within any contract type and my experience is that they are more likely to be resolved to satisfaction within an IPD shared savings model. If there is a defect within a GMP or Lump sum contract, the contractor often needs to fix the defect at their own cost. They lose money fixing defects. In an IPD model, everyone is paid their actual cost so they will get paid to fix the defects (without additional overhead or profit). The amount of the additional cost to fix the defect comes from the project continency first, then team profit (if no contingency left) and lastly paid directly by the owner if all profit is exhausted. This relationship causes two things to happen - 1) there is less trade damage as trades know that damaging someone else's work will result in them effectively paying the other trade to redo it. 2) Defects are a team issue, not just the performing contractor. The team will often rally to find an acceptable, cost effective solution to resolve the defect. The owner is involved in this discussion and is able to approve the solution (so they don't end up with a subpar solution). Check out this IPD case study on a defect from one of my projects for a deep dive into an actual issue: leanipd.com/integrated-project-delivery/case-study-risks/ In short, I think the conflicts are more transparent and the entire team works on them in IPD, where others models are more about who's fault it is instead of how to resolve the defect effectively.

@@LeanIPD Thanks for your time and sharing your knowledge and experience. My point is mostly about corruption in teams. I feel that team profit in IPD might increase actions to finish works with less quality. It is totally correct that doing work right in the first time will cause less cost. But, this is valid for people who are experienced enough and capable of performing the work. Other models have less entity to get direct benefits. Owners and some project shareholders. Maybe a little award a year. Still, there are incorrect actions or hiding failures. With team benefit, most of incorrect actions can be solved. Collaboration and many more issues of other contract types can be handled. However, in my opinion, IPD can increase risks to have quality work due to having more people to earn from project if the project finishes under budget. Designed work can be for 50 years. Mistake done can cause to face problems in 3 or 5 years after operation starts or let's say failure to build as required and can be realized in case of an earthquake. The above is not my experience with contracts, but observation with people who are scared to lose their jobs or do not have honor and integrity. When having these kind of people as a shareholder, what measures can be placed in IPD contract to prevent these. 3rd party inspections, penalties on teams in case they fail to act right or some other measures to have people scared of doing wrong acts to get more at the end of the project. For example, after 5 years of completion, if any failure in building, who is guilty? User or team who built it. I love the idea behind IPD contracts. Clarity, alignment and integration... But, how to manage corruption while we increase shareholders with IPD?

Dan, great suggestion, thank you. I added to my list. one on PDB vs IPD, One defining PDB and one to compare DB vs PDB. honestly I’m still learning myself and I’ll share what I’m learning.

@@LeanIPD I'm looking forward to it!!

thanks Mr Fauchier. appreciate the note.

Glad you like them Felipe.

Thank you! 😃. best wishes Brian. let me know what other subjects we should cover in future videos.

Sean, I agree with you. We need to simplify the approach and use template to scale adoption. There will eventually be a way to simplify project finances as well.

Many thanks!