Asian Journal of Civil Engineering

https://doi.org/10.1007/s42107-020-00251-1

ORIGINAL PAPER

Integrated project delivery (IPD) method with BIM to improve

the project performance: a case study in the Republic of Iraq
Mahdi Swadi Salim1 · Ahmed Mohammed Raoof Mahjoob1

Received: 9 January 2020 / Accepted: 24 March 2020

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Abstract
Design-build, design-bid-build and construction manager at risk are conventional approaches of project delivery and have
many restrictions in the construction industry. To overcome these restrictions, in recent years, Integrated Project Delivery
(IPD) has appeared as an approach to deliver the projects. IPD is a delivery approach in which the owner, designer, and
constructor work together collaboratively to create a project from the initial stages to deliver and operating the building.
Building information modeling is the best tool for creating a virtual model being used more often in conjunction with tra-
ditional delivery methods. The early involvement and collaboration characteristics of the IPD approach can enhance the
coordination of BIM technology. In this paper, the researcher will identify the status of using IPD and other traditional
methods in the Republic of Iraq. It also indicates the most important area when using the IPD method obtains the benefits of
using this method and investigates how this system related to BIM technology. A questionnaire form was distributed, then
collected and analyzed statistically. The results indicate that 83.33% of the respondents used the traditional methods, while
16.66% was used the IPD method.

Keywords  Integrated project delivery (IPD) · Building information modeling (BIM) · Traditional delivery methods

Introduction approach with BIM technology relatively is a new approach

to the design and construction stages of the project (Justin
The traditional methods of project delivery, such as design- Neil 2015). In this study, the IPD method will be focused as
build and design-bid-build, are the most commonly used in well as the relation of IPD and BIM technology. The objec-
projects despite the problems in using these methods such as tives of this research will be:
lack of coordination between the planning and construction
stages. These traditional methods are still used in conjunc- • Identifying what is an IPD method and its principles.
tion with building information modeling. • Analyzing the status of using the IPD and traditional
A modern delivery approach barely emerged in recent approaches in the construction industry.
decades called Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) to bridge • Identifying the obstacles and motivating factors that
the gap between the phase of the project and this method motive using IPD method.
different from the traditional approaches mentioned ear- • Identifying the benefits and requirements of BIM tech-
lier, where it has more benefits and advantages (Mihic et al. nology that met with the benefits and requirements of
2014). One of its main advantages is that it involves all the IPD method.
major parties from the early stages of the project, which • Identifying the organization and operating system used
enhances the advantages of BIM technology. Using IPD in the projects.

* Ahmed Mohammed Raoof Mahjoob In this paper, a literature review for the traditional deliv-
[email protected] ery and integrated project delivery methods are briefly
Mahdi Swadi Salim explained, as well as the building information modeling
[email protected] and the relationship between BIM and IPD are described.
Finally, the statistical analysis for the results of the question-
1
Civil Engineering Department, Construction Project naire and the conclusion have been presented.
Management, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 Asian Journal of Civil Engineering

Literature review is from the American Institute of Architects AIA (2007)

