PocketArchitecture:

Technical Design Series

Design Management

This is a design guide for architects, engineers and contractors concerning

the principles and application of design management. This book addresses
the value that design management and design managers contribute to con-
struction projects. As part of the PocketArchitecture series, Design Management
is divided into two parts: Fundamentals and Application. In Part 1, Funda-
mentals, the chapters address the why, what, how and when questions in a
simple and informative style, illustrated with vignettes from design manage-
ment professionals. In Part 2, case studies from Colombia, Norway and the
USA represent unique examples of the application of design management.
This book offers a concise overview of design management for postgraduate
students and early career design managers.

Stephen Emmitt is an architect and established book author. He is a Profes-

sor of Architectural Practice, Director of the Centre for Advanced Studies
in Architecture (CASA) and Head of the Department of Architecture and
Civil Engineering at the University of Bath, UK. His research and teach-
ing focus on the application of design management in collaborative projects.
He is Editor-in-Chief of the international journal Architectural Engineering
and Design Management.
 PocketArchitecture:
Technical Design Series

Series Editor: Ryan E. Smith

Building Information Modeling

Karen M. Kensek

Life Cycle Assessment

Kathrina Simonen

Daylighting and Integrated Lighting Design

Christopher Meek and Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg

Architectural Acoustics
Ana M. Jaramillo and Chris Steel

The Hierarchy of Energy in Architecture

Ravi Srinivasan and Kiel Moe

Design Management
Stephen Emmitt
“Stephen Emmitt has written a clear, concise and straightforward description
of design management, brought alive by vignettes from professionals of their
experience and application of design management in industry and through
international case studies. It is an essential reference book for anyone work-
ing in design or with designers . . . a very enjoyable and accessible read.”
– Rachel Cooper OBE, Distinguished Professor:
Design Management and Policy, Lancaster University, UK

“Professor Emmitt begins a conversation long overdue. I would recommend

this work for more than just students and early design professionals but for the
seasoned practitioner as well. The globalization of our industry has afforded
numerous positive benefits for all. Riding tandem to these benefits we often
find glaring gaps in project delivery systems. Improper management wastes
resources and endangers lives when buildings fail to function as intended.
This guide covers a wide breadth of design management methods and helps
practitioners go on to deliver high quality construction.”
– Stephen Forneris, AIA, Principal and Board Director,
Perkins Eastman Architects, New York, USA
 PocketArchitecture:
Technical Design Series

Design Management

Stephen Emmitt
First published 2017
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2017 Stephen Emmitt
The right of Stephen Emmitt to be identified as author of this work
has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of
the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or
reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical,
or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including
photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks
or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and
explanation without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Emmitt, Stephen, author.
Title: Design management / Stephen Emmitt.
Description: New York : Routledge, 2016. | Includes
bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2016025178 | ISBN 9781138930650
(hb : alk. paper) | ISBN 9781138930667 (pb : alk. paper) |
ISBN 9781315680316 (ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: Architectural design. | Architectural practice—
Management. | Construction industry—Management.
Classification: LCC NA2750 .E45 2016 | DDC 729—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016025178
ISBN: 978-1-138-93065-0 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-1-138-93066-7 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-1-315-68031-6 (ebk)

Typeset in Goudy and Univers

by Apex CoVantage, LLC
 Contents

List of figures and tables x

Preface xii
Acknowledgements xiv

Introduction 1

FUNDAMENTALS 7

Chapter 1 Design management fundamentals 9

Design management: what it is 9
Levels of design management 12
Elements of design management 14
Vignette – a case for strategic design management 22

Chapter 2 Preconstruction – generating design value 25

Design value 26
Design briefing 27
The project quality plan 30
Design team assembly 31
The design program 33
Design dependency and responsibility 34
Design cost plan 35
Monitoring the brief as the design develops 37
Design (change) control 37

vii
 CONTENTS

Design progress reports 38

Vignette – design management at the
preconstruction phase 39

Chapter 3 Construction – delivering design value 41

From design to construction 42

The design program revisited 43
Design responsibility matrix revisited 44
Design reviews 45
Design information checklists 47
Design change control 49
Managing cost variations 51
Project completion and reviewing performance 52
Vignette – reflections of a consultant design manager 54

Chapter 4 Working together – valuing design interactions 57

Collaborative working 57
How do we establish effective communication? 60
How do we develop trust? 61
How do we manage conflict? 63
Tools: identifying and managing interfaces 63
Tools: meetings and workshops 65
Tools: learning events 69
Vignette – the design manager’s challenge of
coordinating and liaising with multiple internal
and external project stakeholders 70

Chapter 5 The design manager 75

Design management roles 75

Establishing the design manager’s remit 79
Vignette – design integration 81
Knowledge and skills 84
Vignette – what motivates design managers? 85
Ensuring consistency across the organization 87

viii
 CONTENTS

Vignette – building design management:

working in Sweden 89
Internal knowledge exchange events 91
Managing expectations 92

APPLICATION: PROJECT CASE STUDIES 95

Chapter 6 Shining light on the dark side: an American

architect’s journey into design management 97
DAVE BEEM

Chapter 7 The Beck Group: an integrated approach 111

RICK DEL MONTE

Chapter 8 Veidekke: collaborative planning in design 133

VEGARD KNOTTEN AND FREDRIK SVALESTUEN

Chapter 9 ARPRO: project delivery in emerging markets –

a case study from Colombia 148
RODRIGO RUBIO-VOLLERT

Further reading 163

Index 165

ix
 List of figures and tables

Figures

I.1 Performance on three levels 2

1.1 Design management – integrating cultures 12
1.2 Elements of design management 15
4.1 Working together: addressing communication,
trust and conflict in project teams 58
5.1 Evolution of the design management role from
construction to design 76
5.2 Typical design management hierarchy 78
5.3 The design manager as bridge between strategic and
operational decision making 80
6.1 UK design management theater 100
6.2 US and UK design management theater 106
6.3 The future design management theater 110
7.1 The Beck workplace 112
7.2 Technology DProfiler 114
7.3 Pinnacle Park 116
7.4 Federal office building 120
7.5 UoF, Tampa 128
8.1 The main elements of CPD 136
8.2 The scheduling system for CPD 137
8.3 Collaborative planning from the Sjetnan Nedre project 138
8.4 Operational design schedule 139
8.5 Constraints of a design process 142
8.6 The meeting structure 144

x
 FIGURES AND TABLES

8.7 The architect uses BIM and Smartboard to propose changes

in an ICE session 145
9.1 ARPRO timeline from 1998 construction crisis to the
present day 153
9.2 1998 – Urban Plaza before and after 154
9.3 ATRIO development, Bogotá; to be delivered in 2019
(Phase 1) 155
9.4 ATRIO organizational chart 156
9.5 ARPRO innovation chart 158
9.6 ATRIO, example of schedule engaged with 3D model 159
9.7 ATRIO Sala Digital 160

Tables

1.1 Levels of design management in AEC 13

1.2 Phases in the design process 19
4.1 Types of meetings 67
4.2 Types of workshops 68

xi
 Preface

Although architects and building professionals come into contact with,

specify, design and build technical practices every day, they actually know
relatively little about them. These are “abstract systems” construed and con-
structed upon industry norms passed through generations of professionals.
Most of them are correct, but many when disassociated with their cultural
underpinnings of building vernacular and more importantly, their scientific
basis and practice contexts, present challenges that cause buildings to not per-
form as intended or, worse, lead to physical, economic, or social catastrophe.
PocketArchitecture: Technical Design Series fills this void. The series
comprises succinct, easy to use, topic-based volumes that collate in one place
unbiased, need-to-know technical information about specific subject areas by
expert authors. This series demystifies technical design criteria and solutions.
It presents information without overladen theory or anecdotal information.
PocketArchitecture is on point.
As the name would suggest, the volumes in this series are pocket-
sized and collectively serve as a knowledge base on technical subjects in
architecture, creating a value-added information base for building novices
and masters alike. In addition to architects, engineers and contractors who
deliver building projects, the series is appropriate for students and academics
interested in accessible information on technical information as it relates to
building design and construction.
Despite their size, the series volumes are highly illustrated. Further-
more, the volumes use easily accessible language to succinctly explain the
fundamental concepts and then apply these basic ideas to cases of common
issues encountered in the built environment. PocketArchitecture is essential,
accessible and authoritative. This makes it important reading for architec-
tural technologists, architects, building surveyors, building commissioners,

xii
 PREFACE

building engineers, other construction professionals and even owners and

clients.
This volume, Design Management, is written by a thought leader and
internationally published author on the subject, Stephen Emmitt. Practice
and project management is becoming ever more complex due to the conflu-
ence of building technologies and digital practices required to deliver twenty-
first-century structures. Offices must employ advanced business methods,
knowledge management and interpersonal relations to successfully deliver
on construction projects today. This volume emphasizes design managers’
technical and interpersonal skills in leading and managing people and pro-
cesses, with the underlying goal of delivering maximum value to the client.
As part of the PocketArchitecture Series the book includes both fundamentals
and advanced topics. It is appropriate for the novice and expert practitio-
ner as its content is fresh and well considered in the field of texts on design
management.
Ryan E. Smith
Senior Editor

xiii
 Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the contributors to the vignettes and the case study
chapters for their valuable input. To state the obvious, I could not have com-
pleted this book without you. The individual views provide a unique insight
into the world of design management, and it is necessary to state that the
views expressed are the views of the contributors, and may not necessarily
reflect the views of their employers.
I am grateful to the series editor, Ryan E. Smith, who asked me to con-
tribute with a book on design management. It has been an enjoyable chal-
lenge to express the main aspects of design management in such a concise
format.
I would also like to acknowledge the many individuals, practitioners,
academics and students with whom I have discussed the whys and where-
fores of design management over the years. Too numerous to mention, these
conversations have shaped my thinking, writing and application of design
management.

xiv
 Introduction

ALTHOUGH DESIGN MANAGEMENT has existed both as a discipline and a

field of knowledge since the 1960s it is only since the turn of the twenty-first
century that design management has been accepted as a means of deliver-
ing value to construction clients. Changes in procurement routes, shifting
responsibility for design, rapid developments in digital technologies and ever
more demanding clients have combined to emphasize the need to better man-
age design. This applies to all aspects of design, ranging from the manage-
ment of designers and design information to design tools, technologies and
processes.
The rapid uptake of design management demonstrates that design
quality is foremost in the minds of building sponsors, project participants,
owners and users alike. Combined with exciting developments in informa-
tion technologies, such as building information modeling (BIM), off-site pro-
duction and a more inclusive approach to the management of projects via
collaborative and integrated project delivery methods, we are experiencing
rapid and positive change in how we design, deliver, use and reuse our built
environment. This change is also having a positive effect on the drive for
a more inclusive and sustainable (low-carbon) built environment in which
design is an important factor. This means that design, both as an activity
(designing) and as an output (design information), must be managed to maxi-
mize design quality, deliver buildings in an efficient manner and, most impor-
tantly, realize buildings that are a delight to use.
This brings us to the issue of performance in architecture, construction
and engineering (ACE). This can be expressed in three interrelated ways by
the performance of: the design and delivery team(s); the completed artifact;
and the users of the building. (see Figure I.1).The management of design
plays an important role in ensuring efficient delivery by the design and con-
struction teams; it influences the final quality of the building and its technical
and functional performance; and it influences how people perform within

1
 INTRODUCTION

Design and
delivery
team

Users Artifact

I.1 Performance on three levels

and around the building. Combined, these performance drivers highlight the
need for a systematic and consistent approach to the management of design-
ers and design information. We do not need more management, or more
managers. We need better management practices and procedures that are
responsive and supportive of creative individuals and creative processes and
managers with a passion for design. The emphasis should be on people and
processes, with the underlying goal of delivering maximum value to the cli-
ent: the theme of this book.
There are a variety of definitions of design management and design
manager to be found within the literature. The situation is similar in practice,
although the terms and definitions used tend to be specific to a particular
organization and the country in which it is based. Combined, the definitions
relate either entirely to the management of designers, or more usually to the
management of design information with an emphasis on design integration.
Many of these definitions have their roots in, and draw on, project manage-
ment. For clarity the definitions used in this book for design management and
design manager are:

■ Design management is the management of design information and the

management of designers in a team environment – that is it concerns
people and processes.
■ Design managers are responsible for delivering design quality.

2
 INTRODUCTION

This book addresses the value that design management and design managers
contribute to all phases of construction projects. The book differs from the
small number of books currently available by presenting information in a
concise and accessible format that resembles a guide, or concise handbook,
rather than a narrative. Consistent with the Pocket Architecture series, this
book is divided into two parts: Fundamentals and Application. In Part 1,
Fundamentals, the five chapters address the why, what, how and when ques-
tions in a simple and informative style. Vignettes from design management
professionals are included to further illustrate specific issues:

1 Design management fundamentals

This chapter sets out the fundamentals of design management, starting
with definitions and moving on to identifying different levels of design
management within organizations. The vignette is contributed by Clive
Robertson, who argues for a strategic approach to design management.

2 Preconstruction – generating design value

The two most important aspects of any project are the project defini-
tion (client briefing) and the team assembly stages. This is where the
true value of design management lies. Ben Bourke provides the vignette
about the value of design management at the preconstruction phase.

3 Construction – delivering design value

Constructors deliver the design value to the client, and this chapter
looks at the management of design from the perspective of the con-
structors. John Eynon reflects via the vignette on a career as a design
manager.

4 Working together – valuing design interactions

Design management is primarily concerned with managing people, and
the focus in this chapter is on how people interact in temporary project
environments. In the vignette Lanre Gbolade discusses the challenge of
coordinating and liaising with multiple stakeholders.

5 The design manager

Our focus in this chapter is on the individual design manager. We look
at the different job roles, the need to establish the design manager’s

3
 INTRODUCTION

remit within projects, personal characteristics and the need for consis-
tency across projects and organizations. Vignettes are provided by Susan
Snaddon, Robert Toon and Nicolas Gill and address design integra-
tion, the factors that motivate design managers and working overseas
respectively.

In Part 2, the case study chapters provide unique examples of application of

design management. Contributors are drawn from Colombia, Norway and
the US to give a broad insight into the evolving world of design management.

6 Shining light on the dark side

by Dave Beem
Dave Beem describes his move from an architectural practice into the
world of design management, a world often referred to as the dark side.
He identifies a general lack of knowledge about design management in
the US while also extolling the virtues of design management. Dave has
found light on the dark side.

7 Beck Group: an integrated approach

by Rick del Monte
Rick del Monte provides a comprehensive overview of the integrated
approach adopted by the Beck Group. He reflects on two recent projects,
concluding with lessons for others to learn from.

8 Veidekke: collaborative planning in design

by Vegard Knotten and Fredrik Svalestuen
Scandinavia has long been recognized for its democratic and inclusive
approach to life and business. In this case study the emphasis is on col-
laborative planning and the approach taken by Veidekke as part of their
design management strategy.

9 ARPRO: project delivery in emerging markets — a case study from

Colombia
by Rodrigo Rubio-Vollert
Developing countries, such as Colombia, face the challenge of integrat-
ing global knowledge and practices with local ones. In the final chapter
Rodrigo Rubio-Vollert describes the challenges of applying international

4
 INTRODUCTION

knowledge to a local context. He concludes with an overview of a joint

venture between organizations based in Colombia and Canada to deliver
an innovative building in the center of Bogotá.

Whether readers are new to design management or are experienced in its

application, this book encourages everyone involved in the design, delivery
and operation of our built environment to learn more about design manage-
ment. Design management provides considerable value to building sponsors/
owners, organizations and users; it is worth applying and adapting to one’s
unique circumstances. Design management will bring about better efficiency
in organizations and projects; it will result in better delivery and better qual-
ity buildings; it will result in better performance of buildings and a more
satisfying experience for building users; it will add value to organizations and
individuals.

5
Fundamentals
 chapter 1

Design management fundamentals

IN THIS CHAPTER the fundamentals of design management are explained

and illustrated to set the context for the chapters that follow. We start with
explaining what design management is – that is what it is we are managing
and why. Then we explore the different levels of design management from an
architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) perspective. This is fol-
lowed by a review of different design management roles and the business of
design. We then turn our attention to managing six fundamental aspects of
design: design activities, design data, design processes, technologies, people
and expectations.

Design management: what it is

CLIENTS EXPECT THEIR PROJECTS to be delivered effectively and efficiently

by their project delivery teams. Clients demand and should expect:

■ A consistent level of service

■ Certainty over build cost
■ Certainty over program
■ Assurance about the quality of the completed artifact
■ An artifact that performs as designed during its service life
■ An artifact with minimal negative impact on our environment.

These demands and expectations are influenced by the decisions made by the
design and delivery teams within an appropriate managerial framework for
a project. Underlying all decisions is design (with a small ‘d’), and all of the
client demands just listed are influenced by the way in which the designers
and constructors interact and their collective performance.

9
 DESIGN MANAGEMENT FUNDAMENTALS

Design is a creative activity. Creativity comes from the fear of fail-

ure, or more accurately the luxury of failure. It concerns the exploration of
possibilities and opportunities, testing different solutions to see what works
and what does not, and embracing the better solutions to come to a work-
able proposition. This is an iterative process often involving a large num-
ber of participants. In architecture, engineering and construction, design
is concerned with translating wants and needs from the world of clients to
the world of constructors and building users. The remit of designers is to
constantly draw out the unexpected and create value. The work of the con-
structors is to translate the value codified in design information into a built
artifact. It is the constructor who delivers the value. Of course this is a rather
simplistic view because many stakeholders are involved in the cocreation of
design, ranging from clients and building users to specialist subcontractors,
suppliers and trades.
The creation and delivery of design value are often a lengthy and
complex series of interactions, lasting many years for the larger projects. The
entire process needs to be managed to keep process waste to a minimum and
to ensure that the maximum possible value is delivered to the client and
building users. Project managers, design managers and construction managers
are typically the primary actors in this process. It is the design management
team that is responsible for the design aspects of the project.
The word ‘design’ may be interpreted in many different ways, and
therefore it is necessary to use some definitions to ensure everyone under-
stands what is being ‘managed’.
The verb design is concerned with doing various activities that fall
under the umbrella of designing – creating something new. When designing
we are using cognitive and social skills, thinking and interacting with others
in the cocreation of design. This involves communicating and making deci-
sions in a collaborative group or team environment, using the most appropri-
ate technologies and tools to hand. This helps to eliminate uncertainty about
what is required to resolve design clashes and is fundamental to the creation
and delivery of design value.
The noun design describes the output of the design process. Initially
this is codified in design information (drawings, specifications, models and
calculations) and then translated by the constructor into a physical artifact.
The verb manage is concerned with doing various activities that fall
under the umbrella of managing. Similar to when we are designing, when

10
 DESIGN MANAGEMENT FUNDAMENTALS

we are managing we are using cognitive and social skills to forecast, plan,
coordinate and direct people towards a common goal. This also involves
communicating and making decisions in a collaborative group or team envi-
ronment, using the most appropriate technologies and tools to hand. This
helps to eliminate uncertainty about what is required from the designers and
constructors. Management, like design, is fundamental to the creation and
delivery of design value.
The noun management is usually used to describe managerial systems
and processes that are put in place to allow people to achieve their tasks
safely and efficiently. The word ‘management’ is often used as a synonym for
administration, although management is more correctly concerned with set-
ting goals and controlling the means to achieve them.
Putting design and management together we get design management.

Definition

Design management is the management of design information and the

management of designers in a team environment.

Design management comprises the convergence of two cultures, the culture

of design and the culture of management. Although the two cultures use dif-
ferent language, fundamentally they are not dissimilar. Design is concerned
with exploring and shaping solutions to problems, as is management. Design-
ers are concerned with bringing many disparate elements together to realize
the bigger picture, as is management. Design managers need to understand
how designers and constructors work; they also need to understand man-
agement principles and techniques. This emphasizes a need for commercial
awareness – the business of design (discussed ahead).

Definition

Design managers are responsible for delivering design quality.

Design managers can be found throughout construction, working for clients,

developers, designers, engineers and contractors. The term ‘design manager’ is
used quite broadly to encapsulate a bridging role between design and its deliv-
ery (see Figure 1.1). Design managers work alongside project managers, often
undertaking similar tasks, but their primary goal is to achieve design quality

11
 DESIGN MANAGEMENT FUNDAMENTALS

Design
management as Construction
Design culture
a bridge between culture
cultures

Design culture: Construction culture:

Iterative Linear
Creative Pragmatic
Values creation Values delivery

1.1 Design management – integrating cultures

throughout the life of a project. Design managers must have an understand-

ing of and love for design in addition to knowledge of contractual procedures
and regulatory compliance. They must have exceptional coordination and
communication skills. Activities primarily relate to managing the following:

■ Timely production of accurate design information. This is achieved by

nurturing a collaborative and integrated working environment.
■ Effective flow of information to those who need it. This is achieved
through the effective mapping and management of the design supply
chain.

