ARCOM

Search or browse again, or refine search.

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 10 results ...

Raisbeck P (2013) Time keeps on slippin', slippin', slippin' into the future: BIM, imaging and time on construction sights. In: Smith, S D and Ahiaga-Dagbui, D D (Eds.), Proceedings 29th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2013, Reading, UK, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 1093–1102.

Raisbeck, P (2009) Considering design and ppp innovation: A review of design factors in PPP research. In: Dainty, A R J (Ed.), Proceedings 25th Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-9 September 2009, Nottingham, UK. Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Vol. 1, 239–47.

Raisbeck, P (2010) Investigating design as research: understanding R&D activities in Australian architectural practices. In: Egbu, C (Ed.), Proceedings 26th Annual ARCOM Conference, 6-8 September 2010, Leeds, UK. Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Vol. 1, 747–56.

Raisbeck, P (2019) Space Oddity: Spatial Design Strategies and Work Place Design . In: Gorse, C and Neilson, C J (Eds.), Proceedings 35th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2019, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 184- 193.

Raisbeck, P (2021) Taking the Pulse: Developing a Model of Resilience Capital for Architectural Firms. In: Scott, L and Neilson, C J (Eds.), Proceedings 37th Annual ARCOM Conference, 6-7 September 2021, UK, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 96-105.

Raisbeck, P (2016) The Architect as Gleaner: Design Practice as Performance in the Architectural Office. In: Chan, P W and Neilson, C J (Eds.), Proceedings 32nd Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2016, Manchester UK. Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 771–780.

Raisbeck, P (2017) Tribes, Warlords And Transformers: An Institutional Logics Model Of The Architectural Profession . In: Chan, P W and Neilson, C J (Eds.), Proceedings 33rd Annual ARCOM Conference, 4-6 September 2017, Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge, UK. Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 471–480.

Raisbeck, P and Aibinu, A A (2010) Early stage cost estimation and the relationship of architects to quantity surveyors. In: Egbu, C (Ed.), Proceedings 26th Annual ARCOM Conference, 6-8 September 2010, Leeds, UK. Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Vol. 1, 53–61.

Raisbeck, P and Tang, L C M (2009) Humanistic and scientific knowledge management: a comparison of design practice between architects and engineers. In: Dainty, A R J (Ed.), Proceedings 25th Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-9 September 2009, Nottingham, UK. Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Vol. 2, 729–38.

Raisbeck, P, Millie, R and Maher, A (2010) Assessing integrated project delivery: a comparative analysis of IPD and alliance contracting procurement routes. In: Egbu, C (Ed.), Proceedings 26th Annual ARCOM Conference, 6-8 September 2010, Leeds, UK. Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Vol. 2, 1019–28.

• Type: Conference Proceedings
• Keywords: alliancing; integrated project delivery; procurement; project management; building information model
• ISBN/ISSN: 978-0-9552390-4-5
• URL: http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-docs/proceedings/ar2010-1019-1028_Taisbeck_Millie_and_Maher.pdf
• Abstract:
  The proponents of Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) claim it can potentially achieve superior results over other procurement models. The American Institute of Architects defines IPD as: “a project delivery approach that integrates people, systems, business structures and practices into a process that collaboratively harnesses the talents and insights of all participants to optimize project results, increase value to the owner, reduce waste and maximize efficiency through all phases of design, fabrication and construction” (AIA, 2007). This aspirational description suggests why IPD is said to be the next evolutionary step in collaborative contracting. In order to begin to assess these claims IPD is examined in relation to its theoretical sources and genealogy in lean construction, concurrent engineering and the collaborative structures of Alliancing. While fundamental similarities exist between Alliance and IPD procurement structures, improvements have been added to IPD contracts and processes which appear to respond to new technologies. These improvements include: Building Information Modelling (BIM) protocols, improved project management techniques to improve workflow and cost management as well as early stage collocation in a ‘Big Room’ environment. These innovations point to the need to understand the pre-conditions for IPD adoption: the take-up of BIM technology by contractors and sub-contractors and an understanding of IPD collaborative negotiations in practice. Whilst IPD is clearly a credible procurement model it requires further empirical and applied research in order to establish its widespread adoption.