which is IPD as a project delivery approach that inte-
The traditional methods of project delivery grates people, organizations, business structures, and
exercises into a process that collaboratively harnesses the
It is generally recognized that the construction industry is talents and insights of all project participants to optimize
fraught with inherent shortcomings. These problems can the results, increase value to the owner, reduce waste, and
be attributed to the fragmented nature of the industry in maximize efficiency through all stages of design, manu-
their operations and the lack of coordination and commu- facturing, and building. This definition supports that IPD
nication between the parties in the supply chain. So, the differs from other delivery approaches in the fact that early
degeneration of design and construction activities along and continuous cooperation among all parties involved in
with the adversarial contractual relationships among pro- the process of design and construction is necessary. Coop-
fessionals make it difficult for construction teams to pro- eration can result in a better final product for the owner,
vide effective value to the client (Uthman 2011). where all participants are invested in the project and work
There are three commonly traditional approaches to pro- toward common goals (FISH 2011). Figure 1 denotes the
curement. The Design, Bidding, and Build (DBB), in which contractual relationship of IPD.
constructors are not created until the design is almost com- Principles are necessary to carry out the business effec-
pleted, and the “explosion” is where the constructors strug- tively, and the construction industry is no exception. There
gle to understand the design and make it buildable and try to are nine basic principles required to make IPD more effec-
compensate for its limits (Mossman et al. 2010). tive. If all these things are implemented and used together,
Another traditional approach was design-build (DB), in the better collaboration will be created, which in turn will
which the contractors participate in the project early, so result in better production of the project in design and con-
there is some integration and increased cooperation com- struction (FISH 2011). The American Institute of Archi-
pared to design-bid-build. However, there are still prob- tects & AIA California Council (2007) and Becerik-Ger-
lems with this approach. Under the conventional design ber and Kent (2010) are adopted the nine principles of IPD
and build, the customer usually participates through the as below:
completion of the design and then seeks to reduce input
and participation to protect the responsibility of risks. As • Mutual Respect and trust.
a result, opportunities for improvement of projects and • Shared Risk and Rewards.
innovation are reduced (Justin Neil 2015). • Collaborative Innovation and Decision Making.
While Construction Manager at Risk (CM) has the same • Early Involvement of Key Participants.
contractual agreement as DBB and early cost commitment • Early Goal Definition.
such as the DB method. CM at Risk is a method of pro- • Intensified Planning.
ject delivery in which the “construction manager is hired • Open Communication.
early in the process to deliver an early cost commitment • Organization and Leadership.
and to manage issues of schedule, cost, construction, and • Multi-party Agreement.
building technology” (AIA 2007). This approach is closely
related to IPD but still does not include the contractual Building information modeling (BIM)
relationship and trust required in IPD.
Finally, four major systemic problems have been Building information modeling (BIM) is an intelligent 3D
identified with conventional delivery and contractual model-based process that is more efficient and effectively
approaches: (1) the disruption of good ideas; (2) contract-
ing limits on cooperation and innovation; (3) lack of coor-
dination; and (4) pressure for local improvement at project
expense as a whole. All these problems could be reduced
or settled by using IPD.

Definition and principles of integrated project

delivery approach

Many works defined what IPD means; however, the defini-

tion that is commonly circulated in various publications
Fig. 1  Integrated Project Delivery approach (AIA 2007)

13
Asian Journal of Civil Engineering

used by architecture, engineering and construction profes- Project Performance Measures

sionals for planning, designing, constructing and managing
buildings in an efficient manner (Arunkumar et al. 2018). Cost/Profit
BIM
BIM considers a management and communication tool for Schedule
all the stakeholders in the project because it contains all digi-
Design & construction Return on investment
tal information that the project needs from the beginning to process
Safety
the construction and operations so it can create a center for
information on the project by BIM. Design and construction Productivity
IPD
quality, communication and cooperation between stakehold- Relationships
ers can be improved by collaboration models (Mahjoob and
Abed 2017). In fact, BIM is demanding for cooperation to
Fig. 2  The integration model of BIM/IPD (Ilozor and Kelly 2012)
get the benefits of this technology to the participants. Using
this technology has immediate and obvious benefits (Glick
and Guggemos 2009). Also, model simulations made by aspects of the construction process has been presented in
BIM help to plan constructability, operations and mainte- Fig. 2 which represents the integration model of BIM/IPD.
nance, where simulations can be made for different factors
for the model such as costs, energy consumption, traffic, traf-
fic lights, and traffic guidance. Despite the various benefits Research methodology
that BIM has for the construction industry, it causes some
challenges for the company if it is not ready for implementa- In order to achieve the objectives of this research, a closed
tion (Abbasianjahromi et al. 2018). questionnaire was designed by the researcher. The question-
naire form designed electronically by using (Google Drive
BIM and IPD ™) as well as use the word software for the hard copy. The
electronic copy distributed for the remote audience by using
Although IPD can be used without BIM technology, BIM’s many applications (Linked-in, E-mail, WhatsApp, etc.)
enabling benefits are significant. The demands of owners in while the hard copy for the closed audience.
the industry are forced to use of BIM and IPD. The construc- Based on previous studies of the IPD approach, twenty-
tion industry was more demanded by the owners, including six questions were formulated in the questionnaire form,
the attention to use digital models for improved decision which subdivided into three parts but did not present all
making; eliminate the use of the (Request For Information) these questions in the statistical analysis. The first part was
RFIs during construction by improved contract documen- about the personal information of respondent, the second
tation; improved the estimating during preconstruction; part includes the questions about the implementation of
improved procurement; accelerating and scheduling and integrated project delivery (IPD) system, and the last part
also improved coordination of the project during the design consists of questions about the organizational and opera-
and construction phases; improved cost-efficiency through a tional systems used in the projects of respondents. At the
value-based approach and using of laser scanning and digital end of the first part, skip question was used. The respondent
models to improve closeout documentation. Drivers for the who did not use the IPD system in his/her project will skip
bigger use of BIM and IPD include: turning toward the glo- to the third part. The questionnaire also included questions
balization of supply chain product in the construction indus- containing multiple options, in which the respondent could
try, the necessity for increasing productivity in construction choose more than one answer for the same question. After
and the subsequent low-profit boundaries. In addition to the the questionnaire was distributed, it was then collected and
desire for greater sustainability and the need to decrease the analyzed the answers statistically by using some methods to
environmental impacts of construction and the increasing data analysis such as Runs test, reliability and validity test;
complexity of the building process (Wright 2011), BIM tool finally, the results were obtained.
complements IPD methodology and vice versa. BIM facili-
tates the integration of information and provides a single
storage and retrieval platform of data, and IPD provides a Statistical analysis
framework for integrating the common objectives and values
of project participants. IPD does help overcome obstacles to One hundred questionnaire forms have been distributed (30
improve early involvement of the key contributors, collabo- electronic copy and 70 hard copies). Fifty form contains a
ration, and increase the level of trust among key participants, skipping term and the remaining forms without skipping
thus helping eliminate the obstacles to BIM implementa- term, which answered by only 32 respondents. This skipping
tion (Piroozfar et al. 2019). The impact of BIM/IPD on the term was used in order to compare the answers of respondent