Levels of design management

THE ROOTS OF DESIGN MANAGEMENT can be traced back to the 1960s, with
early work conducted by the architectural profession in the UK. Parallel work

12
 DESIGN MANAGEMENT FUNDAMENTALS

into industrial (generic) design management started to develop around a sim-

ilar time, with early publications also going back to the 1960s (see ‘Further
Reading’). Constructors started to take interest some 30 years later as they
became ever more responsible for design quality. The constructors realized
that they had to do something different if they were to manage design quality;
hence the construction design manager role was born out of necessity. Since
the turn of the century the number of design managers employed by con-
structors around the world has grown at a staggering rate. This is in marked
contrast to a relatively modest uptake in design management within the
architectural and engineering fraternity, where design managers are mainly
found in large multidisciplinary organizations. Needless to say the application
of design management is still evolving within the architectural engineering
and construction (AEC) sector. Not surprisingly, many questions remain as
to the extent to which design management is used within organizations.
The Design Management Europe Network (www.designmanagement
excellence.com) has developed a ‘design management staircase’ that graphi-
cally illustrates how organizations use design management in their businesses,
ranging from no design management at the lowest level rising to the top
level, where design management is an integral part of the business culture.
This work has been adapted to make it relevant to organizations working in
AEC and is shown in Table 1.1. Readers should ask themselves where they
are currently positioned and where they wish to be positioned in the future.

Table 1.1 Levels of design management in AEC

Level 1: no design management

At this level there is no, or very little, knowledge of how to manage design. There
is no consistent approach to the management of design within the organization
or across its portfolio of projects. Design is not part of the organization’s culture
and the management of design tends to be undertaken ‘if necessary’ and in an
informal, ad hoc manner.

Level 2: design management applied only to projects

The understanding and application of design management are restricted solely
to individual projects. This tends to be where many contracting organizations are
currently positioned, with design managers primarily located on construction sites.
This could be viewed as a ‘reactive’ approach, with design managers employed
to address challenges created earlier in the preconstruction phase, such as the
coordination of design information, requests for information and design changes.
Design management is not integrated into business processes or office culture.
(continued)

13
 DESIGN MANAGEMENT FUNDAMENTALS

Table 1.1 continued

Level 3: design management used proactively

At this level there is an understanding of the importance of design management
within the business. Design forms part of the business processes and there are
efforts to manage design at an organizational and project level. Senior design
managers will oversee the project portfolio and link performance of projects to
the business. At this level architects, engineers and constructors will employ
design managers as a link between the design team and the construction team.
Contractors will employ preconstruction design managers to proactively deal
with design-related challenges before they create problems on the construction
site. Taking a proactive stance will allow the design and construction teams to
deliver better design value compared to those positioned at Level 2; it will also
result in fewer issues to address during construction.

Level 4: design management as culture – strategic design management

At this level organizations will be design-driven with design embedded in all
business processes. Design management will be central to the culture of the
business, forming the glue between the project portfolio and the business. Design
management will have strategic importance to the business, and profitability will
be determined by the effectiveness of design management across every aspect of
the business. This allows the organization to embrace process innovations, such
as lean thinking and integrated project delivery, as part of its design management
activities. At this level clients should expect projects to be delivered on time,
on budget and to agreed quality levels. More importantly, the organization will
deliver excellent design value to its client and building users.

Elements of design management

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF ELEMENTS that make up the design management

discipline, as illustrated in Figure 1.2. All of these factors influence the ability
to generate and deliver design value to the client and building users. Under-
standing the interaction of these elements in a project and organizational
environment is an essential skill. These six elements are discussed ahead.

Commercial factors: The business of design

Understanding the value of design to an organization and its clients is fun-
damental to a successful business. The interrelationship between effective
management of design within an organization and effective design within
that organization’s portfolio of projects will determine the level of productiv-
ity and profitability of the organization. It is essential that design managers

14
 DESIGN MANAGEMENT FUNDAMENTALS

People

Technologies Commercial

Design
Management

Process Design

Information

1.2 Elements of design management

understand the commercial climate in which they operate. Commercial fac-

tors primarily relate to the following:

■ Business aspects of individual projects. This is often expressed in terms

of cost, but it should be seen in a wider context of delivering design value
to the client. The manner in which designers interact, how they produce
information and the quality of that information all have implications for
the commercial success of a project.
■ Business objectives of the organization. This is often expressed in terms
of profitability, but it should be seen in a wider context of delivering
value to society.

Without a sound understanding of the commercial factors relating to both,

often competing interests, it is unlikely that individuals will be particularly

15
 DESIGN MANAGEMENT FUNDAMENTALS

effective in the design management role. This requires a higher level of

understanding and application, as indicated on the levels of design manage-
ment (Table 1.1).
Many of the decisions taken by design managers will be colored by
project finances and the implications for their organization’s economic for-
tunes (in terms of managing the organization’s resources). Understanding
the interrelationship between project decisions and the implications for the
financial well-being of the organizations contributing to the project is a fun-
damental requirement. So too is an understanding of the commercial deci-
sions that ensure building projects are commissioned and seen through to a
successful completion. Designers who are able to add value to their clients’
projects will be rewarded with future commissions. Adding value may be tan-
gible, such as delivering the project ahead of schedule or being able to design
in more useable floor space. It may, however, be intangible in terms of how
appealing the building is to potential investors.

Managing design activity

The act of design is a complex undertaking, involving interaction with
many other designers in a highly dynamic and often fragile network of tem-
porary relationships. The design manager must ensure that the best possible
environment for encouraging interaction and collaborative design exists
within the organization and within every project. How this is done will
vary depending on the design manager’s specific organizational context
and his or her personal preferences. A strategic overview is required for
every project. There are some underlying factors to address that relate to
the following:

■ Physical collocation of designers (to discuss issues face-to-face). This is

expensive to organize, and it is not always possible due to project logis-
tics and/or the global location of project participants.
■ Virtual location of designers. It is relatively easy to communicate and col-
laborate via information communication technologies (ICTs) and using
‘big room’ technologies, but it is also too easy to miss the informal inter-
actions and body language that give clues to how we really feel.
■ Design management tools to be used. The value of one over another
will depend on the project context and the market orientation of the

16
 DESIGN MANAGEMENT FUNDAMENTALS

organization concerned. It may also be determined by the individual pref-

erences of the design manager for certain types of tools and approaches.
The important point to note is that tools alone will not achieve effective
design management. It is also necessary to employ design managers with
the experience, knowledge and interpersonal skills to interact effectively
with colleagues in their organization and project stakeholders. One of
the most comprehensive sources of information for design managers can
be found at www.projectdesignguides.com.

Managing design information and its flow

The output of the design process is a set of design information (e.g. drawings/
specifications/calculations/models) that will be used by others to construct
the building. The drawings and specifications show the constructors what is
required and the interrelationship of the various elements of the design. The
design information does not tell the constructors how to build; that is the
responsibility of the construction team. However, without accurate design
information the constructors are left to ‘guess’ what is required, which unnec-
essarily increases risk to the constructor, which is reflected in higher costs and
unnecessary conflict.
Collaborative digital platforms allow design managers to better man-
age design information, helping to reduce clashes between architectural and
engineering elements of the design and reduce the number of unresolved
issues before the work starts on site. This results in fewer requests for informa-
tion (RFIs) compared to more traditional, less well-coordinated methods of
handling design data. Greater transparency of data will, inevitably, result in
fewer requests for design changes. It is, however, of little use letting everyone
have everything all at once because we would all be swamped with the sheer
volume and complexity of the information. Thus it is necessary to forecast
the following:

■ Who requires what information? This question can be answered only

by understanding the temporary project organization and the goals of
the specific project. The management tools associated with BIM will
help to define information requirements early in the project. As the
project evolves these requirements will need to be revisited and adjusted
accordingly.

17
 DESIGN MANAGEMENT FUNDAMENTALS

■ Why do they require the information? At a basic level this relates to

whether people require information to be able to design or construct
buildings, as the needs will be different. However, there are quite subtle
boundaries within projects that help to define what specific require-
ments are. The better these are managed, the more effective are the
individuals working with that information.
■ When do they require that information? Understanding the flow of work
within organizations and within projects will assist design managers with
answering this question. Mapping the flow of information and the deliv-
ery of design work packages will be helpful in managing information
requirements.

Managing the design process

Process models and frameworks are essential to allow all designers to under-
stand their position, roles and responsibilities in relation to others. Process
guides are essential tools for design managers. A wide range of process plans is
available to guide designers through the design and build process. These range
from simple descriptions to detailed step-by-step guides. The best known are
provided by the American Institute of Architects (AIA) and the Royal Insti-
tute of British Architects (RIBA). Alternative and complementary process
guides can be found in, for example, the discipline of value management,
where the focus is on identifying and then delivering value to the client.
All design projects, regardless of size and complexity, pass through
four key phases. These are summarized in Table 1.2 and discussed in a design
management context. The effective identification and management of these
major interfaces are an essential task of design and project managers, and are
discussed further in Chapter 4. The important point to make is that each
phase involves different skill sets, and inevitably the individuals involved
will change as the project moves from inception to delivery and use.
Process plans help guide individuals through the design and construc-
tion process. Each project must have a bespoke process plan that is suitable
to, and appropriate for, the project context. The process plan should facili-
tate effective and efficient design work, communication and information
flow, and learning. This means that the process needs to be first mapped and
then designed to suit the project requirements. This will help to inform the
design and construction programs. It will also help to eliminate process waste,

18
Table 1.2 Phases in the design process

1. Project definition: inception, client briefing and procurement

At the project definition stage the key value parameters are established. It is
through the briefing process that the users’ wants and needs are explored and
understanding is achieved. It is here that the client’s business plan is established
and the procurement route decided. Design quality will need to be discussed
and appropriate parameters agreed. Failure to conduct a comprehensive briefing
process will usually lead to design changes and cost uncertainty later in the
project. The briefing process also starts to establish connections with a variety of
organizations and individuals that may form the project team. Establishing the brief,
understanding what is required and putting the right people together to deliver the
project will help to ensure a relatively straightforward project (see Chapters 2 and 4).
Failure to do this effectively will lead to problems later in the project.

2. Project design: generating design value

The outcome of the briefing process, the brief, sets out what is required and
serves to inform and steer the design team. At this stage more people join the
temporary project organization, comprising managers, cost consultants and
designers to explore solutions to the given challenge. During the development
of the design it is inevitable that it will change as designers and engineers work
to maximize design value and minimize waste. Therefore some attempt must be
made to manage the design process as the design evolves and the parameters
set out in the project brief are challenged (and in some cases redefined). As a
general rule of thumb, the later the design change occurs in the process, the
greater the implication (cost and time) of accommodating that change. This
phase should conclude with accurate and complete design information. This
will be accompanied by accurate cost and program information and with all
legal and environmental approvals in place. For schemes with a high degree of
off-site manufacturing it is essential that the design is reviewed and approved
prior to manufacturing, although one could also extend this argument to more
traditional forms of construction. In terms of efficiency and reducing uncertainty
it is necessary to complete the design information, review it and approve it
before entering the construction phase. This allows for accurate bidding by
contractors and subcontractors and accurate construction (see Chapter 2).

3. Project delivery: construction, delivering design value

At the project delivery phase there is a change in the culture of those
contributing to the project, moving from a creative to a pragmatic mindset.
Design information will be ‘consumed’ by the constructors and interpreted into
a physical artifact. The construction design manager will be working alongside
the project managers and the construction managers to ensure that design
quality is maintained and the building complies with relevant permissions and
standards. Cost and time tend to take priority as the constructors aim to deliver
the project safely and to agreed quality parameters (see Chapter 3).

4. Product operation: use, maintenance and recovery

Buildings will require regular maintenance, repair and upgrading to suit
changing user needs. Feedback from building maintenance managers and
facility managers can be used for the development of new projects, helping
to integrate important experience and knowledge of how buildings are used
and how they perform over time. Once the building becomes obsolete, it will
need to be remodeled or demolished and materials recovered, recycled and/
or reused in a new artifact. And so the process starts once again, albeit from a
different point in time and with different stakeholders.
 DESIGN MANAGEMENT FUNDAMENTALS

the focus of the lean thinking philosophy. Process plans should include, as a
minimum:

■ Clearly defined stages, roles, tasks and responsibilities (design decision

matrix)
■ Meetings and workshops
■ Value and risk management workshops at strategic intervals
■ Project milestones (for the design team and the delivery team)
■ Last responsible moment for decision making
■ Control gateways to coincide with the end/start of different phases
■ Learning opportunities and feedback loops.

Managing technologies
As the design management role has evolved and matured so too have the
digital technologies that underlie design and realization. It is now possible to
communicate with all project stakeholders via dedicated project intranets and
associated information communication technologies (ICTs). We can design
in a collaborative manner via a shared virtual building information model,
using a variety of building information modeling and building information
management software (BIMs). This information can be linked directly to
manufacturing plants to produce bespoke building components and products.
Given the variety of commercially available software and the prefer-
ences of individual organizations for one over another, it is essential that
individual projects are set up with shared technologies, preferably the same
technologies. A number of fundamental questions need to be addressed at the
project initiation stage:

■ What are the most appropriate technologies for the project?

■ How do the project technologies interface with each stakeholder’s orga-
nizational needs?

A number of tools are available that help in this regard, such as BIM proto-
col. It is, however, essential that the various options and preferences are dis-
cussed within the project team and a collective decision taken. The decision
should not be imposed on the project team by the project manager without
prior consultation as this may lead to inefficiencies and in the worst cases

20
 DESIGN MANAGEMENT FUNDAMENTALS

organizations running parallel systems, the familiar one in their organization

and the unfamiliar one via the project. Inevitably, this will create unneces-
sary interoperability issues and unnecessary work. We must not rely entirely
on the technologies; they are only as good as the people inputting, manipu-
lating and interpreting the data.

Managing people
At the heart of the design management discipline is the ability to effectively
manage people. This calls for an understanding of how people behave in gen-
eral terms and also an understanding of how individual project contributors
are likely to behave during the course of the project. This is crucial because
research has shown that we all respond differently during the various phases
of a project, sometimes being more efficient than others and sometimes feel-
ing less stressed than others. We all have our preferred way of communicating
and interfacing with others. We all respond differently to various managerial
approaches. We all have good and not so good days at work, and although
we do not like to admit it we all do, occasionally, make mistakes. We are not
machines; our performance levels may vary significantly during, for example,
the course of a week. While there is not much a design manager can do about
inconsistent individual performance levels, he or she can be prepared by
building a certain amount of flexibility into programs and recognizing that
one approach will not suit all. An appreciation and understanding of the
behavior are an essential requirement.
The design and construction ‘teams’ are extremely diverse, and ensur-
ing an appropriate level of interaction to develop and realize the design is
challenging. The following questions should be addressed:

■ Who are the most appropriate people for the project? The emphasis
should be on key individuals as much as it is on organizations.
■ What individual skills, knowledge and abilities do the individuals bring
to the project?
■ What value do the individuals add to the project?
■ Are they compatible with the overall project ethos and with the other
members of the project team?
■ Are they leaders or followers?
■ Can they be trusted to deliver?

21
 DESIGN MANAGEMENT FUNDAMENTALS

Design managers need to have empathy with the people they manage.
Understanding what motivates individuals and their goal orientation will
help design managers to deliver design value (see Chapter 5).

Vignette – a case for strategic design management

Clive Robertson
Design Consultant and Chartered Construction Management Engineer

Design is generic and a part of everyday life and something that everybody
wants to be involved with one way or another. Be it cooking or making a
sandwich, you are designing. Be it drawing or contributing to a design deci-
sion, you are designing. The initial design that started as a few lines on a
napkin over dinner with the owner eventually becomes a design project with
many parties contributing to the design. Moving up to the megaproject level
the design and delivery team becomes very large, with hundreds of people
from many disciplines working on the project over a long period. Regardless
of project size and complexity, the design manager has a responsibility to
manage the design process effectively, ever mindful that ‘design’ and ‘design-
ing’ are not well understood within the entire project team.
My career has spanned 35 years, starting in architectural practice as a
designer and moving into design management as my career developed, working
extensively in the Middle East on megaprojects over the past decade. During
this time I have witnessed early incarnations of the design manager, which
was little more than a glorified document controller, transform into an estab-
lished and respected role. What is too frequently overlooked in a BIM-driven
project environment is that the iterative design process still needs to be man-
aged, regardless of the technologies used. Architects often wish to manage their
design teams without ‘external management’ taking the responsibility away
from them. However, the majority of lead architects now realize that the design
manager needs the lead designer and they, in turn, need the design manager.
It is a team approach. The design manager provides a comprehensive and sup-
portive understanding to the complete design process. It is the design manager
who establishes a common set of project objectives; generates an understanding
and knowledge of the project; educates; reduces risk; encourages strategic deci-
sions and unequivocally improves the delivery of design quality.

22
 DESIGN MANAGEMENT FUNDAMENTALS

Look more closely and we see a shift in the design manager role from
the construction site to the preconstruction phase, where strategic decisions
and planning combined with effective communication are key factors. Com-
plaints from clients about the quality of the buildings (expressed in numerous
government reports the world over) can be addressed only at an early stage
in the project. Design management needs to move to the executive board
level in organizations, and hence form part of the strategic business plan. The
problem that developers face is that although they may require a green, state-
of-the-art building that they can sell or put to immediate use, they have to
evaluate where to begin. With a strategic design management approach the
evaluation would have already commenced. I favor a strategic design man-
agement approach because not all clients and contractors have a true under-
standing of design and the technologies required to deliver design value.
Encouraging all stakeholders to communicate with one another is one
of the many tasks that a design manager has to fulfil. Stakeholder manage-
ment is the most important element within any project of any size and com-
plexity. There is a diverse and different type of clientele on every project.
Consulting and supporting clients in different ways to produce a structured
and well-detailed brief, along with an appropriate procurement route, are
fundamental to project success.
Programming design team activities is also something that architects
rarely do. It is up to the design manager to take a strategic view of the ‘assault
course’ and manage the process to ensure that design value is not lost at the
many obstacles along the route to project completion. The iterative design
process must be strategically managed because it involves everyone from proj-
ect inception to completion, use and beyond. Design programming would
appear to be missing or misunderstood by constructors. The design team usu-
ally provides a detailed design program that is subsequently ‘rationalized’ by
the contractor to suit their working methods. This is done without adequate
knowledge of the design durations and design dependencies, which inevita-
bly results in delays and claims.
To conclude, I believe that everyone entering the construction sector
should be taught the basics of managing design, which of course includes
an understanding of design and designing. Design management education
is a modern by-product of design and technology, construction and manu-
facturing trades. Therefore, it should be introduced as an apprenticeship.
As the technologies evolve and we move more towards prefabrication and

23
 DESIGN MANAGEMENT FUNDAMENTALS

off-site construction, we will need fewer construction project managers,

which will be replaced by design managers. We need a new strategic design
management framework. The principles, processes and protocols would be
generic to all projects, helping to reduce the uncertainty (and the associated
risks and costs); I am currently researching and working towards this goal.

24
 chapter 2

Preconstruction – generating
design value

IT IS WELL KNOWN that the two most important aspects of a project relate
to (1) understanding and defining what is required and (2) the assem-
bly of the most appropriate organizations and individuals to deliver the
project. The first aspect relates to client briefing and the establishment
of a comprehensive project brief. Get this wrong and it is very difficult
to achieve the value required by the client. This can lead to frustration
and disputes as well as a physical artifact that does not function in the
way it was intended. The second aspect involves the considered selection
of compatible project participants to design and subsequently construct
the project in accordance with the project brief. Get this wrong and it
becomes very difficult to deliver the project on time, on cost and to agreed
quality levels. This can lead to ineffective communication, disputes and
poor-quality buildings. Many challenges encountered on construction sites
can be traced back to poor understanding of the client’s requirements and
project participants failing to interact effectively. The message is to go
slow to go fast – that is get everything in place and agreed by the client
before starting to do the work.
In this chapter emphasis is on the way in which design activity is man-
aged to generate the best possible value for the building sponsor (client) dur-
ing the major design phases (e.g. AIA stages and RIBA stages). The design
manager’s role varies considerably at the precontract stage, dependent on the
market orientation of the organizations involved and the type of procurement
route being used on a specific project. At this early stage the design manager
needs to consider how the strategic decisions will minimize the operational
decisions. It is the design manager’s job to oversee design quality and the
coordination of design information. The primary function is to maximize
design value for the client. It is not the design manager’s job to do the design;
others are employed for that task.