13
 Asian Journal of Civil Engineering

who did not use the IPD system with the answers of respond- 1. Null hypotheses (H0 ) : The data was in a random pro-
ents that used IPD system in their projects. Only 19 elec- cess, when the significant value > 0.05 OR |Z| < Z1− ∝.
( )
tronic and 47 hard copies were filled out. The researcher
2
2. Alternative hypotheses H1  : The data was not in a
excluded one uncompleted hard copy to achieve consist- random process, when the significant value < 0.05 OR
ency at its highest level. Thus, the total number of responses |Z| > Z1− ∝.
reached 65 to become the response rate of 66%. 2
As the results depicted in Table 1, the values of |Z| (Cal-
Concerning the type of delivery systems used in the culated) of all items of the two sets of questions smaller
projects of the study sample, this was the skip question at than the value of Z (Tabulated). As well as the sig. value is
the end of the first section of the questionnaire. The results greater than 0.05; therefore we accept the
show that 50% of the respondents used the Design-Bid-build ( null
) hypotheses
(H0 ) and reject the alternative hypotheses H1  , so the data in
delivery system, 25% for the Design-Build, 5.95% used the the questionnaire was produced in a random process.
construction manager system, 16.66% used integrated pro-
ject delivery and 2.38% for others. This is normal results
because most public and privet sectors are more used the The reliability and validity
traditional systems due to the ease of work and the avail-
ability of engineers for preparing the scope of work and bills The reliability is defined as the consistency of all results in a
of quantities, in addition to the desire to transfer the risks test, or how the results are consistent with time and accurate
to the other party, especially in the Design-Build method. representation of the total population under study is referred
to as reliability. Theoretically, there are some errors in each
The runs test for randomness test, so there are irrelevant results to the structure you are
trying to measure (Joppe 2000).
The runs test is one of the statistical tests used to detect While the validity is defined as the questionnaire content
whether the data set is from a random process or not and ability to achieve what is intended to be measure or honest
is defined as a series of incremental values or a series of the questionnaire results are. The data does not have to be
decreasing values. Sometimes called the (Geary test) and it validated if it is reliable, maybe the test can be very reliable
considers as a nonparametric test. The runs test is an alterna- but has no validity, but for a test the reliability only is not
tive method to test autocorrelation in the data. Autocorrela- sufficient, it must also validate (Joppe 2000). The validity
tion means that the data are related to its lagged value, so to of the questionnaire was examined by sending it to experts
check whether the data have a correlation with the lagged for evaluation, and then some of their advice was modified
value or not, it can use the runs test for randomness. The and added.
researcher will use the statistical package of social science The most common method for measuring the reliabil-
(SPSS V.25) for checking the randomness of the data accord- ity is coefficient alpha or Cronbach’s alpha, which is used
ing to the following equations (Bradley 1968) to evaluate the internal consistency of the scales that have
multiple answers. As the value of Cronbach’s alpha closed
R − R̄
Z= (1) to one as the reliability is high. To calculate the reliability of
sR
the questionnaire, we will use SPSS V.25 in addition to the
where R is the observed number of runs, R̄ is the expected values of Cronbach’s alpha according to the equation shown
number of runs, sR is the standard deviation of the number below (Montgomery 2011)
of runs. � �
� ∑ 2�
𝜎
The values of R̄ and sR are calculated as follows: r𝛼 =
K
1 − 2i
K−1 𝜎
2n1 n2
Z= +1 (2)
n1 + n2 where r𝛼 is the Cronbach’s alpha, K: is the total number of
test items, 𝜎i2 is the variance of one test item, 𝜎 2 is the vari-
(
2n1 n2 2n1 n2 − n1 − n2
) ance of the entire test.
s2R =( )2 ( ) (3) The values of the Cronbach’s alpha are shown in Table 2
n 1 + n 2 n 1 + n2 − 1 for the two questions of multiple answers to evaluate the
reliability. The values of Cronbach’s alpha are considered
where n1 and n2 represent the number of positive and nega- reliable if greater than (0.7). Since the values in the tables
tive values of the series. The values above the mean consider are higher than the thresholds of reliability (0.7) and close
positive, while the values below the mean consider negative. to one, such that the maximum and minimum value is 0.855
To check the randomness of the data, the researcher will use and 0.845, respectively, for the two multiple questions, so
the following hypotheses:

13
Asian Journal of Civil Engineering

Table 1  The results of the Runs test for two sets of questions

N The questions Calculated Tabulated
|Z| Sig. Z Sig.

Which of the following IPD requirements are met when using BIM in the projects?
1 Involvement of all key participants from early stages 0.967 0.333 1.96 0.05
2 Collaboration during all phases of the project 0.268 0.788 1.96 0.05
3 Mutual understanding with respect to each other’s objectives 1.442 0.149 1.96 0.05
4 Open communication among parties 0.428 0.669 1.96 0.05
5 Mutual trust among the parties 1.236 0.216 1.96 0.05
6 Effective coordination 0.177 0.86 1.96 0.05
7 Clarity of management decisions 1.771 0.077 1.96 0.05
8 Performance evaluations and payouts 0.948 0.343 1.96 0.05
9 Positive attitude of the project participants 0.00 1.00 1.96 0.05
10 Good relational contract 0.193 0.847 1.96 0.05
11 Appropriate technology 0.018 0.985 1.96 0.05
Which of the following benefits of BIM technology are agree with the benefits of IPD methodology?
12 Arrange collaborative meetings based on a shared model and a virtual reality application 0.234 0.815 1.96 0.05
13 Get better quality of design, with less waste, shorter timelines. 1.169 0.243 1.96 0.05
14 Decrease the construction costs. 1.068 0.285 1.96 0.05
15 Increase the value of the project for the owner by making simulations. 1.328 0.184 1.96 0.05
16 Improved contract documentation to eliminate using RFIs and Change Orders. 0.60 0.548 1.96 0.05
17 Faster and more effective processes through sharing and reusing information 0.902 0.367 1.96 0.05
18 Improved preconstruction estimating, procurement, expediting and scheduling 1.442 0.149 1.96 0.05
19 Visualization and fabrication/shop drawings 0.537 0.591 1.96 0.05
20 Facilities management 0.062 0.95 1.96 0.05
21 Conflict, interference and collision detection 0.498 0.619 1.96 0.05

the stability of the answers are available; thus the question- and 57.7% for the group two. It seems that the two ratios
naire is considered high reliability in addition to validity. are almost identical, which means the second group has
some information about the use of the IPD method in
Discussion of the questionnaire results the projects or it is the same principles used in other
delivery systems.
Implementing of integrated project delivery (IPD) approach B. The IPD projects are led either by the core group
(Owner, Designer and Contractor) or by an individual
This section includes the questions related to the imple- facilitator. Since the group one have been selected the
mentation of the IPD method. The researcher will make a IPD system, the highest percentage of them (78.58%)
comparison between the answers of those who selected the believe that the core group always lead the IPD projects
IPD method with those who selected the traditional meth- while (50%) for the group two. (7.14%) believe that the
ods. Eight respondents from those who received the ques- individual facilitator who lead the IPD project for the
tionnaire forms that include the skip question have selected group one while 11.54% for the group two and 14.28%
the IPD method and six respondents from 32 participants say some projects by the core group and others by indi-
that received the questionnaire forms without skip question vidual facilitator for the group one, while for the group
have selected IPD method too. So the comparison will be two was 38.46% as illustrated in Figs. 3 and 4.
made statistically by using SPSS V.25 between the answers C. The greatest benefit that will be gained when using the
of 14 respondents, those will be called (group one) and 26 IPD method was in the construction stage for the group
respondents who selected another delivery method and those one (42.86%) as illustrated in Fig. 5, while for the group
will be called (group two). two the greatest benefit was (34.61%) at the operation
and maintenance stage, as shown in Fig. 6.
A. Regarding the presence of a multi-party contract or not D. The most important areas when implementing the IPD
when using the IPD system, the results show that the projects are illustrated in Table 3 for both groups. Since
respondents who say (Yes) were 64.3% for the group one the group one has selected the IPD system, this selec-