25
 PRECONSTRUCTION

Design value

INVESTORS AND OWNERS of buildings invest in design to generate value for

their businesses. It is the designers who explore, expose and articulate the
wants and needs of the client via the briefing process and transfer those into a
design proposal. It is this process that generates value for the building owner
and users. Value is influenced by:

■ A whole-life approach to design management (including low-carbon

and resilient design)
■ Design briefing (and optioneering)
■ Design development (including target value design)
■ Specifying design quality
■ Design for construction (including on-site and off-site considerations)
■ Design management responsibilities.

Value, like quality, means different things to different people, and hence the
term needs to be discussed to arrive at a shared understanding for each proj-
ect. This can be achieved by following a defined value management plan or
included in the project plan. Defining value is primarily related to the initial
briefing process, where value should be discussed, explored and defined. Val-
ues of the project participants also need to be discussed to ensure a degree of
compatibility and shared project values.

Value management
Value management and value-based management models are based on
the discussion and agreement of values, primarily, but not exclusively via
facilitated workshops. Consensus and the creation of trust are fundamental
components of these models. Workshops start with team assembly prior to
the briefing stage and continue to project completion and feedback. Interac-
tions within the workshops encourage open communication and knowledge
sharing while trying to respect and manage the chaotic nature of the design
process. Cooperation, communication, knowledge sharing and learning as
a group help to contribute to the clarification and confirmation of project
values. Getting to know fellow actors and developing trusting relationships
are essential features of the approach. Value engineering is a subset of value

26
 PRECONSTRUCTION

management, where tools are used to interrogate all aspects of the design to
ensure maximum value is delivered to the client for the least cost. This is
discussed further in Chapter 3.

Design briefing

A CRUCIAL STAGE in any project is establishing an understanding of

what is required and why. In construction this means getting to know
the sponsor of the building project, the client, and making the effort to
understand their needs, likes and wants, and just as importantly what
they do not like. This process is usually termed the briefing process or the
employer requirement capture phase. The outcome of the briefing process
is a series of documents known collectively as the brief. These documents
are used as a guide by the design team to explore and develop the design.
The briefing documents are a record of the client’s requirements, and thus
they will need to be referred to and updated as necessary throughout the
project. The project brief will be a contractual document in the majority
of contracts.
Briefing is, unfortunately, an aspect of projects that is too often
poorly managed. Thus the design team starts designing based on incomplete
or misleading information, often resulting in the need to revisit designs and
to take more time than would otherwise be required. This is process waste
that eats into the profitability of the design team. And not surprisingly,
many of the challenges to be found in the realization phase can be traced
back to ineffective briefing – that is not spending enough effort on clearly
establishing what is required and why. This will invariably result in requests
for changes and requests for information (which take time to deal with)
and thus the cost and time parameters will be compromised. In the worst
cases the inability to clearly define the brief will lead to negative conflict
and disputes.
Too often clients and their advisers work with a very vague brief to
‘get things moving’ and often pay the price at a later stage, having to rework
designs and drawings, and in the worst cases dismantle and rebuild parts of
the building. It follows that an essential aspect of design management is to
capture the client’s needs before design work commences. Failure to do so will
result in wasted effort, unnecessary cost and project overruns.

27
 PRECONSTRUCTION

Exploring client needs – steps to success

It is crucial that clients are able to set out their demands in detail, with a clear
vision for the building and a clear set of business benefits. The majority of cli-
ents, perhaps with the exception of repeat clients and clients with large build-
ing portfolios, will need guidance and assistance with this. Brief takers must be
able to quickly establish empathy with the client and also have the ability to
question initial statements of need. This requires excellent interpersonal skills
as well as extensive experience of design and construction projects. Manage-
ment of the briefing process is an essential tool in the design manager’s tool-
box. Effective management of the process will result in less uncertainty and the
reduction of risk. There are a number of discrete steps in the briefing process
that need to be managed and that have a degree of iteration between them.

1 Establishing the business case – why?

This is the most important part of the project, establishing the answer to
the question, why? The commercial aspects of the project will be expressed
in a project business plan or a strategic brief. This will set out the reasoning
for the project, together with the financial and time constraints.

2 Establishing project requirements – what?

Once the business case has been established, and approved by the cli-
ent, attention turns to what is required. This usually involves discussing
the project requirements in an increasing level of detail, which once
approved are set out in the briefing documents. A variety of terms are used
to describe the written documents that define the client’s requirements,
the most common being ‘project brief’, which is used here for consistency.

3 Establishing the project team – how?

As the briefing process develops and the main project requirements start to
be established, there will, inevitably, be discussion about the skills required
to deliver the project. These are the early discussions about team assembly,
colored by major decisions – for example to use off-site manufacturing or a
certain type of procurement route, such as relational contracting.

4 Establishing the project program – when?

The business case will have established the financial constraints for the
project and also one or more critical dates. However, it is only when the

28
 PRECONSTRUCTION

project requirements are confirmed and the main decisions relating to

how the project is to be delivered that the main dates and hence the pro-
gram can be established with any certainty. Failure to establish clear and
unambiguous project requirements, together with the means of delivery,
will result in an inaccurate program and subsequent problems with the
delivery of the project to program. The design management program will
sit under the overall project program and will need to be coordinated
with the construction program, as discussed later.

5 Client approval (sign-off)

Given the importance of the briefing documents it is essential that the
client approves and signs off these documents in accordance with the
agreed timescale. Once the documents have been approved, they can
be issued to the design team. The client will also need to approve any
subsequent changes to the brief.

6 Communicating the brief to the design team

Sending a large volume of information to the design team without any
form of social interaction with the client and/or briefing team is not
recommended. No matter how good we are at expressing the client’s
needs in the briefing documents it is very difficult to convey the spirit of
the client to the design team. The briefing documents should be handed
over to the design team via the brief taker and, if possible, the client.
Meetings or workshops can be instrumental in helping to reduce uncer-
tainty and aid understanding. Although such events are time-consuming,
the payback is a more efficient and better-informed design process.

7 Monitoring
Monitoring the brief throughout the design and construction process is
essential to ensure client expectations are met. Failure to monitor the
development of the design and the development of the build against
the brief is likely to lead to disputes with the client, because what was
delivered has deviated from what was required.

8 Learning
Briefing is a process of learning for the client and the brief takers. Given
the intensity of the questioning process it is inevitable that the client

29
 PRECONSTRUCTION

will know more about its requirements at the end of the process com-
pared to the start. Similarly, the brief takers will have developed an in-
depth understanding of how the client goes about its business and the
aspects of the project that are most precious to it. For repeat projects and
clients with large property portfolios the learning is crucial to informing
the efficiency of the process.

The project quality plan

ONCE THE BUSINESS case (strategic brief) and the project brief have been
established it is then possible to define the project quality plan in accordance
with the quality assurance procedures. The project quality plan is an essential
tool to help steer the project to a successful conclusion. The aim is to give
the client and project participants confidence in the service provided. The
project quality plan sets out what will be done and by whom. The best project
quality plans are usually those produced as a result of a collaborative exercise
by the main participants. This is possible only if these are known at an early
stage. Producing the quality plan via consensus helps to ensure the document
contains information that has been discussed and agreed (thus helping to
avoid future conflict). This is also a useful step in starting to build a project
team ethos. Along with the project brief the project quality plan provides the
backbone to the effective management of the project. It is an essential tool
for project managers and design managers.
In line with all good project information the quality plan should be a
concise and precise document. Lengthy project quality plans will not be read,
until something goes wrong, by which time it is too late. It is also important
to review the project quality plan at regular intervals to ensure that the con-
tents are still relevant to the project goal. The quality plan will need to be
agreed upon and signed off by the client prior to the start of the project and
when changes are required to the document. In addition to the basic project
information the project quality plan will include items such as:

■ Names and contact information for the project participants and their
organizations
■ Clearly stated project goals (linked to the strategic brief)
■ Communication protocols (extent of meetings, use of intranets, etc.)

30
 PRECONSTRUCTION

■ Clearly defined roles and responsibilities of each organization (e.g. the

design consultants and where appropriate specialist subcontractors and
trades with a design input)
■ Extent of constructors’ design input
■ Protocol for information production and exchange (usually linked to
specific software and interoperability requirements)
■ Master program with clearly defined control gates for the delivery and
approval of design work, which is usually linked to the design program
and the construction program
■ Change control procedure
■ Agreed protocol for dealing with conflict and disputes
■ Performance measurement protocols
■ Procedures for capturing knowledge (defined learning events in relation
to the master project program)
■ The name of the person(s) responsible for checking that the project is
running in accordance with the project quality plan.

Design team assembly

IT IS NOT UNCOMMON for design and construction teams to form in an ad hoc

manner. An initial contact leads to other organizations joining, and before we
know where we are, the project is underway. In these cases it is more by luck
than judgement if the participants get along and are able to work in an effec-
tive manner. It is worth taking the time to carefully select the members of the
design (and construct) teams. This is best done once the strategic brief is com-
plete and the project goal established. Ideally it should be done when the client
has approved the project brief and the project quality plan. It is then possible to
select the most appropriate organizations and individuals to develop the design.
Depending on the procurement route it may also be possible and desirable to
select the main constructor and specialist subcontractors. Their early involve-
ment can contribute invaluable knowledge to the design process, resulting in a
more efficient build process and more accurate time and cost estimation.
Organizations and participants should be selected based on their
knowledge and skills and their ability to work effectively as a team. This tends
to imply that previous knowledge of individuals is necessary in helping to
assemble a team that is relatively harmonious and targeted at the same goal.

31
 PRECONSTRUCTION

Start-up meetings and workshops

These are used primarily as a means of allowing project participants to meet
and get to know one another prior to any work commencing. The primary
aim is to explore the values of the individuals and their organizations to reach
some form of understanding. This can be expressed by a shared set of project
values that determine how the project team is going to communicate and
collaborate towards the common goal. The aim is to explore and agree on a
set of common values for the project. This underpins the working relation-
ships within the temporary project coalition and is particularly important
for projects based on trust, such as partnering and other relational forms of
contracting. Someone who has no stake in the project usually facilitates these
types of workshops. His or her role is to encourage open communication and
effective interaction. Facilitated workshops are a useful tool to:

■ Identify how best to work together

■ Agree on a common language
■ Identify and embrace differences
■ Discuss and agree on a conflict resolution strategy
■ Make promises (and keep them)
■ Identify interfaces, the exchanges of information and resources
■ Manage interfaces to enable the flow of information and resources.

Rules of engagement
Do not tell people how to work; it rarely works out as intended. It is much
better to get the main stakeholders together to discuss how they would like
to work and identify differences as early as possible. This needs to be done on
two levels (as a minimum): first, with the senior members of the organizations
involved; second, with the people who are actually going to do the work – the
designers and engineers, design managers, consultants, and subcontractors.
This will help to bring about an integrated design team. Given the long dura-
tion of construction projects these workshops may need to be repeated several
times to revisit the rules of engagement and bring new contributors into the
project ethos.

The design manager and design team structure

Clients will want to communicate with only one organization, and preferably
one individual. They desire single-point responsibility. This contact is usually

32
 PRECONSTRUCTION

the lead designer or the design manager within the design team. Sometimes
this contact is direct; sometimes it is indirect via the client’s project manager.
Given the importance of clear communication routes it is necessary to agree
who the main client contact is, and express this in the form of a relation-
ship diagram. Communication routes with the main design consultants, such
as the structural and mechanical engineers and cost consultant, can also be
included to produce a design team structure. This diagram can then be added
to the project quality plan for reference and guidance.

The design program

THE DESIGN PROGRAM must be coordinated with the overall project pro-
gram. In all but the most simple of projects the project manager will be
responsible for agreeing to the project program with the main participants.
The two main subsets of this are the design program and the construction
program. Responsibility for the design program will be that of the design
manager. Good design management is founded on a clear and realistic pro-
gram of design activities.
The design program will include the key stages in the project, ranging
from briefing through concept design and detail design to concluding with
the start of the construction phase. Time will also need to be allocated to the
construction phase to deal with requests for information and proposed design
changes. As with all programs, simplicity is key. It is of little use providing a
highly complex program of activities in a software package that the rest of the
team struggles to read and understand.
The project manager will devise the master program. This will set out
the start and end dates, key milestones and target dates for the completion
of certain stages. The design program needs to honor these key dates so that
packages of design information are provided at the agreed date. In addition to
this the design program will define key dates for the design team to achieve.
These dates are exclusively for the design team to achieve, and the produc-
tion of work in accordance with the dates needs to be monitored and man-
aged by the design manager. A highly effective means of planning projects is
to use collaborative planning techniques. This is a relatively simple process
that relies on individuals making promises about what they will deliver and
when (see also Chapter 8).

33
 PRECONSTRUCTION

Typical dates will relate to these major events and will, most likely, be
linked to a familiar process plan, such as those offered by the AIA and RIBA:

■ Completion and approval of the project brief

■ Design team assembly and appointment
■ Completion of the concept design and cost plan
■ Submission of drawings for permits to build and environmental
compliance
■ Completion of detailed design and updated cost plan
■ Completion of contract information.

Within these dates space needs to be allowed for design iteration. A highly
detailed program may be self-defeating since it will suffocate creativity. One
of the skills that design managers need to master is the balance between just
enough control and the space for creativity. Too much control is stifling,
whereas too much freedom is chaotic. Control gates for formal design review
and client approval of the design are recommended at major stages in the
program.
Programs should allow ‘float’ – that is time to deal with unknown chal-
lenges. Programs should also include ‘buffers’ between design packages with
a high level of interdependency. A buffer is time between the completion of
one package of work and commencement of another. The buffer allows the
space for a slight overrun in the completion of the first package of work with-
out impacting on the commencement of the next work package.

Design dependency and responsibility

IT IS VITAL that all designers understand what they are expected to produce
and when. Although this is outlined in the project quality plan it is common
for design managers to produce a matrix of design responsibilities. This will
help to identify the interfaces between the various designers and establish the
level of design dependency. It will also help with the planning of the design
program.
Design dependency is a term used to describe a situation in which one
designer is reliant on another to progress their work. In the majority of design

34
 PRECONSTRUCTION

projects we are all dependent, to lesser or greater degrees, on other designers

to be able to progress our work. An obvious example would be an architect
being unable to progress the design drawings because the structural engineer
has not provided the column spacing for the structure. Design managers need
to be able to map the design process and identify who is dependent on whom,
and what the impact may be on the design program.

Design responsibility matrix

A design responsibility matrix is a tool for helping to establish respon-
sibility and degrees of dependency. This will help to identify potential
challenges before they arise. Once they are known it is possible to put
procedures into place to manage the dependency. This may be as simple
as making an adjustment to the design program to allow more time for a
specific design dependency to be resolved. In other situations the mere fact
of highlighting the dependency is enough for the designers involved to
address it as part of their work routine. The challenges arise when design
dependencies are not fully understood or not identified at the outset of the
project. This will, inevitably, lead to delays and in the worst cases conflict
between the parties involved.

Design checklists
A design checklist is a schedule of drawings and associated design informa-
tion that needs to be produced for a project. Agreeing what needs to be
done, and when it is required, will be instrumental in helping to manage the
design process. The design checklist will help to inform the production of
the design program. As the design proceeds the design manager can use the
design checklist to monitor progress against the program.

Design cost plan

AT THE BRIEFING STAGE the client will have set out the project budget, and
the design team will need to design to that budget. The design manager’s
role is to encourage the design team to derive maximum design value for the
given budget. This will be achieved by working closely with the cost con-
sultants and the design team. The client will expect relatively accurate cost

35
 PRECONSTRUCTION

estimates at agreed intervals in the design process. The agreed intervals are
usually at the end of a work stage, or in very large projects at specific intervals
within work stages. As the design develops and becomes more detailed, and
the uncertain aspects start to be resolved, the cost estimation will become
increasingly more accurate.
The design manager needs to monitor the development of the design
to ensure that the budget is not exceeded. If it is, then the design will need to
be adjusted to ensure that it is in line with the client’s expectations. Working
closely with the cost consultant and/or with computer software to track the
cost of the design is a challenging and essential part of the design process.
Being able to bring product manufacturers and specialist trade contractors
into the design process as early as possible will also help with the accuracy
of the cost plan. Other ways of ensuring that the costs are meaningful are to
use historic cost data from recently completed (similar) projects. In situa-
tions where the design includes some unique and innovative elements – for
example a new façade system – it will be essential to bring the manufacturers
of the façade system into the discussions concerning detailed design and cost.
As a general rule, the closer the design team is to the producers, the more
accurate the cost estimates.
Clients do not like surprises, especially when it comes to cost. An
important aspect of the design manager’s job is to be able to present the
design and the associated cost information without causing upset. In situa-
tions where the design is running over cost it is important to alert the client
prior to formally presenting the cost plan and explain the reasons for the
overrun and the strategy for getting it back on track. Being able to generate
regular cost updates will help to prevent big surprises.

Life-cycle costs
Historically the cost plan dealt with only the cost of the construction.
More recently the cost plans have become more sophisticated to reflect the
entire life-cycle cost of the project. The life-cycle costs include the cost
of construction, the cost of operation during the building’s service life and
the cost of disassembly and materials recovery. Focusing on life-cycle costs
not only enables the design team to make decisions that reduce the run-
ning cost of the building (sometimes involving slightly higher initial costs)
but also concentrates the mind to the building’s end of life and the cost of
disassembly.

36
 PRECONSTRUCTION

Monitoring the brief as the design develops

ONE OF THE CHALLENGES for the design team is to stay within the scope of
the project brief. During the design phase the design team will be encouraged
to test the brief via their design proposals, often leading to new insights and
knowledge, and hence the need to update the project brief to reflect the evolv-
ing nature of the project. The design manager must put in place a procedure
that allows the designers the space to explore a number of creative options and
suggest revisions to the brief as appropriate to the development of the design.
It is also necessary to provide the client with an opportunity to respond to the
suggested changes to the project brief. A variety of tools are used to monitor
(track), check and approve changes to the project brief at the design phase
as well as during construction. In the design stage this is often discussed at
progress meetings, design reviews, value management and value engineering
exercises and at control gates. In the construction phase the process is formal,
as changes to the brief will constitute a deviation from the contract.

Design (change) control

CHANGE CONTROL PROCEDURES are most pertinent at the construction

stage when deviation from the approved design will have implications for
the program, the cost and the quality of the building. This is explored further
in Chapter 3. At the design stage it is important to allow space for exploring
options and preferences; thus design change control has a different meaning
to later in the project. The challenge for design managers is to decide how
best to keep track of the changes in line with previously agreed parameters
of time, cost and quality. In situations where it is necessary to depart from
the parameters set out in the project brief it will be necessary to discuss the
implications with the client and get the changes approved. A number of
established tools can assist with monitoring the development of the design;
the most common are as follows:

■ Design critiques
These tend to be informal events held in the design office. In this forum
the design can be reviewed by the design team against the project param-
eters, but in the private confines of the office.

37
 PRECONSTRUCTION

■ Design reviews
Regular reviews are required as part of the overall design program. These
are usually linked to some form of control gate and attended by the main
project participants, including the client. The intention is to review
the design and approve it, or parts of it, prior to proceeding to the next
activity. The parameters for the review include the project brief, statu-
tory consents, budget, program and design quality.

Design progress reports

KEEPING ALL PROJECT participants and the client informed of progress is

one way of helping to manage expectations and avoid uncertainty. The fre-
quency of reporting should be commensurate with the scale and complexity
of the project. Ideally the reports should be presented at progress meetings
so that there is the opportunity to respond to questions raised by the report.
Reports should be concise and written in plain English. Although the style
varies considerably across organizations, the chosen format should be consis-
tent for individual projects. Typical items to report are:

■ Status of drawing production. This should be reported as actual progress

compared to planned progress. Simple visual tools, such as traffic lights
and smiley (or not) faces, are extremely effective. An example would be
complete (green light), incomplete (amber light) and not started (red
light). A more detailed way of reporting is to use percentage complete –
for example 100%, 50%, 0%.
■ Status of the design. This may relate to changes requested by the client
or changes brought about by outside parties – for example to meet the
requirements of the town planners.
■ Status of the design team. This can relate to the (under-) performance of
organizations and individuals. It can also be used to report challenges that
have arisen due to illness and individuals moving jobs, which tends to
influence design dependency and thus put pressure on the design program.
■ Status of the overall design program. This needs to be reported against
previously approved key dates for the design program and, where appro-
priate, the master program. Progress may be ahead of or behind that
initially planned.

38
 PRECONSTRUCTION

■ Status of the build costs and life-cycle cost estimates. Costs need to be
reported against agreed targets so that decisions can be taken to keep the
design within cost parameters.

Coordinating and agreeing on the design prior to construction

Software technologies allow designers to work in a collaborative environment
in real time, and clashes within the drawings can be highlighted as they occur.
Although software, such as BIM technologies, is not foolproof (rubbish in = rub-
bish out) it is a major development in the quest to improve the quality and the
coherence of design information. The coordination of the various design and engi-
neering inputs to the digital model will save considerable time and effort when
coordinating information on the construction site. Indeed, it is the developments
in computer software that are helping to drive the design manager from the con-
struction site to preconstruction activities, where the most value can be added.
All production information must be reviewed by the design manage-
ment team and approved (signed off) prior to issuing it to the constructors.
This is a time-consuming activity, and appropriate time should be allocated
within the design program.

Vignette – design management at the

preconstruction phase

Ben Bourke
Design Manager, Preconstruction, Carillion Projects, UK

From my point of view design management during the preconstruction phase

is vital to the success of a project. I consider myself lucky coming from an
architectural background. This allows me to know the construction process
throughout but ultimately to know what the consultants need, why they need
it and when. I can spot when consultants have not put enough information
into their design documents, which makes it difficult to provide accurate
prices. I also know when the consultants are trying to hide behind a perfor-
mance specification and hoping that someone else – that is the constructor –
will sort it out for them. Picking up early on these issues and resolving them
prior to construction save the constructor considerable time and effort and
help to provide increased certainty with costs and program.

39
 PRECONSTRUCTION

At Carillion the design manager and the project manager manage the
preconstruction process jointly. Account managers are also involved on large
projects and for large clients, but the day-to-day running of a project is the
responsibility of the design manager and the project manager. All design,
governance, regulations and environmental compliance (e.g. BREEAM) is
controlled by the design manager, who then calls on the estimators and cost
consultants (quantity surveyors) for cost plans and legal requirements.
All elements of the design will be the design manager’s responsibility,
and therefore all aspects of design (architectural, structural, mechanical and
electrical services, etc.) must be understood fully. Because design managers
generally have a good design background, projects can run smoothly. How-
ever, if a design manager is not appointed early within the project, the design
is not managed correctly and the project manager may not always understand
or appreciate the consequences of design actions. This can happen when a
new project comes straight through from the commercial team and with a
strong desire to get the project onto site as quickly as possible.
I find the majority of problems arise from projects being rushed through
without the early involvement of design managers. Ultimately, early involve-
ment will benefit design managers, contractors and clients. Often clients do
not fully know what they want, so it would be a design manager’s role to fully
develop the brief with them prior to the commencement of design.
In conclusion, I would say the key to success for any project is good
planning and management from the start. A design manager can concentrate
on design development and delivery, while the project manager (and others)
can concentrate on their responsibilities, such as delivering the project on
time and to budget. This helps to avoid overloading individuals with tasks
that lie outside their remit and contributes to a smoothly running project.

Tips for success

■ Involve the design managers at the earliest opportunity
■ Take a good brief from the client and challenge the brief if needed
■ Listen to your consultants and let them do their job
■ Take the consultants’ advice on aspects of the design that are not your
main area of knowledge (which in my case is M&E)
■ Be upfront with the client regarding design changes and the implica-
tions these have on program, cost and quality. A good change control
procedure should help with this.

40
 chapter 3

Construction – delivering design value

ONCE VALUE HAS BEEN EXPLORED and codified into the design informa-
tion, the next stage is for constructors to translate the information into a
physical artifact. It is at this stage where there is a major shift in culture,
moving from a highly creative phase into a more pragmatic one. Here the
construction design manager’s task is to deliver design value to the client
while also satisfying the commercial goals of the constructor. This is done
primarily by coordinating and managing design information for compliance
with the client brief, contract documentation and regulations. Incomplete or
missing information is requested via requests for information (RFIs) and pro-
posed changes to the design are managed via a design change protocol. This
means that the construction design manager will form a bridge between the
design team and the constructor’s delivery team. Most construction design
managers will report to the construction project manager and work alongside
the site-based construction manager(s).
Construction design managers occupy a difficult position, on the one
hand protecting design integrity and on the other making changes to help
the constructor realize the project safely and within agreed project param-
eters without compromising design quality. At this phase the construction
design manager needs to consider how design information is best translated
into a physical artifact. The strategic decisions will relate to information
flow and exchanges, and the operational decisions will relate primarily to
compliance and change control. The strategic decisions will help to mini-
mize the number of operational decisions. To be effective the construction
design manager will need to understand the designers’ and the constructors’
perspectives. It is the design manager’s job to oversee coordination of design
information and design quality. It is not the design manager’s job to design;
any challenges with the design or design information needs to be referred
back to the design team.

41
 CONSTRUCTION

From design to construction

THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT change in culture when the project starts to be

realized. Designers give way to the constructors and the design value codified
in drawings and specifications is translated into a physical artifact. The suc-
cess of the construction phase will be dependent upon many factors, some of
which can be controlled and some of which cannot (e.g. the weather and the
economic fortunes of a nation). The important factors are as follows:

■ Accurate information that is fully coordinated. Without this we are into

the realms of guesswork, uncertainty and risk.
■ The ability of the construction team to interpret and, where appropriate,
challenge the design information to improve, for example, constructa-
bility. This relies on the construction team’s design literacy.
■ The ability of the construction team to interact effectively with the
design team. The bridge between the design culture and the construc-
tion culture can be made via the preconstruction and construction
design managers. It is the design managers who have an understanding
of both worlds.

At the construction stage the design team’s work should be complete, or sub-
stantially complete. Thus involvement of the design team will be restricted
to dealing with requests for information, addressing design changes and
attending progress meetings in accordance with the contract conditions.
In fast-track projects where the design and construction activities are com-
pressed and overlapped there is likely to be a greater degree of interaction
and involvement of the design team at the construction stage. Similarly, in
projects where there is a substantial amount of specialist design input from
the trades and subcontractors there will be interaction between the precon-
struction and construction design managers.
We should celebrate and embrace the differences in culture and
expertise that exist between the design team and the construction team.
Too often this is seen as a challenge and invariably used as an excuse for
poor project performance. The differences need to be recognized, discussed
and if necessary addressed before the physical work starts. Workshops and
meetings are useful tools in helping individuals to better understand one
another.

42
 CONSTRUCTION

Handover meeting
It is essential to hold a precontract meeting prior to the commencement of
the build. The main emphasis of this meeting is to review the project infor-
mation with the aim of identifying any areas of uncertainty on behalf of the
construction team. In many cases this may be the first time that the design
team and the construction team have met, and thus it also serves as a mecha-
nism by which the design team and the construction team can get to under-
stand each another. Although the individuals involved tend to be the senior
managers, the handover meeting provides an opportunity to review, discuss
and understand some crucial elements of the design – namely:

■ Explain the design philosophy. This may be very difficult to compre-

hend from the drawings and project information. It is crucial that the
design philosophy be discussed and understood by those managing the
construction phase before the physical work commences. This will help
to ensure that design value is respected and delivered.
■ Discuss the most important points of the brief and highlight parameters
that cannot be changed under any circumstances.
■ Revisit the project quality plan and update to include the new partici-
pants and organizations.
■ Review the design program against the construction program and discuss
any potential challenges (see ahead).
■ Discuss the design responsibility matrix.
■ Agree on a protocol for dealing with requests for information.
■ Agree on a protocol for design change control.
■ Discuss compliance with codes, town planning legislation, health, safety
and well-being and environmental compliance.
■ Discuss and agree on the rules of engagement. How is the design team going
to work with the construct team? What happens when it goes wrong? Who
is the point of contact, the design manager(s) or the project manager(s)?

The design program revisited

THE CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM, along with method statements for safe

working, identifies the main construction activities and the dates for their
completion. This is often broken down into key phases, such as completion

43
 CONSTRUCTION

of the ground work, the substructure, the superstructure, external envelope,

internal works and finishes. This allows the construction project manager to
monitor progress against that plan, as well as to coordinate the large num-
ber of trades and subcontractor work packages. The construction program
also helps the construction design manager to identify what information is
required and when.
Responsibility for producing the design program lies with the lead
designer and/or the (preconstruction) design manager. It is the construction
design manager’s responsibility to interrogate the design program to ensure
the proposed flow of design information complies with the proposed con-
struction program. Any concerns should be referred back to the lead designer
or preconstruction design manager for clarification before any adjustments
are made to the program.

Design progress reports

Design progress reports at the construction phase are primarily concerned
with monitoring the construction against the approved design. The con-
struction design manager usually compiles these. The aim is to highlight
specific issues with the design documentation and the progress of the con-
struction in relation to design quality. Typical reports would provide an
overview of:

■ Outstanding requests for design information and design changes

■ Issues likely to affect statutory and legislative approvals, including envi-
ronmental compliance and health and safety
■ Design quality as realized
■ Design issues likely to affect build costs.

Design responsibility matrix revisited

THE CONTRACTOR’S DESIGN responsibility matrix will be a similar for-

mat to that used by the design team. However, at the construction phase
the organizations and individuals involved will have changed and their
remit will have shifted from generating design value to delivering design
value. However, under many contractual arrangements there will still be

44
 CONSTRUCTION

a considerable amount of specialist design to complete. Relationships will

need to be revisited and established and responsibilities reviewed and
redefined. Subcontractors and specialist trades may have responsibility for
designing certain packages of work – for example the façade. Their inter-
dependencies with other subcontractors and the main contractor will need
to be mapped within the design responsibility matrix. These activities are
linked to the production, coordination and approval of design information.
This will need to be managed by the construction design manager, interact-
ing with the contractor’s project manager and the preconstruction design
manager (be they in-house or not).
The design responsibility matrix will enable the construction design
manager to identify the relationship between outstanding work packages –
for example the design engineering of the façade with other work packages.
This will highlight the dependencies on other information that may or may
not be complete. This intelligence will inform the construction program.

Design reviews

CONSTRUCTORS WILL REVIEW the design prior to construction to ensure

that the information provided by the design team can be translated into
a physical artifact. The constructor’s main priority is to program work
packages so that the building can be assembled in a logical, safe and cost-
effective manner. The design review forms part of the constructor’s design
verification process.
The purpose of the design review is to review the information pro-
vided by the design team to check that it is complete and capable of being
transformed into a physical product. This allows the constructor to estab-
lish that the design information has been supplied in accordance with the
specification before it is issued to those who need it. Construction design
managers will undertake the review, usually in partnership with the con-
struction manager. This should be conducted before the project com-
mences and subsequently at regular intervals to review newly issued design
information. Design reviews also allow project stakeholders to contribute
to the process and hence have their opinions considered. They function
at their best with a small group of experienced professionals reviewing

45
 CONSTRUCTION

the information as a group exercise. What one may miss another may
see, given their different knowledge and experience. Design reviews are
conducted to:

■ Review the content and quality of the information against the project
quality plan, brief and specification.
■ Coordinate the design information provided by a wide range of design
consultants, specialist trades and subcontractors.
■ Check the design information for environmental and legislative
compliance.
■ Examine the information for constructability.
■ Identify risk and potential challenges for the construction team, to be
explored separately – for example via a value engineering exercise.

Reviewing specialist trades and subcontractor design

Design information packages produced by specialist trades, and subcon-
tractors will need to be reviewed for compliance in a similar manner to
that described earlier. The difference is that the specialist design informa-
tion is generated from the information provided by the design team. If the
base design information is erroneous, then it follows that these errors will
be repeated in the specialist design packages. This helps to emphasize the
importance of checking the main design information before it is issued to
the specialists.
Specialists are likely to raise a number of questions about the base
design information, which may result in RFIs being issued to the design team
before the specialist design work can proceed. This tends to be less of a prob-
lem if the specialists are consulted during the precontract phase, which is not
always feasible or desirable.
Sign-off is required for the specialist subcontractor drawings. This
needs to be carried out by the construction design manager by carefully
checking the coordination of drawings with the base design information.
This will result in the drawings being approved for fabrication or returned to
the specialist for further work.

Value engineering the design

Value engineering (VE) is often used when the cost estimates are higher than
the project budget to help identify aspects of the design specification that can

46
 CONSTRUCTION

be changed to save initial build costs. Using VE purely as a cost reduction

exercise is to undermine the value that a well-managed VE exercise can bring
to the design and construction teams.
At its best, VE is a tool used to examine aspects of the design speci-
fication and, where appropriate, propose alternative solutions. The VE
exercise needs to be facilitated and must include the appropriate specialists
within the workshop. Value engineering is best conducted at the design
stage, although it is more common to use the technique postcontract, usu-
ally when there is an issue about the cost of a particular feature. Given the
interdependent nature of much of the building components and elements,
it is likely that changes to a specific issue may well impact on neighboring
components and possibly the overall performance of the building. This is
why it is important that the appropriate specialists are contributing to the
workshop so that the decisions made are considerate of the overall build-
ing design. The alternative proposed will need to be put through a change
control process.

Design information checklists

IN AN IDEAL WORLD information should be complete and fully coordinated.

We know that this is rarely the case. Reviewing the design production infor-
mation will help to identify areas of the design that need further work and
highlight aspects of the information that are incomplete, incorrect, uncoor-
dinated or unclear to the constructor. As previously noted, the adoption of
BIM technologies and associated software can significantly reduce the num-
ber of design clashes and assist with the coordination of information. How-
ever, this does not mean that the information is error-free, nor does it mean
that those reading the information and translating the codified information
into a physical product can understand what was intended. The construction
design manager acts as a filter between the design team and the delivery team,
reviewing the information and ensuring it is complete and understandable
prior to releasing it for construction.
Creating a design information checklist allows the construction design
manager to oversee all of the project information requirements. The design
manager will have a comprehensive overview of the entire project infor-
mation package. Other members of the team will be interested only in the

47
 CONSTRUCTION

package of information that directly affects their work. The design informa-
tion checklist will help to highlight the following:

■ Information that is complete and fully coordinated. This can be issued

to those who need it.
■ Information that is incomplete and/or uncoordinated. This will be
returned to the design team with a request for it to be completed within
a given timescale (usually stipulated in the contract and the project
quality plan).
■ Missing information. This will trigger a request for information (dis-
cussed ahead).
■ Design dependencies.
■ Design program issues.

Dates can then be allocated for the completion of the incomplete and missing
information to coincide with the constructor’s main design program. As dis-
cussed in the previous chapter this involves understanding information flow
and appreciating how long designers require to finalize (or revisit) specific
packages of information. Time also needs to be allocated for checking and
coordinating the new information once received by the contractor; there is
no guarantee that it is complete until it has been checked and coordinated.

Managing requests for information

Requests for information (RFIs) are necessary to address missing or incom-
plete design information. Poorly conceived and coordinated design infor-
mation will generate a large number of RFIs. A large number of RFIs is an
indicator of a poorly managed design team and is linked to overruns on proj-
ect cost and program. There is usually a correlation between a large number
of RFIs and poor design quality.
An RFI indicates uncertainty and risk. It is only when the informa-
tion is received that the full extent of the required work can be clarified and
the risk eliminated. This allows the construction design manager, the project
manager and the cost consultant to understand exactly what is required. This
allows definitive costs and time to be associated with the information. In
doing so it mitigates the uncertainty and associated risk.
RFIs are usually issued by the construction design manager via the
design team’s design manager (or lead designer). The contract will stipulate

48
 CONSTRUCTION

how long the design team has to respond with a full set of information. Given
the complex interaction of design components it is rare for designers to
be able to issue the requested information quickly as many issues have to be
checked for interdependency and potential clashes.

Design change control

AT THE CONSTRUCTION STAGE it is important to monitor all proposed

changes against the client brief, the approved design information (and proj-
ect quality plan) and regulatory approvals (building permits and environ-
mental compliance). Changes will impact the project cost and the project
program and the quality of the building. As a general rule of thumb, the fur-
ther into the overall program, the greater the impact of the change on cost,
time and quality. Thus the fewer the changes at the construction stage, the
more likely the project will be delivered on time, on budget and to agreed
quality parameters.
Changes to the approved design may arise for a variety of reasons,
relating to the following:

■ Availability of materials and components

■ Constructability issues
■ Cost concerns
■ Program overruns.

Changes to the design often involve a whole host of interrelated issues, with,
for example, a simple change affecting the overall performance of the build-
ing. It is essential that all proposed changes are carefully assessed for their
impact on the building as a whole and their effect on existing building con-
sents and permits and associated environmental compliance. The construc-
tion design manager is ideally placed to do this, having a complete overview
of the design and design dependencies.

Design change protocol

A variety of tools are used to manage design changes, the main components
being in line with standard design change protocols. Contracting organiza-
tions tend to have their own versions of change control tools to suit their

49
 CONSTRUCTION

specific market sector. At their heart lies a simple procedure that should
include the following steps:

1 Refer all proposed deviations from the contract information to the lead
designer and/or the preconstruction design manager. The request for the
change should be accompanied by a reasoned argument for the change
and the implications in terms of program, cost and quality. Without
this information it is impossible to make an informed judgement on the
effect of the change.
2 Once the change has been evaluated it can be rejected or put to the
client for approval. Await agreement (or otherwise) prior to proceeding
with the change. Ensure all decisions are recorded in writing, making
sure to confirm any verbal decisions in writing at the earliest possible
opportunity.
3 Revise drawings and associated design information to reflect the change.
4 Revise the design program and project cost as appropriate.
5 Update the project brief to accommodate the approved change or
include a note within the project brief as to why a specific item cannot
be changed. This is particularly important on projects with a long tim-
escale to stop the request being repeated at a future date.
6 Review the reasons for proposed changes on a regular basis as part of a
planned learning process. If similar requests arise from one project to the
next, it tends to imply that there is a problem somewhere in the design
phase. Identify the root cause of the problem and mitigate it.

Charging for additional design work

Design changes will have an impact on the design team. Time is required to
assess the proposed change and if approved it is inevitable that the design
information will need to be revised and reissued. This has resource and cost
implications for the designers. Someone has to pay for the time and the client
needs to be made aware of the resources required to make changes and the
associated costs.
If allowance has not already been made in the appointments of the
design team (e.g. changes to be charged on an agreed hourly rate) it will
be necessary to cost each change and agree on the fee to be charged before the
change is implemented. In a fast-moving project environment this is unreal-
istic. Thus it is essential that a protocol for dealing with design changes, and

50
 CONSTRUCTION

associated schedule of charges, is agreed on at appointment and is included

in the project quality plan. The client must be kept informed of the changes
and the associated initial and life-cycle costs.

Managing cost variations

COST CONTROL CONTINUES to be a major concern for clients at the con-

struction stage. In the majority of contracts the project cost will have been
agreed to prior to commencement of the construction work. Invariably this
figure has a tendency to increase as the project progresses. Although the
design manager is rarely directly responsible for controlling project costs,
many of the actions taken by the construction design manager will have a
bearing on the cost of the project. From a design management perspective the
main reasons for cost variations are as follows:

■ Incomplete design information when the contract was signed.

Although constructors will allow for the uncertainty it is difficult to
estimate costs from incomplete information. The more complete the
information, the less the tendency for the initial cost to change. Thus
the aim of the design managers, both preconstruction and construc-
tion, is to keep requests for information to a minimum. The higher
the number of requests for information, the higher the uncertainty
and thus the higher the chance of the project cost changing. In new
build projects there should be no excuses for incomplete informa-
tion. For work to existing buildings the challenge is different, and it
is often impossible to have all information in hand until the building
is opened up and analyzed.
■ Requests for changes. Changes at the construction stage will affect the
project cost, in either a positive or a negative manner. As already noted,
the reasons behind the request for changes to the design are numer-
ous. While some may be impossible to predict at the design stage – for
example unforeseen problems with the ground conditions – the majority
of the requests for change can be mitigated by providing complete infor-
mation and applying a robust change management tool.
■ Innovativeness of the design proposal. The more creative and unusual
the design, the higher the risk and uncertainty. Estimation of project

51
 CONSTRUCTION

costs becomes more challenging with unusual and innovative design

proposals. In such situations it is highly likely that the cost estimate is
incorrect and some form of value engineering will be required to try to
keep the costs in check during the construction phase.