13
 Asian Journal of Civil Engineering

Table 2  Coefficient of Reliability for two sets of questions

N The questions Cronbach’s Alpha
if item Deleted

Which of the following IPD requirements are met when using BIM in the projects?
1 Involvement of all key participants from early stages 0.848
2 Collaboration during all phases of the project 0.851
3 Mutual understanding with respect to each other’s objectives 0.845
4 Open communication among parties 0.849
5 Mutual trust among the parties 0.848
6 Effective co-ordination 0.850
7 Clarity of management decisions 0.846
8 Performance evaluations and payouts 0.845
9 Positive attitude of the project participants 0.853
10 Good relational contract 0.850
11 Appropriate technology 0.849
Which of the following benefits of BIM technology are agreed with the benefits of IPD methodology?
12 Arrange collaborative meetings based on a shared model and a virtual reality application 0.850
13 Get better quality of design, with less waste, shorter timelines. 0.855
14 Decrease the construction costs. 0.851
15 Increase the value of the project for the owner by making simulations. 0.847
16 Improved contract documentation to eliminate using RFIs and Change Orders. 0.852
17 Faster and more effective processes through sharing and reusing information 0.848
18 Improved preconstruction estimating, procurement, expediting and scheduling 0.855
19 Visualization and fabrication/shop drawings 0.847
20 Facilities management 0.847
21 Conflict, interference and collision detection 0.849

Fig. 3  The percentage of who

leads the IPD projects for
(group one)

tion means that they have sufficient experience in this researcher adopted the percent of (50%) of the size of the
system, so they paid attention to the most important study sample as an acceptable percentage to identify the
areas in this approach, IPD contractual principles fol- benefits gained from using the IPD approach. As shown
lowed by collaborative project delivery. In group two, in Table 4, the same number of benefits was adopted by
the respondents also paid their attention to the same the two groups, where nine benefits can be gained from
areas of IPD as group one in addition to another area, using the IPD method, with the difference in adoption
which was (Co-location) that configure the appropriate of one factor (Decreasing the project schedule) adopted
environment for cooperation between participants which by the group two while not adopted in the group one.
consider one of the most important principles of IPD. F. This question is related to the IPD requirements that
E. The researcher in eleven points stated the benefits can be achieved when using Building Information Mod-
that can be achieved when using the IPD method. The eling (BIM). Also here, the requirements achieved 50%

13
Asian Journal of Civil Engineering

Fig. 4  The percentage of who

leads the IPD projects for
(group two)

Fig. 5  The percentages of
project stages that benefits from
using IPD method (group one)

Fig. 6  The percentages of
project stages that benefits from
using IPD method (group two)

Table 3  Responses of the area of IPD method of the study sample size, the researcher will be adopt-
ing them. The responses in Table 5 show that the two
N The area of IPD The responses
groups adopted six requirements of IPD with agreement
The group one The group two on five of them. The shared requirements that have been
Number Percent Number Percent emphasized by the two groups are five requirements
(involvement of all key participants from early stages,
1 IPD contractual princi- 8 40% 16 35.55% collaboration during all phases of the project, open
ples
communication among parties, effective coordination,
2 Use of lean construction 3 15% 4 8.88%
system and appropriate technology). In addition to one require-
3 Co-location 2 10% 11 24.44% ment that was concentrated by the group one and not
4 Use of team building 1 5% 4 8.88% select by group two and vice versa. It seems that the
facilitator two groups focused on main requirements of IPD that
5 Collaborative project 6 30% 10 22.22% can be achieved when using BIM technology. This is
delivery not surprising with regards the group one because their
6 Other 0 0 0 0 experience in IPD method, while focusing the group
Total 20 100% 45 100 two on the same five factors meaning that they have
experience in BIM technology and its requirements and

13
 Asian Journal of Civil Engineering

Table 4  The benefits of using N The benefits The responses

IPD method
The group one The group two
NO. Percent NO. Percent

1 Increase the value of the project for the owner 7 50% 13 50%
2 Increase the productivity of the project 7 50% 13 50%
3 Reducing the waste in the construction phase 9 64% 17 65%
4 Reducing the cost of the project in the construction phase 8 57% 14 54%
5 Decreasing the project schedule 6 43% 13 50%
6 Getting better quality 9 64% 18 69%
7 Reducing the risks 8 57% 14 54%
8 Reducing the rework during the construction 4 29% 12 46%
9 Reducing the conflict during the construction phase 8 57% 19 73%
10 Decreasing the request for information 7 50% 6 23%
11 Discover the clashes from early stages of the project 8 57% 15 58%