Project completion and reviewing performance

COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT should be a cause for celebration – a job

well done and a satisfied client. Unfortunately, it is not always a success and
lessons must be taken into new projects to reduce the possibility of the same
mistakes being repeated. Once a project has been handed over to the owner
there is an opportunity to reflect on project performance and review the value
delivered. It is also a good time for learning, as discussed in Chapter 4.

Measuring performance
A number of performance measures may be used to determine how the
project team performed. The merits of one over another need to be
reviewed in the context of the organization conducting the performance
review. For example, the focus of the engineers may be different to that
of the architects and hence the performance measures may differ. Perfor-
mance measurement is about an attitude to continual improvement. It is
not just about metrics.

Organizational performance
■ Were the project objectives met? This can be measured against the proj-
ect quality plan, brief, specification and program.
■ Did the project return a profit on the resources invested or did it return
a loss? This is measured by analysis of the resources committed (mainly
time) and the income received.
■ Were the staff satisfied with the overall project performance? This is best
measured via a satisfaction survey and/or interviews with the individuals
who worked on the project.
■ Did the project add intangible value to the organization? This is dif-
ficult to measure, but tracked through acquisition of new clients and
projects.

52
 CONSTRUCTION

Project performance
■ Were the client’s values realized in the finished building? This will be
measured against the final version of the project brief and specification.
■ Were the participants satisfied with the performance of the project
team? Given the number of project stakeholders this is best measured
via an online satisfaction survey.
■ Did the project team perform as expected, or were there conflict and
disputes? This can be measured by the number of recorded disputes and
conflict recorded in the minutes of progress meetings.
■ Was the project delivered safely? This is measured by the number of
recorded accidents on site.
■ Was the project delivered to agreed quality standards? This is measured
against the final version of the project specification, and against the
number of defects recorded at practical completion.
■ Did the design managers add value to the process? This is difficult to
measure, but can be compared with similar projects in terms of number
of RFIs and design change requests.

Individual performance
■ Did the individuals enjoy their role? Were they comfortable or stressed
when carrying out their duties?
■ Did they achieve individual and team performance goals?
■ What would they do differently next time?

Monitoring the asset in use

Staying in touch with the client and learning about how the building per-
forms in use is essential if we are to learn from the way the building performs.
This is sometimes a relatively informal interaction between the owners of the
architectural and engineering firms and the building owner. However, if we
are to learn from the building we need to invest in recognized ways of measur-
ing the performance of the building.
Postoccupancy evaluation (POE) is an established way of reviewing
the occupied building to see how it is performing. Typical issues to review are
energy use, maintenance costs and use of internal spaces and facilities. This
is usually assessed against the project brief (hence the need to keep the brief
up to date). For clients with a large building portfolio and repeat clients there

53
 CONSTRUCTION

will be a clear link between their asset (facilities) managers and the procure-
ment of new building projects. Data gleaned from POE can be used to inform
the specification of new similar building projects.

Vignette – reflections of a consultant

design manager

John Eynon
OpenWater Consulting, UK

I am often asked how I ended up in design management. It was a fluke! Or

maybe the universe was conspiring to get me in the right place. It was the
end of an economic recession in the 1990s; I had been made redundant a few
times and needed to get back into the mainstream construction industry. An
ex-colleague from an architect’s practice asked me if I wanted to be a design
manager for a major contractor. I said yes and that decision changed the
course of my career.
I had always enjoyed being involved on site and working with con-
tractors, including a year on site as a resident architect. So although I
thought I was prepared to an extent for what followed, it was quite a dif-
ferent story. In hindsight it took me about 12 months to adjust to life in
a contracting environment because there was so much to take on board
and assimilate. First, being involved directly in the construction process is
quite different to working in an architectural practice. One is immediately
involved in the procurement and construction process, right at the coal-
face, so the pressures are more intense compared to architectural practice.
I think it is fair to say that the majority of architectural practices are insu-
lated to a degree from the site process in terms of understanding and knowl-
edge of the contracting environment. Second, it takes a while to adjust to
these processes and the different roles involved. Getting a project through
the tendering process and on to the construction site is a real team effort,
involving many specialists and often working to extremely pressurized
deadlines. However, this also presents opportunities to learn and broaden
one’s experience, and you do learn a huge amount every day. In gaining this
experience I have developed a growing admiration for project directors and
project managers as they shoulder the full and final responsibility for the

54
 CONSTRUCTION

delivery of their projects. Also gaining an understanding of how buildings

get built from the codified information provided by the design team is a real
eye-opener. I tend to think of it more as a military operation, with com-
mand lines, logistics and organization, making sure everything arrives on
time and fits safely into place.
Over the last 20 years I have worked on varied projects, such as offices,
arts centers, schools, colleges, prisons and housing, up to about £100 million
in project value with some of the UK’s leading architects and designers. The
role of the design manager brings one into contact with all kinds of people
who are involved in the project, from the client to the designers, specialists
and many others. This makes it a challenging yet rewarding role.
Many years ago I started out on a journey to become an architect,
and I believed that one day I would have my own architectural practice. On
reflection that was a rather traditional and limited view. As my career has
evolved into design management it has opened up a much larger and broader
world to me. I have gained an appreciation of the total project process and
the stakeholders and personalities who play their part. I have worked with
some amazing people on great projects. I have, of course, also had my share of
mistakes and disasters. And one is never too old to learn, from the good and
the not so good experiences.

Tips for success

If you are thinking of moving into design management there are a few tips
and hints that will help:

1 Whatever your background (design, construction, surveying, etc.), find

out about the areas you do not know about. Get a placement or second-
ment and talk to people in different roles and with different backgrounds.
2 When you are in the role as a design manager take time to understand
the quality assurance and design management procedures of your
organization. There will be guides, tools and policies that you will
need to comply with and use; combined these also help you to get the
job done.
3 Understand the roles and agendas of everyone you interface with in
order to do your role successfully. Understand what they need from you
and why; understanding what they do and why they do what they do will
help in this regard.

55
 CONSTRUCTION

4 Understand how your activity fits into the whole project process. The
role of the design manager enables one to learn so much more and you
may discover the pathway for your next career move.
5 Keep up to date with developments in the construction industry, includ-
ing everything to do with BIM and how that affects your role.
6 Reach out to other design managers across the industry. Join forums, link
with others across organizations and read books and articles on design
management. It is good to talk, and you will most likely discover that
others are dealing with similar challenges to you. You can catch up with
me at www.zenanddm.com.
7 And finally, early in my career as a design manager I thought that there
was some magic ingredient to success, a ‘silver bullet’ perhaps. Looking
back on my career I do not think there is. It is simply good management:
understanding the process, roles and activities that combine to make a
successful project. Good luck!

56
 chapter 4

Working together – valuing design

interactions

NOW THAT WE HAVE ADDRESSED the value creation and value delivery
phases of projects, attention turns to how we interact effectively within
temporary project environments. Design managers need to be able to build,
maintain and develop relationships with designers and constructors. They
need the skills to hold honest and open conversations with fellow project
participants to enable maximum value to be created and delivered. This is
about people trusting the design manager and the design manager behaving
in a consistent and professional manner to earn that trust. This is particularly
important when projects start to go wrong; people start to behave differently,
more senior people become involved, behavior becomes defensive and it is
too easy to drift into a blame culture, which is counterproductive. It fol-
lows that the design manager must give attention to how people behave in
a challenging project environment. Learning to value interactions will be
instrumental in helping to deliver design value to the building sponsor, users
and society.

Collaborative working

PEOPLE WORKING TOGETHER towards a common goal make projects suc-

cessful, not processes. At the heart of all design and construction proj-
ects lies the way in which individuals for a wide variety of professional
and commercial backgrounds come together during the life of the project.
Relying entirely on (standard) process plans and contracts will rarely bring
about a harmonious, creative and successful project. Attention must be
given to how project participants interact, with a view to maximizing their
collective skills and knowledge. This means that design managers must
understand how designers and constructors behave in temporary project
environments.

57
 WORKING TOGETHER

Communication Trust

Conflict

4.1 Working together: addressing communication, trust and conflict in project teams

Collaborative working is founded on the principle of shared values

and common ethics. This should underpin the use of collaborative design
environments (CDE) using digital (BIM) platforms and integrated project
delivery. Effective interaction of project participants is determined in part by
the procurement route and contract conditions, and in part by the manner in
which the project is managed and how people behave. There is a strong argu-
ment for relational (nonadversarial) contracting, although these presently
constitute a very small proportion of the total number of contracts awarded.
Partnering and lean and integrated project delivery all provide a more col-
laborative and trusting approach to the delivery of projects compared to more
traditional approaches, which too often result in adversarial relationships.
The challenge is to put a design and delivery team together who can
work together in a productive manner. This means addressing communica-
tion, trust and conflict within temporary project teams (Figure 4.1).

People and behaviors

Projects comprise a multitude of organizations and professionals. Each organi-
zation has its own organizational culture, history, values, ethics and corporate

58
 WORKING TOGETHER

goals. Similarly, the individuals representing each organization work within

the ethics, culture, values and traditions of their profession or trade. They
will also hold personal goals, which may or may not be compatible with their
employer and/or project goals. This makes for an exciting and potentially
explosive mix within a temporary project environment when (divergent)
cultures are brought together. Understanding who is contributing what and
when will help to identify the interfaces where tension is likely to be highest
(see ahead). Understanding the personalities and motivations of individuals
will help the design manager to anticipate behaviors. This is discussed in
more detail in Chapter 5.
It is unlikely that the design manager will know the personality of an
individual early in the life of a project, but understanding different person-
ality types will help design managers to spot certain behaviors. There are
a small number of established personality indicators, and while managers
are not expected to be expert social psychologists, an understanding of the
underlying personality traits can be helpful. It is also useful to understand
one’s own personality type, and a number of online tools can assist in giving
a quick indication. One of the best known is Myers-Briggs.
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is based on an individual’s basic pref-
erences from the four dichotomies implicit in Carl Jung’s theory. These are:

■ Favorite world. Do you prefer to focus on your own inner world (intro-
version – I) or the outer world (extraversion – E)?
■ Information. Do you prefer to interpret information and add mean-
ing (intuition – N) or do you prefer to focus on the basic information
(sensing – S)?
■ Decisions. Do you prefer to look at the people and the circumstances
surrounding the decision (feeling – F) or do you prefer to first consider
logic and consistency (thinking – T)?
■ Structure. Do you prefer to stay open to new information when dealing
with the outside world (perceiving – P) or do you prefer to get things
done (judging – J)?

By answering a series of questions about preferences (usually via an online

tool), it is possible to get an indication of one’s own personality type. This
allows us to understand the differences between people and embrace those
differences to maximize the performance of a team. There is no one best

59
 WORKING TOGETHER

personality type; all types are equal and complementary. Thus when assem-
bling a team it would be useful to have a mix of personality types to ensure
a balanced team. The problem facing managers is that we rarely have such
information on hand. Myers-Briggs gives an indication of personality type; it
does not measure ability, trait or character. That is best determined through
interaction with others. (See myersbriggs.org for further detail.)

How do we establish effective communication?

COMMUNICATION IS AN ESSENTIAL aspect of human interaction and a fun-

damental factor in the effective management of projects. A common project
language, or at least a simplified language free from acronyms and technical
terminology, will help to encourage participation and prevent individuals
from feeling excluded from discussions. The means of communication – the
formal communication routes and means of information exchange – must
be discussed, agreed on and confirmed within the project quality plan. Simi-
larly, the data exchange formats will need to be discussed, agreed on and
confirmed in the BIM execution plan. Running alongside the agreed means
of communication are individuals’ preferences for certain communication
media, such as:

■ Face-to-face dialogue
■ Telephone
■ Email
■ Video conferencing
■ Meetings and workshops (physical and virtual)
■ Project extranet systems
■ Project BIMs.

When problems arise, individuals tend to use informal communication chan-

nels in an attempt to resolve the issue. Although this may be useful in diffus-
ing tensions and resolving issues quickly, there is unlikely to be a record of the
communication. Simple communication and reporting structures will help,
but design managers should be aware of individuals’ idiosyncrasies and expect
a little deviation from the agreed communication protocols.

60
 WORKING TOGETHER

Language
Communication is a social activity, the sharing of information and the
sharing of experiences. This is dependent upon the communicators under-
standing the rules of communication for a specific project context. Profes-
sionals and tradespeople have developed specialist languages, using words
and terminology that are specific to their discipline: essentially a unique
vocabulary. This enables members of the same discipline to communicate
facts and ideas quickly and efficiently. The other side to this is that those
outside the discipline may find it difficult to understand the meaning.
In multidisciplinary temporary project organization, it is inevitable
that the participants use language in a variety of ways and hence speak a
different language to their fellow participants. Mechanisms must be put in
place to allow the participants to understand each other (e.g. workshops and
social events).

How do we develop trust?

TRUST UNDERPINS ALL business relationships and is related to the distri-

bution of resources, power and money. Trust allows organizations to share
commercially sensitive information and engage with other organizations
in a project environment. The design manager’s remit is to build trust
within the design team, and develop trust with the constructors. Build-
ing trust with the design team is concerned with guiding and steering the
designers to specific project milestones for the delivery of design informa-
tion at the correct quality. Trust will be earned from the constructors by
providing design information on time, to the agreed quality and in a fully
coordinated manner.
Trust is a firm belief in the reliability of a person or a thing, an attitude
held by the truster towards the trustee. The perceived level of trustworthiness
will come from interaction and communication with others and experience
of the way they act and behave. The implication here is that we need to
have some experience (either direct or indirect) of a person or an organiza-
tion before we can start to trust them. The opposite of trust is (managerial)
control. Business relationships are often based on low levels of trust and a
certain amount of distrust, which is why we have legally binding contracts

61
 WORKING TOGETHER

that set out the rules of engagement. There is nothing wrong with this type
of relationship per se; indeed, one could argue that everyone knows where
he or she stands when there is little or no trust between the parties. Rules of
engagement are known at the start of the contract and there are procedures
to mitigate the lack of trust. At both ends of the scale, total trust or total
distrust, we know where we stand. Unfortunately such absolutes are rare in
practice and because trust is contextually derived the space between trust and
distrust is often obscured. Thus working relationships are difficult without
establishing some clear parameters.

Limits and boundaries

We trust some people more than we do others, and we trust them with dif-
ferent aspects of work. Within the organization there is regular interaction
between staff and the degree and levels of trust are usually well understood;
indeed many professional offices rely on trust and mutual respect in preference
to rules and regulations to achieve their objectives. By contrast, management
by trust is not easy to achieve in a project context. With people interacting
only occasionally and holding different organizational values and objectives,
the development of trust is far more challenging because participants often
have very limited opportunities to get to know others well enough to develop
an adequate level of trust.

■ Within organizations trust will be developed over time as relatively

stable relationships are developed within small groups and subgroups
of employees. Individuals will know how people behave and how they
respond to certain circumstances. Internal meetings and social events
can help to nurture trust within the organization.
■ Within the project environment relationships are less stable compared
to an organization. Individuals enter and leave projects at various junc-
tures, making it very difficult to form regular patterns of interaction.
Interactions are infrequent and it may be difficult for individuals to
develop trust unless some specific interventions are designed into pro-
grams to help develop and maintain trust. Examples are ‘teambuilding’
workshops prior to the commencement of the project and prior to the
beginning of major phases – for example from briefing to design, design
to construction.

62
 WORKING TOGETHER

How do we manage conflict?

PARTICIPANTS SHOULD BE WORKING towards decisions made by consensus,

which calls for tact, diplomacy and the ability to negotiate. This does not
mean that we need to agree with everyone all the time, as this is not condu-
cive to successful projects. Design managers need to build a project culture in
which the participants feel comfortable challenging and questioning others,
with a view to creating the best possible design value for the client. Some-
times it may be necessary to ‘agree to disagree’ so that the project can proceed
and not be stifled by indecision.
There are two types of conflict, constructive (positive) and destructive
(negative). Constructive conflict occurs naturally as individuals disagree or
challenge their colleagues. The intention is to improve the outcome of the
discussion. Destructive conflict occurs when an individual deliberately sets
out to undermine a discussion and create tension. The intention is to gain
an advantage (financial or otherwise) from the unnatural conflict. The chal-
lenge is to minimize destructive conflict and encourage constructive conflict.
This means getting the team selection correct at an early stage in the project.

When things go wrong

When things do not proceed as planned it is essential that the design man-
ager acts swiftly to get the project back on track. The procedure is to:

■ Stick to the facts

■ Keep emotions out of the debate
■ Aim to identify the root cause of the problem before taking action
■ Stick to the agreed project protocol for dealing with conflict
■ Learn from the experience (and share that learning with colleagues).

Tools: identifying and managing interfaces

AN ESSENTIAL SKILL for managers is to be able to identify the main interfaces

within projects so that they can be managed to maximize effective interaction.
This is an area of projects that is far too often left to chance, the view being
that there is a program and associated process plan(s) in place so everything

63
 WORKING TOGETHER

will be okay. It will not. Interfaces need to be mapped and managed to deliver
successful projects. Interface management is a term to denote the task of man-
aging interdependent organizations and individuals to achieve a common
goal. The focus for the design manager is the interaction of designers and the
interaction of the design team with the construction team.

How do we identify interfaces?

Interfaces between construction materials form physical boundaries or joints,
which are relatively easy to design and manipulate to achieve the required
technical performance for a building because they can be seen. Interfaces
between project organizations form softer boundaries that are determined by
legal contracts (which specify responsibilities), but that are often blurred as
individuals work informally with others at the margins of the boundaries.
Organizational and cultural boundaries within construction projects
are constantly changing; individuals enter at certain stages, and the team
changes in size and format. Boundaries of responsibility and interests in the
project are constantly in a state of flux. Obvious boundaries are the interfaces
between client and brief taker, brief taker and design team, design team and
contractor, contractor and subcontractors. Other more subtle boundaries, for
example between architects and engineers, also exist.
There are two fundamental types of interfaces with projects:

■ Organizational interfaces
Organizational interfaces are mainly defined by contracts and the project
context. Interorganizational relationships are concerned with organiza-
tional culture and the interoperability of management and ICT systems.
Although the relationships can be dynamic, they are relatively straight-
forward to define, map and manage through the life of the project.
■ Personal interfaces
Individuals interface with others representing other organizations, not the
organization per se; thus interfaces are colored by the ability to commu-
nicate and work with representatives of other organizations. Effectiveness
of the relationships is dependent on compatibility of the individuals con-
cerned. These interfaces are challenging to define, map and manage. Over
the course of a project individuals may be allocated to different projects;
thus new individuals join the project and new interfaces are created.

64
 WORKING TOGETHER

These interfaces need to be managed. Some of the main areas to con-

sider are as follows:

■ Interface definition. Map primary and secondary interfaces and identify

areas of uncertainty.
■ Responsibilities. Clearly defined and visible areas of responsibility can
help to reduce disagreements and disputes.
■ Communication. Clear and effective communication is central to inter-
face management.

Tools such as a design decision matrix can be used to help identify interde-
pendency, and hence some of the important interfaces. This has to be con-
sidered in the context of the program and will need to be revisited at regular
intervals to reflect the changing nature of the interfaces.

Tools: meetings and workshops

MEETINGS AND WORKSHOPS are where we get the opportunity to interact

face-to-face and test the trust we hold in other project participants. Formal
meetings and events will form part of the project plan, although it may be
necessary to hold impromptu meetings to address unforeseen events. Meet-
ings and workshops can be classified as one of two types, either ‘internal’ or
‘external’ to the organization. This can have a significant bearing on how
individuals behave and communicate.

■ Internal (closed) meetings and workshops are limited to participation by

the organization’s members only. In a familiar environment it is possible
for the participants to be relatively informal, open and trusting of the other
members. Discussions tend to be relatively open with shared objectives. An
example of this type of interaction could be a number of designers discuss-
ing the design development of a particular project within their office.
■ External (open) meetings and workshops include the presence of partici-
pants from other, possibly competing, organizations. In this environment
individuals may act in a more formal manner, be less candid and less trust-
ing of the other members’ motives (regardless of procurement route). Dis-
cussions tend to be relatively guarded and objectives might not be shared.

65
 WORKING TOGETHER

Productivity of meetings and workshops is an important consideration. Both

consume a considerable amount of the participants’ time in preparing, trav-
eling and attending (and subsequently responding to agreed actions). They
should be used sparingly and be integral to the project’s strategic process
plan. The value added to the project is the ability to encourage interaction
and candid discussions. Although a variety of metrics could be used to mea-
sure the efficacy of meetings and workshops, the main concern for managers
should be with the process (effectiveness of group processes and communica-
tion), the product (quality of the outcome/solution) and perception (how the
participants perceive the process and the product).

The function of meetings

Meetings are convened to deal with procedural issues and are primarily
concerned with the achievement of tasks. Interaction is mainly task-based,
although they also serve to develop relationships. Meetings are used to:

■ Appraise. Appraise progress and the performance of projects, organiza-

tions and individuals.
■ Bond. Meetings fulfil a fundamental human need to communicate and
bond, and hence help foster team relationships. Meetings can also be
used as a tool to help motivate the project team, although this function
may be better served through facilitated workshops.
■ Control. Meetings allow managers to stay aware of progress and in com-
mand of the tasks to be completed. They also allow those attending to
follow up information requests, allocate resources, agree on action and
set deadlines. All decisions should be recorded in the meeting minutes.
■ Coordinate. Face-to-face discussion may help with the coordination of
works packages and the clarification of roles and responsibilities. The
aim is to ensure that adequate resources are allocated to allow operations
to take place effectively and safely.
■ Develop trust. Addressing tasks and resolving problems in a meeting
forum can help to develop trust.
■ Explore possibilities and preferences – for example through structured
client briefing exercises.
■ Resolve and clarify. A timely meeting can help to resolve problems, dif-
ferences of opinion, minor conflicts and disputes.

Meetings can also be classified by type, as shown in Table 4.1.

66
 WORKING TOGETHER

Table 4.1 Types of meetings

• Design progress meetings

The primary aim of a design progress meeting is to review progress against
the design program. It is good practice to include the client (or the client’s
project manager) in design progress meetings. This helps to keep the client
updated with progress and allows the client to participate in discussions
relating to design value.

• Design team meetings (and workshops)

Design team meetings should be conducted in an atmosphere of trust and
complete openness. The intention is to identify areas of the design that can
be improved and also areas that may be problematic. Design team meetings
should address progress of the design in accordance with the brief and highlight
areas of the design to improve. Issues relating to coordination of design
packages may also become pertinent, although they are usually best considered
in a separate forum to ensure that the focus of all participants is on design
quality and getting the best possible design value for the given parameters.

• Coordination meetings
Given the importance of coordinating design information from a wide variety of
sources it may be prudent in large and complex projects to hold coordination
meetings as a separate event to design team meetings and progress meetings.
Although software developments in BIM facilitate coordination and clash
detection it is still important to review and discuss coordination to ensure that
the information put into the BIM model is both correct and sufficiently detailed.
The focus of the participants should be on how the separate design packages
come together. Attention needs to be given to the flow of design information as
well as the accuracy and quality of the information.

• Review meetings
Reviewing the performance of the project and the project participants is an
important function. This helps to identify how the project performed against the
parameters set out at the start of the project.

• Knowledge exchange meetings (learning)

It is essential that we learn from the project and the completed artifact as it is
used over time. Bringing people together to explore what they learned and how
best to disseminate and apply that experience to future projects is preferable to
relying on individual recall (see ahead).

The function of workshops

Workshops differ from meetings in that they are concerned with establishing
and developing interpersonal relationships, either as a primary or secondary
function of the workshop. Interaction is mainly socio-emotional. Development
of relationships is often achieved by working collaboratively towards solving a
(nonproject-specific) task (e.g. a simulated role-play exercise or an educational
game) or by working collaboratively on a project-specific issue – for example

67
 WORKING TOGETHER

in a value management (or value engineering) workshop. Workshops pro-

vide a forum for creative interaction and have a central position in col-
laborative design approaches and the development of integrated temporary
project organizations. In addition to helping to establish group membership
and social identity in a temporary organizational setting, workshops are also
used to:

■ Build trust
■ Confront groupthink
■ Create knowledge
■ Develop working relationships
■ Establish project parameters
■ Explore different perspectives (and disagreements)
■ Resolve conflict.

Workshops can be classified by type, as shown in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 Types of workshops

• Collaborative planning
Collaborative planning techniques have been around for a while, and are
commonly associated with lean construction. The principle is that all contributors
to the project discuss and agree to a program of work in a workshop setting. The
outcome is a set of promises made by those responsible for delivering specific
packages of work. The result is usually a much more accurate representation of
the program than if dictated by a project manager. An approach to collaborative
planning is described from a constructor’s perspective in Chapter 8.

• Creative problem solving

There are occasions when a design problem seems to be unsolvable. In
such situations it may be necessary to hold a workshop that involves project
participants and invited experts to discuss and try to resolve the design
challenge. This is sometimes referred to as a creative cluster workshop, where
the goal is to reach a creative solution.

• Value management and value engineering

Value management and value engineering are usually workshop-driven events,
where the emphasis is on collective decision making.

• Team building
Workshops have a role to play in helping to build and maintain project teams.
They need to be scheduled into the overall project program, with particular
attention paid to the start-up of key stages. Similarly, used at the delivery of a
key stage they can be a useful vehicle for individuals to reflect and share their
learning experiences.

68
 WORKING TOGETHER

Tools: learning events

SIMILAR TO THE NEED to identify interfaces within projects is the need to

identify where learning events would be best positioned within the life cycle
of the project. Individuals will be learning as the project develops, and it
is important that this knowledge is captured and made available for use on
future projects. Incorporating feedback (as part of the process plan) is an
essential feature of successful projects. The challenge for individuals and
organizations is to integrate the learning opportunities into the normal work-
ing week – that is making learning part of a balanced program of work. This
can be achieved through the following:

■ Experiential learning from projects and the product

■ Reflection on work
■ Learning from how others approach their tasks
■ Learning from books and articles via evidence-based learning
■ Learning in action via action learning
■ Learning through storytelling.

Levels of learning
Evaluation and learning take place on three levels, at the individual, organi-
zation and project level:

■ Individual needs
Self-evaluation and learning is fundamental to being a professional.
Engaging in reflective practice and undertaking formal (re)training
courses will enhance our knowledge and help to develop new skills.
Self-development may also be enhanced through applied research proj-
ects. An individual’s learning will be colored by his or her employing
organization and the projects on which the individual is deployed (see
also Chapter 5).
■ Organizational needs
Organizational development will rely on a combination of individual
self-development and formally organized group staff development.
Investment in employee development schemes can help an organization
to stay competitive and responsive to changing markets.

69
 WORKING TOGETHER

■ Project needs
Learning from a project can be conducted during the life of the project
and after the project has been completed. Learning events need to be
incorporated within the overall project program, ideally at the comple-
tion of each major phase. Used sparingly, knowledge exchange meet-
ings can form a platform for participants to share their knowledge with
others.

Vignette – the design manager’s challenge

of coordinating and liaising with multiple
internal and external project stakeholders

Lanre Gbolade
Architect and Precontract Design Manager, London & Quadrant (Develop-
ments Division), UK

The design management role takes shape in many forms dependent on the
type and size of organization the individual works in. Having worked in the
construction industry, both in architectural practice and in client developer
organizations for a number of years, I have gained insight into the design
manager role from both sides of the table. I am currently working with one
of the UK’s leading residential developers in the role of design management
and coordination, but my experiences have been shaped through working on
a wide range of projects in the residential, health care, retail and commercial
sectors, both in the UK and internationally. This has given me an excellent
understanding of the positive impacts of collaborative design management. It
has also fueled my passion for fostering project team collaboration and using
advanced information technology systems to develop efficiently designed and
constructed buildings.
The developer client has many functions but typically one main
goal: to deliver a profitable product, usually in the form of a physi-
cal building asset. This asset will be developed for sale (disposal upon
completion); it may be held and leased; or it may be maintained in a
complete design/build/operate arrangement. The roles I have undertaken
in the function of design management for residential developers include

70
 WORKING TOGETHER

technical coordinator, assistant design manager and design manager. Each

suggests different roles by title alone, but in reality they are very much
centered on the same tasks and goals, although with increasing responsi-
bility, direct reporting, accountability and authority. Experiences gained
from working in organizations within a design/build/operate and design/
build/sell arrangement form the basis of much of my personal observations
that follow.
My continually developing approach to design management is
shaped not only through practical experience but also by observing team
leaders, professionals and colleagues and through academic study and
research over 13 years. I have come to appreciate that design manage-
ment is a dynamic and very worthwhile role in the construction industry.
It allows those involved to appreciate the multitude of complex issues that
need to be considered throughout the development process. From my prac-
tical experience, some of the key tasks of a design manager (preconstruc-
tion) include the following:

■ Formulating and appointing a design team, ensuring the right consul-

tants are engaged at the most appropriate time.
■ Communicating the employer’s requirements (ERs), the standards and
specifications, to those appointed to provide the design, engineering,
construction and related services.
■ Chairing and leading design team meetings towards successful delivery
of the ERs.
■ Assessing, reviewing and interrogating design information in line with
the ERs.
■ Coordinating the delivery of design information in a timely manner
from multiple consultants and supply chain contractors, while manag-
ing internal department communication.
■ Being commercially aware of the impact of design change and being able
to gauge the financial and program implications of project risks.
■ Managing project risks and ensuring those responsible for design work
consider the risks associated all the way through the project life cycle
(design, construction, maintenance and disposal).
■ Promote an environment of collaborative working that challenges the
status quo and leads to value-adding (optimum) design solutions.

71
 WORKING TOGETHER

■ Keeping abreast of design and technical standards, including changes

to regulations and codes to ensure optimum value is achieved over the
duration of a project.
■ Managing and keeping track of inevitable design changes, all in line
with cost plans, overall development program, city planning, building
control and statutory approvals.

All of these tasks require the design manager to be, or become, adept at
managing a multitude of (sometimes conflicting) issues, each with their own
level of importance in relation to cost, quality and time. The outputs of all
or most of these tasks will have an impact on various internal organization
and external stakeholders. While an organization will have an overarching
goal(s), each of these internal stakeholders will have their own goals and
motivations, and naturally, they will be of most importance to the individ-
ual requesting information. For example, a large-scale residential developer
organization will have a number of functions within it, ranging from land
to planning, design, technical, build, surveying, commercial, sales, customer
services, asset management, aftercare and estate management. The external
stakeholder list is equally long and includes local planning authorities, build-
ing control bodies, clients, statutory authorities, consultants, supply chain
partners and a host of other stakeholders who are not directly involved in the
development process but who are interested in the decisions being made and
how the decisions may impact them.
Marrying the incompatible motivations of these varying functions and
stakeholders can be a challenging task, but an essential one for the design
manager. The reason is not definitive, but a fine-tuning of collaborative
working methods is a theme that consistently springs to mind when this issue
is raised. While the idea of collaborative working is not a new concept, as
architects and master builders have had to use this method of working since
time immemorial, the challenges of delivering built assets in an increasingly
commercially driven market sector do raise the stakes. My practical experi-
ence has highlighted that one of the key components of collaborative work-
ing is effective communication. I have found the following techniques to be
effective and productive:

■ It is always worthwhile bringing the keys issues to the table with the
right personnel and the most appropriate communication medium.

72
 WORKING TOGETHER

This will help with the discussions and will assist the decision-making
process.
■ Personnel management is a key part of the design management role,
helping to create strong working relationships. Fostering a good team
spirit through effective (timely and open) communication helps to
achieve effective working relationships.
■ Be prompt and accountable for the delivery of all promises made. If
the promises are not achieved it is essential that the design manager is
transparent about the reasons with those expecting the information. A
pragmatic proposal for resolving the issue in a timely manner will also
be expected.
■ Use a variety of methods and techniques to effectively communicate
technical and design information to organizational personnel who work
primarily in nontechnical design roles and the wide range of external
stakeholders.
■ Find a middle (acceptable) ground for multiple parties that helps to sat-
isfy their goals and motivations. It is not always an easy task, but using
effective communication to negotiate towards this end is the goal.

It is my belief that design managers can add value to the process of build-
ing design and construction through efficient, collaborative design coor-
dination, information management and value engineering (in the truest
sense of the term, not only through money-saving exercises). The design
management role is broad and requires a skillset to match, including the
following:

■ Being proactive
■ Being responsive and not shying away from responsibility
■ Appreciating that one does not need to know the solution to every issue
or challenge but being able to steer the team towards exploring opportu-
nities to problems, and hence provide informed solutions
■ Being able to recall a personal memory of experiences that do not often
repeat themselves in order to resolve a challenge; experience is key to
undertaking the role effectively
■ Sharing experiences with other team members and being aware of every
opportunity to develop knowledge and capture successes and the lessons
learned for incorporation into future projects

73
 WORKING TOGETHER

■ Appreciation of the professional work of others and how the vari-

ous members of the project team can contribute to design managers’
successes
■ Keeping the bigger picture in mind and understanding the placement
of a specific project in the context of the organizational strategic goals/
targets

74
 chapter 5

The design manager

THE DESIGN MANAGEMENT role has been around since the 1960s, first being
developed in the architectural profession, but rarely adopted. By the late
1980s and early 1990s the role started to be taken up by the more progressive
contracting organizations, primarily in the UK, but also in Brazil and Scan-
dinavia. The role has rapidly evolved to cover the entire range of design and
construction activities. This chapter provides an insight into what a design
manager does, with three vignettes from design management professionals
helping to illustrate the richness of the role.

Design management roles

INITIALLY THE CONSTRUCTION DESIGN management role was concerned

with checking and coordinating design information provided to the construc-
tor by the design team. Design managers were based on the construction site
for the majority of the working week, interacting with the construction proj-
ect manager(s) and the contracts managers. In the early years design manag-
ers often referred to themselves as a ‘post box’ where all design information
was sent to be sorted, checked and coordinated, prior to being issued to the
workers on the construction site. Since these pioneering days many coun-
tries have witnessed a significant increase in the number of design managers
employed by contracting organizations, ranging from Australia to Europe and
South America. Taking a snapshot of the construction design manager role
in the UK in 2000 and in 2016 helps to show how much the role has evolved
in the contracting sector.
In 2000 the number of design managers employed by constructors
was relatively modest but growing. The (construction) design managers
were located on the construction site, working alongside project managers

75
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

and construction managers. Their role was to resolve challenges relating to

the coordination of design information, manage requests for information
(RFIs) and manage design changes, primarily to improve constructability and
address cost/program challenges. Ten years later constructors started to realize
that many of the issues being dealt with by their construction design man-
agers should have been addressed much earlier. Their response has been to
move the design manager role upstream into the preconstruction stage, thus
helping to further improve efficiency during construction. This has resulted
in two job functions, the preconstruction (or precontract) design manager
and the construction design manager.
At the time of writing this book it is now generally accepted that the
design management role should be approximately 75% preconstruction and
25% construction. If working entirely with off-site fabrication the function
would be nearer 95% pre-assembly and 5% at the site assembly stage (see
Figures 5.1a and 5.1b).

Construction
95%

Design
5%

2000 Construction
75%

Design 2017
25%

5.1a Evolution of the design management role from construction to design

76
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

On-site assembly
5% - 25%

Off-site production
95% - 75%

The future?
Design managers
controlling value
prior to
production and
assembly

5.1b Evolution of the design management role from construction to design: the future?

Readers should ask where they currently are and where they wish to
be in the future.
The majority of contracting organizations have a career structure for
design managers, which helps to differentiate different roles, functions, tasks
and actions. This usually takes the form of a hierarchy (see Figure 5.2), and
progression from the bottom to the top will depend as much on experiential
learning, desire and ability as it will on qualifications. Typical job titles start
at document controller and progress to design coordinator, design manager
and finally design director.

Document controller
This is often the entry level into a design management career, with individu-
als coming off the tools – for example from carpentry and plumbing – to go
into a management career. Aspiring design managers learn about design man-
agement and, in some cases, start to appreciate how the business is managed.
The focus is individual projects and the control of project documentation.
The document controller is an essential and complementary function to that
of design management. When individuals have developed an appropriate

77
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

Design director
(strategic - organization and
project portfolio)

Design managers
(project specific)

Design coordinators

Document controllers

5.2 Typical design management hierarchy

level of understanding of document control they may then progress to a

design coordination role. Typical responsibilities include the following:

■ Ensuring design information compliance with city planning and build-

ing permits
■ Checking design information for errors and omissions
■ Assisting the design coordinator.

Design coordinator
As the term implies, design coordinators are tasked with coordinating a wide
range of design information at the project level. The entry route is via suc-
cess in a document control role or entering with an undergraduate degree
in design management or a design-related program, such as architecture or
architectural engineering. The design coordinator will work alongside and
under direction of the design manager. The design coordination role will
usually extend to dealing with environmental and legal approvals. Typical
responsibilities include the following:

■ Coordinating and issuing design information

■ Liaising with design team members
■ Assisting the design manager.

78
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

Design manager
Design managers are usually tasked with managing people and processes, pri-
marily at the project level but also forming a link to the organization’s project
portfolio and business objectives. An important skill will be the ability to
work across institutional and disciplinary boundaries. Individuals will usually
have qualifications (or experience) equivalent to full membership of a rel-
evant professional body. At this level people skills and leadership need to be
demonstrated alongside sensitivity to commercial demands. Typical responsi-
bilities include the following:

■ Leading the project design team

■ Ensuring project targets are met
■ Liaising with project stakeholders.

Design director
The design director, or senior design manager, will work across multiple
projects at a strategic level. The emphasis will be on setting goals for the
organization and individual projects. He or she will form an important
interface between the organization’s business objectives and the organiza-
tion’s project portfolio. This position demands excellent leadership skills,
people skills and commercial management skills. Competences in these
areas are developed and honed over a period of many years, enhanced with
training, education and targeted reading. Typical responsibilities include
the following:

■ Setting commercial and quality targets for the design portfolio

■ Managing design staff and allocating staff to projects
■ Monitoring performance of staff and projects.

Establishing the design manager’s remit

THE DESIGN MANAGER’S REMIT will vary across organizations, projects and
countries. Despite this, there are some generic considerations applying to all
situations. These relate to responsibilities at the organizational level and the
individual project level (Figure 5.3).

79
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

Organization
(strategic)

Design management Projects

team (operational)

5.3 The design manager as bridge between strategic and operational decision making

■ At the organizational level – strategic remit

Businesses are never static, constantly adjusting to the changing mar-
ketplace for services. Organizations must offer a consistent level of
service to their clients and therefore the way in which design manag-
ers operate across the organization needs to be consistent, a point
taken up later in this chapter. Design managers must be able to man-
age individual projects in line with the strategic commercial aims
of their employer. This means that operational decisions taken at a
project level must be done while cogent of the organization’s business
objectives.
■ At the project level – operational remit
It is essential that the design manager’s remit is discussed and agreed on
prior to the commencement of individual projects. It is also necessary to
review the design manager’s remit at regular intervals to ensure it is still
relevant, which is especially important on projects with a long duration,
where the tendency for change is more prevalent.

Design manager responsibilities

There are some typical (generic) responsibilities that apply to construction
design managers, regardless of who they are employed by or at what stage of
a project they specialize in. Design managers are primarily responsible for

80
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

ensuring design quality is realized within the constraints of time, budget and
resources. This can be broken down to include typical tasks:

■ Achieving design quality targets

■ Arranging, coordinating, attending and chairing design team meetings
and workshops
■ Collaborating with a wide range of project stakeholders and other
departments to develop and realize the design
■ Complying with codes and regulations – for example health and safety
legislation and managing environmental compliance (e.g. LEED,
BREEAM)
■ Conducting design reviews and design appraisals
■ Delegating and reviewing design team tasks
■ Ensuring design parameters are adhered to
■ Guiding and leading the design team
■ Integrating the design
■ Meeting client (and stakeholder) expectations
■ Motivating a wide range of designers
■ Presenting design proposals
■ Reporting on progress of design tasks and packages
■ Reviewing budgets and financial reporting
■ Setting design quality targets (in consultation with the client)
■ Value engineering the design.