Table 5  The percentage of N The area of IPD The responses

achieved IPD requirements
when using The group one The group two
NO. Percent NO. Percent

1 Involvement of all key participants from early stages 7 50% 22 85%

2 Collaboration during all phases of the project 8 57% 20 77%
3 Mutual understanding with respect to each other’s objectives 2 14% 17 65%
4 Open communication among parties 8 57% 18 69%
5 Mutual trust among the parties 7 50% 10 38%
6 Effective co-ordination 7 50% 13 50%
7 Clarity of management decisions 3 21% 10 38%
8 Performance evaluations and payouts 0 0% 3 12%
9 Positive attitude of the project participants 1 7% 2 8%
10 Good relational contract 1 7% 2 8%
11 Appropriate technology 8 57% 16 62%

their knowledge that these requirements agree with the to eliminate using RFIs and Change Orders, improved
requirements of IPD system and its principles. preconstruction estimating, procurement, expediting
G. When using BIM technology in the project, some ben- and scheduling) was identified by the group one and
efits that will be gained are agreed with the benefits of one benefit (faster and more effective processes through
the IPD method. The researcher presented ten points of sharing and reusing information) was identified by the
BIM benefits, and as made in two previous questions the group two. This means that both groups have the same
researcher identified the same percentage of the sample experience in BIM technology and group two has the
size to identify the benefits that can agree with the ben- knowledge that the benefits of BIM are consistent with
efits of IPD. The results in Table 6 show that the group the benefits of the IPD method, even though they seem
one identified six benefits from ten while the group two to have applied BIM in traditional systems.
has picked five from ten with agreeing between them for
four benefits. These four benefits are (arrange collabo- Organization and operational system of the project
rative meetings based on a shared model and a virtual
reality application, get better quality of design, with less This section contains questions about the organizational and
waste, shorter timelines, decrease the construction costs, operating systems used in the projects of the study sample.
and conflict, interference and collision detection). In Some of these questions require Likert scale and some others
addition, two benefits (improved contract documentation a multiple choice.

13
Asian Journal of Civil Engineering

Table 6  The percentage of BIM benefits that agree with the benefits of IPD method
N The area of IPD The responses
The group one The group two
No. Percent No. Percent

1 Arrange collaborative meetings based on a shared model and a virtual reality application 9 64% 15 58%
2 Get better quality of design, with less waste, shorter timelines 9 64% 23 88%
3 Decrease the construction costs 8 57% 13 50%
4 Increase the value of the project for the owner by making simulations. 6 43% 11 42%
5 Improved contract documentation to eliminate using RFIs and Change Orders 8 57% 9 35%
6 Faster and more effective processes through sharing and reusing information 4 29% 13 50%
7 Improved preconstruction estimating, procurement, expediting and scheduling 7 50% 10 38%
8 Visualization and fabrication/shop drawings 2 14% 5 19%
9 Facilities management 0 0% 3 12%
10 Conflict, interference and collision detection 8 57% 13 50%

A. This question displayed the degree of involvement of 4D modeling (6.38%) and (1.06%) for (scheduling) in
the parties in the project phases. The responses were (other) category, referring to the tools used in organizing
provided on five scales Involvement from early stages the project schedule.
(5), Involvement from design stages (4), Involvement C. This question regarding the techniques that used in the
from construction stages (3), Limited involved (2), and projects of the respondents. Based on the calculation of
None (1). The arithmetic mean and standard deviation arithmetic mean, the results show that the all of tech-
will be calculated by using SPSS program. The results niques (pull planning, pull scheduling, last planner, tar-
in Table 7 show that the degree of involvement for the get value design, change order management process and
parties did not start from early the stages, which differs Tracking the project percentage complete) were used
with the main principle of the IPD method. (usually) in their projects, while (sometimes) used for
B. The most common tool used by the respondents in the the technique (set-based design) as shown in Table 8.
projects indicates that two-dimensional (2D) technol- This means that non-IPD project used some operating
ogy (39.36%), BIM technology (25.53%), 3D modeling systems that used in the IPD projects.
(20.21%), lazes scanning for existing building (7.44%),

Table 7  Calculation percentages of the involvement degree of the parties in project’s phases

N The respondents’ answers
Involved from Involved from Involved from Limited None (1) A.M S.D Status of answer
early stages (5) design stages construction stage involved
(4) (3) (2)