Vignette – design integration

Susan Snaddon
Associate Director, Planning and Development, Arup, Johannesburg, South
Africa

I studied building in South Africa and had my first jobs in Johannesburg with
Bovis (in an on-site capacity) and a small firm of project managers. I learned
very quickly that the whole of a project has to work, bringing together all
designers and stakeholders, for the benefit of designers, financiers, contrac-
tors and ultimately the building users. I moved to the UK in 1999, initially
working in project management and space planning, before taking my first

81
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

formal design management role at GallifordTry in Uxbridge. I really loved

the action-focused space of herding a team of creative designers and specialist
subcontractors all towards a common goal with a fixed time frame in mind. I
returned to Johannesburg in 2006 and started working for Arup. I was hired
on the basis of my design management experience, particularly to ensure that
the range of engineering disciplines on any given project is properly synchro-
nized and offers a coherent service.
I prefer to term the work I do design integration because I find that
designers perform poorly when ‘managed’ in the traditional sense. But the
designers do need to be integrated for projects to succeed. I am not strong
on systems and programs, but I think the biggest challenge and opportunity
is getting diverse, multilingual people to understand each other, particularly
when they are spread remotely (which inevitably happens on our projects in
Africa). This is why I focus on clear communications – for example prioritiz-
ing workshops and capturing design meeting resolutions in visual, accessible
ways rather than standard minutes. An example of what I do is taken from an
urban planning project.
The planning meetings tended to have upwards of 20 attendees; some
were experienced designers and others were laypeople from the client body.
Within these meetings we often had presentations from different work streams
(e.g. urban design, transport, infrastructure). Sometimes after the formal meet-
ing there would also be a walkabout around the urban area. I would ensure the
agenda was very clear and achievable within the time frame. Record keeping
is a critical element of design projects and minutes are the accepted means of
recording meetings. To try to make the minutes user-friendly and readable,
I took photographs during the meeting of the physical marked-up sketches
being presented by the urban designers and a few photographs of the meeting
discussions themselves. I also made sure I received soft copies of any Power-
Point presentations made during the meeting. I kept the minutes as brief as
possible, keeping the notes to what was discussed and any decisions reached,
and noted any actions and associated dates. I interspersed the notes with
images under the relevant sections. These have several benefits:

■ It is obvious who attended because there are photos of them in the room;
■ Minutes are easier to read as they have visual reminders of the content
that was discussed in the meeting;

82
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

■ The key sketches/presentation images are part of the minutes so the

decisions made are very clear. This is more effective than cross referenc-
ing a difficult-to-locate sketch in some online repository;
■ Photographs of the site visit were added at the end of the minutes,
including relevant notes of any key constraints discovered/opportunities
to be exploited.

Tips for success

My tips for success in design integration relate primarily to communication:

■ Be precise in your language when you write and speak;

■ Ask questions and listen well;
■ Encourage all team members to ask questions. It is especially important
to cultivate a safe place for juniors to ask questions, as they often ask
brilliant ones;
■ Draw out those team members who are introverts, and ensure others do
not ‘hold court’ inappropriately;
■ Pay attention to what people are saying and what they are not saying;
■ Be inclusive;
■ Use collaboration websites only for drawings, specifications, and so
forth, not for communication;
■ Learn to touch-type;
■ Be wary of using cloud-based BIM models if some of your team have
poor bandwidth;
■ Always consider designs from the user’s perspective;
■ Be gracious with genuine mistakes. Cultivate a nonadversarial, support-
ive culture;
■ Make an effort to understand and appreciate the design aspirations and
cultures of places in which you work. Do not impose your preferences;
■ Make use of sustainability and universal access as unifying topics to get
designers thinking about the overall product rather than their specific
discipline;
■ Keep abreast of current thinking in a wide range of topics – design, tech-
nical, economic, environmental and so forth;
■ Use technology appropriately (e.g. MS OneNote is quite good for mint-
ing with words, pictures, spreadsheets all in one place).

83
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

Knowledge and skills

INDIVIDUALS MOVING INTO DESIGN management positions tend to come

from quite a wide background, ranging from architecture and engineering to
surveying and the trades. Although individual knowledge, skills and com-
petences will vary according to background and personality, there are some
fundamental requirements necessary to do the job.

Knowledge
Regardless of one’s individual background, a design manager must possess
comprehensive knowledge of how the design and construction process
works. This includes a working knowledge of building technologies, health
and safety legislation, environmental legislation and life-cycle costs. He or
she also needs to appreciate how the various ‘designers’ and ‘constructors’
who make up the project team like to work and communicate. While some
of this knowledge can be taught in universities and acquired from self-
study, there is no substitute for learning on the job. Experiential learning
comes from the practical application of design management to live proj-
ects, which, combined with self-reflection, will inform and shape design
managers.

Skills
Although many of the skills required are similar to those required of project
managers, there is a deliberate bias towards design knowledge and a deep
understanding of the design process. Design managers must be able to cham-
pion and defend design quality. In addition to having a passion for design
quality, design managers must also demonstrate excellent communication
skills. They will need to have empathy with designers and constructors in
addition to excellent interpersonal skills. This will help them to navigate the
uncertain waters that lie between the various project stakeholders and the
design and construction cultures. This requires ‘people’ skills, such as tact and
diplomacy, negotiating, coordinating, communicating, integrating, organiz-
ing and leading. It also demands the determination and drive to achieve goals
in a multidisciplinary project environment. It follows that a flexible and agile
approach to management is necessary to allow design managers the space to
respond to unexpected events and rapidly changing situations. This needs
to be balanced by a reassuringly consistent and fair approach to day-to-day

84
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

decision making. Individuals will have strengths in different areas, but the
following skills are essential:

■ Building trust and effective working relationships

■ Coordinating diverse design works packages
■ Listening to colleagues and project stakeholders
■ Promoting and defending design quality at all stages of projects
■ Communicating effectively using written, oral and graphic media
■ Consistently managing the production and realization of high-quality
designs
■ Leading the design team
■ Motivating and maintaining high standards and commitment within
the design team
■ Realizing business objectives through effective design management
■ Resolving design-related issues and problems in a timely and efficient
manner
■ Supervising design team members.

Vignette – what motivates design managers?

Robert Toon
Design Manager, Kier Construction, UK

For a design manager, communication and information transfer are of para-

mount importance for the success of a construction project. Good communi-
cation equals good information; good information equals informed decisions;
informed decisions equal a good product. Behind all the communication and
information transfer that design managers have to deal with are people. Peo-
ple are the major influencers of a project’s success, and changes such as the
adoption of BIM and the move to off-site production seem, on the surface at
least, to be trying to eliminate people from construction. The reason for these
changes is, undoubtedly, the error and mistakes associated with human-run
projects. Human error amounts to many problems and delays on a construc-
tion project, but is taking the person out of the project a positive thing? Is
it not the diversity of people whom we work with and the different relation-
ships that form that make the construction industry great?

85
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

One of my interests is related to what motivates individuals in con-

struction, and in particular, what motivates design managers. While studying
for my BSc in design management I undertook research to see whether there
are ‘common goals’ within the construction industry and, if so, if these can
be managed in order to improve project efficiency. I found that the term ‘goal
orientations’ fitted what we do, and this led to my interest in motivational
psychology.
I found that the motivations of individuals on construction projects
are not solely hedonistic. On entering the construction sector individu-
als are motivated by the intrinsic needs of enjoyment and interest. When
they have worked in the industry for some time these motivations tend to
change due to external pressures (e.g. family), which results in their day-to-
day motivations becoming hedonistic. I also found that there was very little
difference in the perceptions of what motivates individuals from various
disciplines, be they an architect, design manager, engineer or constructor.
However, the design managers did exhibit some specific differences to their
fellow project participants.
The design managers claimed to be motivated by the relationships
they developed in the working environment. More specifically they claimed
that it was working in a team that really motivated them. These intrinsic
motivations become evident as design managers strive to make a difference to
their environment, using the relationships to help them achieve their goals
of realizing a great building. They want to be in control and change the envi-
ronment in which they live. Design managers believe that working in a team
can make a great difference and this is what truly motivates them.
Design managers also claimed that they tend to manage workers as if
the workers are hedonistically motivated (by money). My research found that
this form of motivation is not the only form of motivation in the construction
industry, and it would be dangerous for design managers to think that others
are not motivated by many factors. Having a better understanding of the goal
orientations of those we work with will help us to better manage people and
in turn achieve better results.
Reflecting on experience from practice it is clear that individuals have
different agendas and are motivated in a variety of ways. On a day-to-day
basis the design manager will be dealing with many issues and communicat-
ing with a large number of people, each from different backgrounds and each

86
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

with a different skill set. If one attempted to manage these people by using a
formal, set-by-step guide, then it is highly likely that things would get missed
and the velocity of the project would leave a design manager trailing in its
wake. Undertaking research into motivational factors has added value to
what I do as a design manager because I am more prepared and better able to
deal with people. I have often thought of my research when managing people,
and it definitely helps to think of how the individual you are speaking with is
motivated, which in turn allows me to adjust my managerial approach to suit,
and hence achieve positive outcomes.

Tips for success

Managing motivations can take many forms, from getting people to do what
you know must be done to nurturing the workforce in order to encourage
their best efforts. Motivations of individuals should be of paramount impor-
tance to design managers. Some tips for success are as follows:

■ Get to know your fellow project participants and understand what moti-
vates them.
■ People’s motivations and goal orientations change. This means that the
behavior of individuals may change during the life of a project (or across
several projects). Be prepared to manage the situation and stay alert.
■ There are no ‘common goals’ in an absolute sense. On a day-to-day basis
there is a wide range of motivations and goals that can be termed as com-
mon themes of motivations. These can usually be seen in the way people
behave and therefore they can be managed.
■ Embrace the value people bring to construction projects.

Ensuring consistency across the organization

ONE OF THE CHALLENGES for large organizations with a large project port-
folio is to ensure consistency of approach across the entire portfolio. Indi-
viduals will inevitably interpret job roles and responsibilities in a slightly
different way to that of their peers. In organizations employing many
design managers this can, and often does, lead to differences in approach
across the project portfolio. This is especially prevalent where projects are

87
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

spread across a large geographical area, states and countries. Despite differ-
ences in legislation and local customs (ways of behaving), it is possible to
ensure a consistent approach with the organization’s regional offices and
their projects.
There are a number of ways of achieving consistency, but the most
effective is bringing design managers together from across the organization to
discuss what they do and why. This helps to share knowledge, identify good
practice and also identify the less efficient ways of working. These events can
be supported with training and education as part of the individual’s personal
development plan. A typical approach to ensure consistency would be to do
the following:

■ Hold an internal knowledge exchange meeting once per year. Invite all
design managers and associated professionals, such as commercial direc-
tors, project managers and cost consultants, to discuss what they do and
why they do it. This will help to identify good practices and areas in
need of improvement. It will also help individuals to adopt a consistent
approach to design management.
■ Create a design manager’s handbook that is tailored to how the organiza-
tion works. This can be referred to by design managers in their day-to-
day tasks. The handbook will also be invaluable in helping to induct new
members of the organization into how things are done.
■ Establish and maintain an intranet knowledge exchange hub. This will
allow design managers working across the country or globe to share their
knowledge about design management with other members of the organi-
zation, whom they may rarely meet. This resource can be systematically
reviewed and relevant knowledge incorporated into the organization’s
design management handbook.
■ Establish a strategic review system (annual or biyearly) to review what
the design managers are doing in relation to developments in legisla-
tion, technology and ways of working. For example, if the majority of
the design management activity is currently at the construction phase,
consider how this could be moved to the precontract phase and the
associated benefits and risks.
■ Encourage an organizational culture that rewards openness and knowl-
edge sharing.

88
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

Vignette – building design management:

working in Sweden

Nicholas Gill
Design Director, Skanska UK plc

In 2012 I was fortunate to be asked to work on the New Karolinska Hos-

pital project in Stockholm. With a construction cost of £1.5 billion, it was
Skanska’s largest building project at the time and was the biggest hospital
under construction in Europe. The contract was managed in a joint venture
by Skanska Sweden and Skanska UK, which in practice meant that we fol-
lowed the Swedish way of working but with the advantage that English was
an official language of the project.
At the time I joined the project, work had already started on site and
the concrete frame was underway. I was allocated to a small team of building
design managers (BDMs) dealing with Phase 5 of the project, which on its
own had a £500 million construction cost. The design program was in place,
and our objective was set that all design packages had to reach construction
status (in Swedish ‘Bygghandling’) by the end of 2014.
On a day-to-day basis the activities of a BDM on this enormous proj-
ect were little different from those in a similar project in the UK: managing
information flow, answering questions, finding solutions to technical prob-
lems, dealing with change and managing the design team. On this project we
were using BIM and therefore had BIM specialists as part of our team to assist
with coordination, clash detection and visualization. There were also special-
ist technical design managers who dealt with specific technical aspects of the
design, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing services and facades, and
had a key input into our activities.
There were some interesting differences between the Swedish way and
working in the UK. First, the Swedish tendency to reach a consensus about
everything meant that there were many more and longer meetings than I
expected, as all details had to be fully discussed and agreed. Second, there
was a high level of discipline built into the design management system: each
drawing package was formally issued first for comment, with a two-week con-
sultation period that included meetings to present the design, followed by the
opportunity to go through all comments, before formal issue of ‘Bygghandling’

89
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

information. Each stage of this process was meticulously documented. Fortu-

nately, the time taken for this process was included in the overall design
program.
One of the nicer aspects of working in Sweden is the approach
to working life. While many Swedes do start work early (many before
07:00), they also like to go home relatively early in the afternoon to make
the most of their evenings and home life. Lunch is taken on the dot of
11:30 (which means that no meeting can be organized between 11:30
and 12:30) and is eaten in a separate dining area away from the working
area. There is a wonderful Swedish custom called ‘fika’, which involves
having coffee and cakes with colleagues, again away from our desks, usu-
ally in the afternoon. These arrangements are in sharp contrast to the
English habit of working all hours, coffee on the run and eating sand-
wiches at our desks while continuing to work. The easy conversation over
fika does engender some personal interaction with colleagues that is often
absent from work in the UK.
My involvement with the project ended in January 2015, the mile-
stone objective of ‘bygghandling’ design for Phase 5 having been achieved
successfully in December 2014. The project is still under construction, and
the main part of the hospital is scheduled for completion in 2017.

My top tips for working in Sweden are as follows:

■ Engage in the Swedish approach to consensus in decision making. There
is no room for autocracy or loud argument. Individuals who behave like
this soon find themselves on the next plane home.
■ Understand the meanings of the different stages of design development
that apply in Sweden (‘systemhandling’, ‘bygghandling’, etc.) and what
level of detail applies at each stage.
■ Learn a few words of Swedish. In practice, all Swedes speak good Eng-
lish and are quite happy to conduct entire meetings in English for the
benefit of one English speaker. But it really does help to be able to say a
few words in Swedish.
■ Follow the Swedish way of working by taking breaks for lunch and fika
with your colleagues.
■ Make the most of the opportunity to enjoy the fantastic landscape,
vibrant cities and very friendly people in Sweden.

90
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

Internal knowledge exchange events

RESPONSIBILITY FOR ORGANIZING and monitoring the effectiveness of

internal knowledge exchange events will rest with the senior design manager.
These events are linked to consistency and performance.

Training
Training in specific design management tools and techniques, along with
specific training in interpersonal skills, is starting to be taken more seriously
within organizations. As the design manager role has developed, the need for
specific skills training has become more evident and organizations are now
starting to deliver and/or procure training for their design managers.

Education
Training alone will not bring about consistency within the organization.
Individuals will also need to engage in continuing professional development.
This will include attendance at conferences in addition to in-house forums.
Reading around the subject and engaging in information exchange networks
will also be required.

Self-reflection
The concept of the reflective (and reflexive) practitioner has been known for
a long time. This is a powerful tool to help individuals improve how they do
their job. Typical techniques include keeping a personal reflective diary (or
reflective log) and engaging in organizational events that encourage reflec-
tion on daily events. A simple yet effective approach is to do the following:

1 Describe the event. Concisely record the event and describe what the
challenge was and the individuals and organizations involved. Keep it
factual.
2 Reflect on the event. Identify how the challenge could be mitigated in the
future. What could have been done differently?
3 Consider action. Explore some scenarios. How would you respond if
faced with the same event in the future? Highlight training and edu-
cational needs so that you are better prepared for reading more about
the subject.

91
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

The reflective diary is a personal document. The aim is to improve indi-

vidual performance and some of the issues raised may be fed into the
annual performance review when discussing future educational and train-
ing needs.

Managing expectations

WORKING AT THE INTERFACE of design and construction, the design man-

ager will be tasked with managing the expectations of both constructors and
designers, and indirectly the interests of the client. Expectations relate to the
effectiveness of the design and delivery process and also the design quality of
the completed artifact. Having a robust process plan will help all stakehold-
ers to navigate the life of the project; however, there are some simple rules to
follow to ensure expectations are managed:

■ Before any work is done meet with the client and stakeholders in a work-
shop environment to explore exactly what is required, why, when and by
whom. This will help the main parties to understand one another and
is the first step in exploring and understanding the values of the project
stakeholders and establishing trust. Face-to-face discussions will help in
developing common (shared) project values.
■ Manage the briefing process to ensure that the scope of the work, the
business plan (finances) and the program are established before design
work commences. Revisit and revise the brief at regular intervals once
the design process has commenced.
■ Involve the client in all project team meetings. This helps to avoid any
surprises.
■ Sign off on the design with the client before starting work on site; this
will help to reduce uncertainty and unnecessary design changes during
construction. It will also help to reduce unnecessary construction waste.
Certainty will allow the constructor to schedule the work accurately and
will be instrumental in helping the workforce deliver the building on
time, on budget and to agreed quality standards.
■ Consult with the client on overall design changes, no matter how
minor.

92
 THE DESIGN MANAGER

■ Involve all stakeholders in decision making and ensure relevant infor-

mation is to hand so that informed decisions are made.
■ Keep all designers informed (on a regular basis).
■ Never make unrealistic claims or promises that cannot be honored.
■ Build learning events into the program. This enables knowledge har-
vesting and sharing, as well as helping to keep individuals informed.

93
 Application:
Project case studies
 chapter 6

Shining light on the dark side :

An American architect’s journey
into design management

Dave Beem
Beem Management, USA

Dave Beem is an architect and the owner of Beem Management, a firm that he
recently founded to address his perception of the gaps between the artistic and
business content of contemporary architectural practices and current building
delivery systems. Educated, licensed and registered in multiple states in the US,
his vision for his new company is to “bridge design intent with project reality”.

MY WIFE AND I were walking out of the movie theater right after New Year’s Eve
when we ran into Kurt, a former architectural colleague who had at one time
worked at the architectural firm where I had been a partner. After exchanging
pleasantries Kurt remarked, “I heard you went over to the dark side.” Nice double
entendre, Kurt. He and his wife had just seen the new Star Wars movie, but he
was also invoking a phrase often used here in the US to describe an architect
who has moved over to join the owner, facilities, management, or construction
side of the building delivery equation. In that sense he had heard correctly. I
had just left my partnership at the end of 2015 and had opened up my own
multifaceted management firm. But his comment begged the question: why
would a registered architect with 35 years of experience at an award-winning
architectural firm choose to leave that partnership to take such a journey?

The Bucket List

(Warner Bros. Pictures, 2008)

“YOU WANT TO DO . . . WHAT?” The reactions of my partners were not sur-

prising. As a collective we had delivered hundreds of successful and highly
respected commercial and residential projects, both in the US and in Europe.

97
 DAVE BEEM

As I explained to them, I wanted to explore something different than a tradi-

tional architectural practice and instead focus on my passions, which included
project management, owner’s advisory services, and regulatory entitlement
pursuits. Having always been fascinated by the void between the artistic and
business content of architecture, I explained that this new venture would
allow me to use my leadership skills to work for owners, lawyers, architects,
and constructors to bridge that gap. Not only am I wired to think that way,
but I had routinely been asked by owners to augment (and even in some cases
assume) the lead role of project management (PM) responsibilities for several
large-scale projects, even though the owners already had nationally recog-
nized management consultancy firms on board. Having also been exposed to
some projects in the UK and to UK-style building delivery systems, I added
that I would be pursuing what is known as ‘design management’, not fully
grasping the term or its implications here in the US at the time.