The owner 65 45 8 3 7 2 4.34 1.16 Involved from design

stages
The designer 65 27 37 0 1 0 4.38 0.57 Involved from design
stages
The constructor 65 11 12 42 0 0 3.52 0.77 Involved from design
stages
Owner’s staff 65 26 15 12 11 1 3.83 1.18 Involved from design
stages
Construction manager 65 16 17 28 4 0 3.69 0.91 Involved from design
stages
Key subcontractors 65 4 4 45 6 6 2.91 0.87 Involved from con-
struction stage
The supplier 65 5 6 31 16 7 2.78 1.02 Involved from con-
struction stage

13
 Asian Journal of Civil Engineering

D. Concerning the IPD principles that can be used in non- Table 9  The percentage of IPD principles used in the non-IPD pro-
IPD projects. If the organizations are not able to use jects
the IPD method in their projects, they are able to use N The group one
some of the principles of IPD. The researcher adopted
The area of IPD Responses
the percent of (50%) of the size of the study sample as
an acceptable percentage to identify the principles of Number Percent
IPD that can be used in the traditional projects. Table 9 1 Mutual respect and trust 46 71%
shows only three principles from nine (Mutual Respect 2 Mutual benefit and reward 24 37%
and Trust, Collaborative Innovation and Decision Mak- 3 Collaborative innovation and decision making 34 52%
ing, and organization and Leadership) are used in the 4 Early involvement of key participants 29 45%
non-IPD projects. 5 Early goal definition 30 46%
E. In this question, the researcher asks about using the 6 Intensified planning 17 26%
incentive clause in the contract of the respondent’s pro- 7 Open communication 29 45%
jects. Based on the calculation of the arithmetic mean of 8 Appropriate technology 30 46%
the answers, the results show that the contracts (some- 9 Organization and leadership 44 68%
times) contain the incentive clause in respondents’ pro-
jects, referring to there is little incentive to improve the
performance in traditional projects. construction stage. Both groups agreed in two points regard-
ing the most important area when implementing the IPD
projects, where the highest percentages for the contracts and
the contractual principles of IPD as the most important area
Conclusion and discussion for the IPD method. Nine benefits can be gained from using
the IPD method which were (increase the value of the pro-
The research tries to know the current use of IPD in the con- ject for the owner, increase the productivity of the project,
struction industry and know what the relationship between reducing the waste in the construction phase, reducing the
IPD and BIM is. Based on the results of the questionnaire, cost of the project in the construction phase, getting better
only 16.66% of the respondents have used the IPD system in quality, reducing the risks, reducing the conflict during the
their projects, whereas the others used the traditional deliv- construction phase, decreasing the request for information,
ery systems. The respondents who use the IPD system called and discover the clashes from early stages of the project).
(group one) and their results have been compared with the Five requirements of IPD system were jointly emphasized by
results of those who did not use the IPD system and called both groups when using BIM technology (involvement of all
them (group two). key participants from early stages, collaboration during all
A percentage of 64.29% from the group one chooses that phases of the project, open communication among parties,
the IPD system has a multi-party contract while in group effective coordination, and appropriate technology) although
two was the percentage of 57.69%. Both groups agreed with the respondents of group two did not apply the IPD system.
the highest percentage that the core group leads the IPD As the benefits of BIM technology that can be agreed with
project but the lower ratio for group two. The group one the benefits of IPD system, both groups agreed on (arrange
identified that the greatest benefits that can be achieved in collaborative meetings based on a shared model and a virtual
the project from using the IPD system were in the operation reality application, get better quality of design, with less
and maintenance stage, while the group two identified the waste, shorter timelines, decrease the construction costs, and

Table 8  Calculation results of the techniques that used in the projects of the respondents
N The respondents’ answers
Always (5) Usually (4) Sometimes (3) Rarely (2) Never (1) A.M S.D Level of answer

Pull planning 65 21 25 11 2 6 3.82 1.19 Usually

Pull scheduling 65 20 21 14 5 5 3.71 1.20 Usually
Last planner 65 16 26 10 9 4 3.63 1.18 Usually
Set-based design 65 9 14 27 9 6 3.17 1.12 Some times
Target value design 65 22 22 8 6 7 3.71 1.32 Usually
Change order management process 65 21 27 15 0 2 4 0.92 Usually
Tracking the project percentage complete 65 40 20 2 2 1 4.48 0.83 Usually

13
Asian Journal of Civil Engineering

conflict, interference and collision detection). In addition to Becerik-Gerber, B., & David, K. (2010). Implementation of Integrated
three other benefits were identified by the two groups. Project Delivery and Building Information Modeling on a Small
Commercial Project. https​://cites​eerx.ist.psu.edu/viewd​oc/downl​
The degree of involvement of the parties in the project’s oad?doi=10.1.1.705.3757&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
phases was not from the early stages of the projects. Percent Douglas, C., & Montgomery, G. C. R. (2011). In Jennifer, W. (Eds)
of 39.36% of the respondents have adopted 2D to represent Applied statistics and probability for Engineers, 5th edn. United
project drawings while 25.53% adopted BIM technology. States of America p 765, ISBN 3:978-0-470-05304-1. http://www.
wiely​.com/go/permi​ssion​s.
The pull planning, pull scheduling, last planner, target value FISH, A. (2011). Integrated project delivery: The obstacles of imple-
design, change order management process, and tracking the mentation. MSC Thesis, (Kansas State university). https​://doi.
project percentage of completion were considered as a usual org/10.1360/zd-2013-43-6-1064.
operating system in the project, except the set-based design, Glick, S., & Guggemos, A. (2009). IPD and BIM: Benefits and oppor-
tunities for regulatory agencies. In Proceedings of the 45th ASC
which was sometimes used. The principles of IPD that can National Conference, Gainesville, Florida (Vol. 2, No. 4).
be used in the traditional projects (mutual respect and trust, Google Drive™. (n.d.). www.drive​.googl​e.com.
collaborative innovation and decision making, and organiza- Ilozor, B. D., & Kelly, D. J. (2012). Building information modeling
tion and leadership). The contracts (sometimes) contain the and integrated project delivery in the commercial construction
industry: A conceptual study. Journal of Engineering, Project,
incentive clause in respondents’ projects. and Production Management, 2(1), 23–36.
This research provides evaluation for the use of the IPD Joppe, M. (2000). The research process. Retrieved February 25, 1998,
method to improve the performance of projects from the http://www.ryers​on.ca/~mjopp​e/rp.htm.
perspective of engineers. Future research can be useful to Justin Neil. (2015). The use of an integrated project delivery approach
in conjunction with BIM. MSC Thesis, University of Salford Man-
evaluate the performance of the IPD method from the per- chester. School of the Built Environment (pp. 1–30).
spective of owners to promote wider adoption of the IPD Mahjoob, A., & Abed, M. M. (2017). Assessing BIM integration with
method by them, as they are the decision maker in the use sustainable requirement for buildings construction (Vol. 6). https​
of this system or other. Case studies of IPD projects may be ://doi.org/10.21275​/ART20​17575​6.
Mihic, M., Sertic, J., & Zavrski, I. (2014). Integrated project delivery as
helpful also in future research to compare its performance integration between solution development and solution implemen-
with the performance of traditional projects. tation. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 119, 557–565.
https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspr​o.2014.03.062.
Acknowledgement  This paper was done in cooperation with the Mossman, A., Ballard, G., & Pasquire, C. (2010). Lean Project Deliv-
Department of Civil Engineering- University of Baghdad. ery—innovation in integrated design & delivery. Architectural
engineering anddesign management, Special issue on integrated
design & development systems. pp 1–28. www.thech​angeb​usine​
Compliance with ethical standards  ss.co.uk.
Piroozfar, P., Farr, E. R. P., Zadeh, A. H. M., Timoteo, S., Kilgallon,
Conflict of interest  On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author S., & Jin, R. (2019). Facilitating Building Information Modelling
states that there is no conflict of interest. (BIM) using Integrated Project Delivery (IPD): A UK perspective.
Journal of Building Engineering, 26(May), 100907. https​://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.10090​7.
Uthman. (2011). The process of implementing building information
References modelling (BIM) in the UK. Retrieved from Justin Neil (2015).
The use of anIntegrated project delivery approach in conjunction
Abbasianjahromi, H., Ahangar, M., & Ghahremani, F. (2018). A matu- with BIM. MSC Thesis, University of salford Manchester. School
rity assessment framework for applying BIM in consultant compa- of the built environment.
nies. Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transaction of Wright, J. A. (2011). Building information modeling and integrated
Civil Engineering, 43(1), 637–649. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s4099​ project delivery: What is the future? In 3rd International Con-
6-018-0194-0. struction Specialty Conference, Canadian Society for Civil Engi-
AIA. (2007). Integrated Project Delivery : A Guide. Washington: neering, Ottawa, Canada.
American Institute of Architects. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.autco​
n.2010.09.002. Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
Arunkumar, S., Suveetha, V., & Ramesh, A. (2018). A feasibility study jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
on the implementation of building information modeling (BIM):
From the Architects’ & Engineers’ perspective. Asian Journal of
Civil Engineering, 19(2), 239–247. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s4210​
7-018-0020-9.
Bradley, J.V., (1968). Distribution-free statistical tests. Englewood
Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

13