Lost in Translation
(Focus Features, 2003)

IN THE FALL OF 2015 I was still fully committed to my former practice, so my

night job became a mission to open up my own shop: to search for space, set
up corporate legal status, retain a PR consultant, and prepare for the eventual
update of my LinkedIn profile and webpage. Aside from those duties, I spent a
lot of time on the Internet trying to understand more about the various play-
ers and components involved in the UK building delivery systems, the roles
of the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) and the Chartered Insti-
tute of Builders (CIOB), and various specialty careers, including those of the
quantity surveyors (QS). I already had a working knowledge of broad aspects
of this, in part because of the increased and seemingly fashionable requests
by informed owners for such services on large-scale projects here in the US.
While the American Institute of Architects (AIA) and all of the various con-
struction organizations involved on this side of the pond have tremendous
value, my working thesis was that some thoughtful combination of the UK’s
and the US’s respective building construction delivery systems might lead to
a fresh and optimized result. Clearly there was a lot of research to be done.
I purchased and studied several books on design management from
authors such as Emmitt (Design Management for Architects), Emmitt and Ruikar

98
 SHINING LIGHT ON THE DARK SIDE

(Collaborative Design Management), and Sinclair (Leading the Team: An Archi-

tect’s Guide to Design Management). As it turns out, all of the authors were
primarily UK-based and nothing similar appeared to originate from within
the US. That should have been my first clue about the state of design man-
agement stateside. In reviewing the available material and what I could find
online I became a little more knowledgeable, but admittedly a lot more con-
fused. For the purposes of this chapter, my understanding is that from the UK
perspective the role of the design manager (DM) is distinct from the project
manager (PM) or the construction manager (CM) in that her or his decisions
and actions are taken through a lens that prioritizes the value of the design.
While the PM focuses on budget, time, and quality and the CM interprets
the construction documents to execute the design safely and effectively, the
DM must coordinate, oversee, and manage all of those constituents and their
activities to ensure that the design vision is upheld and thrives.
I also gathered that the use of design managers in the UK has ballooned
since the early 2000s, and with the increased recognition of ‘value added’,
those design managers are often now being introduced early on, including at
the predesign or feasibility phase of the appointment. The demand seems to
be fueled by a variety of sophisticated stakeholders who recognize and cham-
pion the inherent value of the design of the project. One of the industries
that use DM services more than others seems to be construction, especially
when they are involved in design-build assignments. DM services are also
used by several architecture and engineering firms in the UK that are trying
to gain insight beyond that of the narrow, project-specific ‘lessons learned’ by
looking at the bigger picture of the overall workings of the firm.
By documenting, understanding, and publicizing these long-term trends,
the entire firm can benefit and grow. Another source noted that owners them-
selves may retain DMs when they need an outside view independent of the
already retained design team: someone to look at the project from the outside
in, mine it for inefficiencies, and expose any lack of coordination and unneces-
sary expense of detailing – in short, a peer review function to trim inefficiencies.
What I did not find to date (but I hope that it does exist) is more informa-
tion on what I would consider the ‘holy grail’ of design management services,
wherein owners not only recognize and understand the value-add of DM services,
but also actually insist on integrating those services at the inception point of all of
their critical projects. Where is that central marketplace where US owners intui-
tively comprehend, value, and seek design management services? See Figure 6.1.

99
6.1 UK design management theater
 SHINING LIGHT ON THE DARK SIDE

A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court

(Paramount Pictures, 1949)

MY FIRST WEEK of open shop in January 2016 was spent evaluating website
concepts presented by Red Pepper Marketing, troubleshooting IT glitches
(I had switched to MAC – what the hell was I thinking?!), and spreading
word of my new business, all the while searching for clients. At the same time,
I heard about a statewide membership group formed in 1952 called the Con-
necticut Building Congress (CBC), which its website describes as “the premier
organization for Connecticut’s building professionals to develop strong indus-
try connections”. Coincidentally, the following week the CBC was holding a
panel-style event entitled “Who’s Got Your Back? Does an Owner’s Represen-
tative Really Bring Value to the Project and the Team?” Setting aside whatever
mixed messages the event’s title may convey, what perfect timing for a seeker
of knowledge about design management services! Guest speakers included rep-
resentatives from several project management services firms, as well as State
of Connecticut employees who were responsible for procuring and delivering
public projects. During the event I was able to glean the following:

1 The current popular US term for management services appears to be

owner’s program management services (OPM), though I found equal
instances of owner project management services (I’ll still call it OPM).
2 There was a lot of great discussion on the value of OPM, the various
participants, and the lessons learned – but curiously there were no own-
ers present at the event.
3 In addition to polling those present at my dinner table, I made a point of
speaking with several of the panelists after the event. No one had heard
of the term ‘design management’.

The Belly of an Architect

(Hemdale Films & Peter Greenway, 1987)

I THOUGHT I WOULD TAKE a “shallow dive” into the US architectural profes-

sion’s position on DM services. A quick search on the AIA website for ‘design
management’ yields surprisingly few coherent results. In true AIA fashion, the first
hit is for a contract form (B171–2013), used when an owner is involved in more

101
 DAVE BEEM

than one project “and where design management services are to be provided under
a separate contract with the owner”. The description goes on to say that those ser-
vices should be “coordinated with AIA Document C171™–2013, an owner/pro-
gram manager agreement, where the program manager is an independent adviser
to the owner throughout the course of the program”. The language jumps back
and forth between ‘program manager’ and ‘design manager’ nearly at will, and of
course you need to buy the contracts themselves – an expense I was not disposed
to incur at this point – to see if there are any definitions or greater clarity.
The AIA’s annual national convention is coming up this spring in
Philadelphia, so I thought I’d look through the vast catalogue of events for
roundtable discussions on design management or at least project manage-
ment that will surely be on the schedule. This year (2016) you can hear actor,
pitchman, and keynote speaker Kevin Spacey expound on “his talent for dis-
ruption and drive to challenge the status quo”. You can participate in elec-
tive EL501a: “Subfloor: The Hidden Asset”, or “WE313: Building Historic
Philadelphia using 70,000 LEGO Blocks”. To be fair, there are hundreds of
highly informative and creative workshops over the four days, but a search
for the term ‘design management’ yields only “sorry – no results”. Substituting
the word ‘project’ for ‘design’ does yield 34 hits, but they are primarily about
the management of risk, finances, and BIM. By my calculation, about a half
dozen of the convention offerings might relate in some fashion to the subject
of this chapter, the strongest of which is TH107: “Managing Project Uncer-
tainty and Expectations: New Leadership Opportunities for Architects”. The
description notes that “Architects have the unique ability to impact the out-
come of these collaborative interactions, but this role is often clouded by
uncertainty or ambiguity.” No uncertainties here: count me in for that class!

The Trip to Bountiful

(Island Pictures, 1985)

IT WAS MID-JANUARY when I took Metro North into New York City to chat with
representatives of Turner Construction. Turner’s preeminent position in the US
contracting marketplace is undeniable, with projects throughout North America
and an annual dollar volume of work exceeding $10 billion in 2014. The firm’s
dominance owes much to foresight: Turner’s leadership recently created their own
team of multidiscipline engineering services that would give them in-house peer

102
 SHINING LIGHT ON THE DARK SIDE

review capacity as well as technical knowledge. As Pat Di Filippo (executive vice

president in charge of the eastern seaboard states and Canada) explains, the ben-
efits are already proving to be significant. Under his direction, Turner has added
architects, MEP engineers, structural engineers, and curtain wall design specialists
to form the Turner Engineering Group (TEG). As a result, Pat noted, “there are
less interruptions, more control, and better desired outcome” on those projects
when the engineering group is involved. “It’s a market differentiator that institu-
tional clients in particular have been quick to notice,” he added.
To help jump-start the creation and deployment of the team of inter-
nal design managers, Pat leveraged the resources of Turner’s parent company,
the German engineering and construction firm Hochtief. While the distinct
advantages of a DM approach are already recognized in Europe (especially
with regard to short- and long-term risks), most domestic construction firms
have yet to understand the business benefit of such an approach. Pat elo-
quently explained Turner’s vision in this regard as a “symmetry of equity, con-
structability and long-term management”.
As a follow-up I met with Rob Barbera, a GM/vice president currently
running the TEG, with his own Turner roots going back to 1988. Rob’s group
has the ability to analyze, assess, or validate any design portion of the work,
which is especially beneficial when they are involved in design-build and public/
private partnership (‘3P’) work. While such in-house capacity is still an emerg-
ing trend here in the US construction market, there are other firms, such as the
Beck Group with multiple locations in the US and Mexico City, that are also
pushing the envelope on that front. Rob and I found much common ground,
but short of my abandoning my newly formed independent consultancy practice
and joining the ‘design’ side of their contracting forces, a project-specific assign-
ment may be difficult to arrange. This could be in part because the contractor
typically arrives midway through the process, and the expense of an additional
consultant may be hard to justify, in-house or to the client, at the proposal stage.
That said, we are on the lookout for the right opportunity to collaborate.

School Daze
(Spike Lee, 1988)

I DECIDED THAT I would revisit my earlier research into the architectural

professions’ position on design management by looking at the paths to US

103
 DAVE BEEM

professional licensure and, for those who want it, to AIA status. There are a
little more than 130 universities and colleges in the US that offer accredited
degrees in architecture, as determined and monitored by the National Archi-
tectural Accrediting Board (NAAB). According to the NAAB website,

Obtaining a NAAB-accredited degree is an essential aspect of pre-

paring for the professional practice of architecture. While graduation
from a NAAB-accredited program does not assure registration, the
accrediting process is intended to verify that each accredited pro-
gram substantially meets those standards that, as a whole, comprise an
appropriate education for an architect.

I called Andrea Rutledge, the executive director of NAAB, and asked for
her thoughts on design management degrees and their possible association with
the NAAB. As the mandate of the NAAB deals specifically with architectural
professional degree accreditation, Andrea noted that they do not monitor other
degree programs, so she wasn’t aware of any design management programs or the
term. She suggested that I look into a similar organization called the Association
of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, whose online resource includes a list of
all associated degrees available from architectural schools. Under the “Related
Disciplines” header of its Online Guide to Architecture Schools, there are a dozen
associated degree programs listed, but nothing for design management (the clos-
est being “Construction Management/Technology”).
If you Google ‘design management’ degrees and programs in the US,
the results include many for a master of professional studies (MPS) in design
management, typically offered in a school of art or school of business. When
I focused my efforts on colleges that offer both design management degrees
and NAAB-accredited degree programs, I found these programs overlapped
at fewer than a dozen schools. Of those, there are strong programs at The
New School Parsons School of Design, Pratt Institute, Illinois Institute of
Technology (IIT), and SCAD (Savannah College of Art and Design),
among others. Pratt’s mission statement sums up the general thrust of these
programs: “The Pratt Institute’s graduate program in design management
provides students with a cutting edge, interdisciplinary learning opportunity
that integrates design, technology, and business. The program bridges the
disciplines of design and business management.”

104
 SHINING LIGHT ON THE DARK SIDE

Open Your Eyes

(Live Entertainment, 1997)

TO FOLLOW UP I sent out a few email inquiries to the heads of some of the
DM programs where architectural degrees are being offered, asking what type
of interaction and possible cross-pollination was taking place between the DM
and architecture programs. Bill Lee, chair of the Design Management program
at SCAD, was kind enough to write back. When asked, “Does your Design
Management program interact with the architectural programs in any way?”
he answered, “Yes, I am coleading one of our Collaborative Learning Center
(CLC) projects with one of our architecture professors next quarter for an
outside-the-university client.” As I talked with him to understand more about
that collaboration, Bill framed it in the context of their overall agenda.
“Our program has a strategic focus at the intersection of design,
theory and practice,” said Bill. Design management has evolved threefold
since its inception in the mid-1970s, and with this latest DM iteration, he
explained, “We are actually teaching folks how to design a business by uti-
lizing a blend of an MBA and the creative side of the brain.” Bill added that
a central tenet of that approach is to “understand and characterize problems
in order to create solutions that people care about”. While the breadth
of that challenge seemingly transcends the built environment in which
architecture and interior design operate, Bill still sees great opportunities
with the pairing of the DM and architectural disciplines in his upcoming
CLC. Even though he could not discuss specifics because of the confidential
nature of the outside client, the collaboration will likely involve aspects
of space planning and of furniture and product design. We agreed to speak
again after the CLC was completed.
Bill also suggested that I contact the Design Management Institute
(DMI), located in Boston, MA, and founded 40 years ago as an outgrowth
of the industrial design sector. The website notes that DMI “is an inter-
national membership organization that connects design to business, to
culture, to customers – and to the changing world”. I did talk to Patri-
cia Olshan, program coordinator at the DMI, who noted that while some
of the members are in fact architects and planners, there was no specific
alignment between the DMI and the architectural community at large (see
Figure 6.2).

105
 DAVE BEEM

6.2 US and UK design management theater

Office Space
(20th Century Fox, 1999)

RELIEF AND ELATION: at the end of January I landed my first – and sizeable –
commission! The assignment emerged from a relationship with a former cli-
ent; there are several buildings involved (new, out-of-the-ground as well as
renovation), with a tight time frame in which to design, gain regulatory enti-
tlement, coordinate, procure, and execute. The delivery methods, timing,
and type of budgeting and constructing interfaces are still to be determined.
At my meeting with the owner/client, I explained the philosophy and Euro-
pean underpinnings of my newly formed practice. His response: “Right – you’ll
be doing project management.” Fine for now. I’ll get my business on solid
footing, and then I’ll go out and push the DM cause.
My other current hot potential leads have more depth from an archi-
tectural point of view, more so than straight-up project management. One

106
 SHINING LIGHT ON THE DARK SIDE

for an owner involves an early focus on the regulatory entitlement process of

a $100 million “new urbanism” style project, closely followed by owner’s pro-
gram management services (OPM) for the balance of the project. Another,
even broader opportunity requires analytical planning skills for a very large
multibuilding portfolio project in New York City, with the balance of services
to be determined after the initial phases.
So far, no one among my current clients and prospects has uttered or
written the phrase “design management”. No one appears to know what it
means, what it does, or why it matters. But I live in hope.

Star Wars: The Force Awakens

(Lucasfilm, 2015)

I WANTED TO GET some perspective from the professionals working here in

the US as to what knowledge or opinions might be out there regarding design
management. In the hope that the force – and the light saber of knowledge –
would be with me, I asked each to show me the way.
William G. Ramroth Jr., AIA, is an architect and author who wrote
the game-changing book Project Management for Design Professionals, her-
alded here in the US as the bible for the modern project manager. My well-
thumbed copy has been with me every step of my career since the book was
first published in 2006. Bill spoke with me recently by phone from the Cali-
fornia home that he and his wife designed and built. During the course of
our conversation I brought him up to speed with various links to books and
articles on ‘design management’, a term with which he too was not familiar.
Bill noted that he did a few Google searches of his own, adding that
while he was working (he retired in 2011) he never came across the term
design management used in any way other than as one of the activities of
project management. “For example, many times when we went after a project
we told our prospective client the qualifications and roles of key people on
our design team.” He explained, “Often, one of those key people would be
designated the design manager, responsible for overseeing the design of the
project.” On further reflection, Bill said,

The way the term ‘design manager’ is being used is broader and more
encompassing than in my experience. It seems to stand for a greater

107
 DAVE BEEM

appreciation and understanding of the interconnectedness of the pro-

fessions of architecture, engineering and construction and the impact
of new technologies on the professions, their business practices, and
their relationships with clients. So, I think the use of the term design
manager in this sense is a good thing. I wish I had thought of it!

Stephen Coulthard is a director at Turner & Townsend Ferzan Robbins,

an “independent professional services company specializing in program man-
agement, project management, cost management and consulting across the
property, infrastructure and natural resources sectors”. The result of a 2011
merger with the highly successful US project management firm founded by
Peter Ferzan and John Robbins, the megafirm with British QS roots now has
offices in 38 countries. Stephen holds a master’s degree in engineering from
the University of Cambridge and made the pilgrimage to the colonies in
2013, giving him a transatlantic perspective.
Having been instrumental in the project management of several com-
plex and award-winning projects throughout the UK (including his steward-
ship for the Manchester School of Art, which was nominated for the Sterling
Prize) and in China, Stephen uses his technical background to manage and
achieve “proper scheduling, proper costs, and proper client challenge”. He
sees design management as a subset of project management wherein design
managers “build the quality”, but he questions the appointment of DMs within
the contracted architectural firm (likening that to a fox in the hen house). To
hedge this inherent conflict, Stephen insists that certain procedures be put
into place so that there is proper visibility for all project participants.
Contrasting DM styles and roles across the continents, Stephen noted
that the approach is very much dictated by the structure and sophistication of
the local construction industry. In China, where project speed is king, design,
procurement, and construction activities routinely overlap. “The need for
design management is extremely strong there due to the lack of coordina-
tion between design disciplines who traditionally work in silos, requiring that
those design conflicts be resolved on site,” he explained.
Turning to the US and the UK he sees a similar story. “Many archi-
tects no longer want the responsibility, or indeed have the skills, to provide
a fully coordinated design from concept to construction detailing,” he said.
To address that issue clients now have the option of securing turnkey project
management services from a company such as TTFR. “It takes all management

108
 SHINING LIGHT ON THE DARK SIDE

and design responsibility, and ensures that the client has a single point of
responsibility for a coordinated design that works within their cost and time
constraints,” noted Stephen. Are we on the verge of the next British invasion?
Neil Grassie, RIBA, is a Scottish-born architect who graduated with
BArch and DipArch degrees from the Mackintosh School of Architecture
in Glasgow. He has held the title of regional or global facilities head for sev-
eral large financial institutions, including the Royal Bank of Scotland Group
and Bridgewater Associates. Neil has personally directed many projects of
substantial scale (up to $1.2 billion) for various institutions both here and
abroad, including the Gogarburn Headquarters building for the Royal Bank
of Scotland Group. We recently got together to discuss the use of the term
‘design management’ services from both a UK and a US perspective.
“Architects have moved too far to the ‘art side’ of the project, and this
conscious dilution of their master builder role has led to a gap that was soon
filled by project managers and construction managers,” Neil said. He added
that “the ‘hands on’ tradition of architects such as Frank Lloyd Wright, who
conceived, designed, and executed every aspect of a commission down to the
furniture, has been superseded by architectural firms who only do the design
drawings and leave the detailing and execution to others.” This “gap in lead-
ership” has led to informed clients bringing in UK personnel to “balance
governance and assurance” on their projects, according to Neil. For him, as
for Stephen Coulthard, the design management role in the UK has tradition-
ally been a subset of the project management role. “Clients just want to know
if the project will serve their vision, how long it’s going to take, how much
it’s going to cost, and how they can realize maximum value for their money.”
And he added acerbically, “It’s what architects used to do.”

Pay It Forward
(Warner Bros. Pictures, 2000)

SO WHERE DOES that leave me, approaching the end of the second month of
my new practice? I’m going to continue to advocate for the UK spirit behind
the term ‘design management’ (or perhaps design thinking?) when approaching
potential clients, even though the term appears to be lost in translation here
in the US. My vision is to expand my firm with like-minded, architectur-
ally educated individuals who have the ability to connect the dots and are

109
 DAVE BEEM

Traditional Project

“Design Design Manager Management: Third

Party Services

Thinking”
Construction
Private/ Public Engineering Group
Partnerships

Architecture/Engineering:
Design Manager -
U.S. Design Management agement
Degrees and the Design
Management Institute

Architecture/Engineering:
Design Manager Individual Project/ Job
Traditional NAAB US
Accredited Architectural
Degrees

Traditional Project
Management/ “Owners
Program Management”: Design Manager
Third Party Services Design/Build Full Team
Engagement: Contractors/
Architects/ Engineers/
Construction Specialists
Manager

US Design Management Theater UK Design Management Theater

6.3 The future design management theater

capable of envisioning the full spectrum of the project with all its moving
parts. My view is that such a group is not only needed but also essential to
‘mind the gap’ that exists today between design and contracting services.
Moreover, that collective stewardship creates the foundation that can lead to
greatness for all parties concerned (see Figure 6.3).
Finally, the term ‘darkness’ seems to stem from an implied loss of
design creativity and control that will necessarily accompany the transition
to the ‘dark side’. I would say that such an oversimplification is both anti-
quated and naïve, given the evolving state of project conception and delivery
today. In fact, when you examine the multitiered, technologically complex
modern building delivery construct with its matrix of specialist disciplines,
an argument can be made that a creative and nimble leadership approach to
‘design management’ may be just as essential to the success of the project as
the initial design vision.
Who says that there can’t be light on the dark side?

110
 chapter 7

The Beck Group : An integrated

approach

Rick del Monte

The Beck Group, USA

Rick del Monte, FAIA, LEED AP, is the chief design officer at the Beck
Group. He is responsible for overseeing the proper execution of designs,
assuring design continuity and the highest design quality standards on all
of Beck’s projects. He is passionate about the value of integrated design and
construction.

The Beck Group

THE BECK GROUP CURRENTLY operates as one of the largest integrated

architecture and construction firms in the US. It is unique in the balance
between architecture and construction: the CEO and three of the nine part-
ners are architects. To be successful as an integrated firm Beck feels that it
must provide excellence in both design and construction. The current orga-
nization was formed by the merger of two firms in 1999, with the mission
statement ‘revolutionize the industry and create our future’.

The merger
The Beck Group was founded in 1912 as Central Contracting Company firm
in Houston, Texas, by Henry C. Beck Sr. The current chairman of the com-
pany, Peter Beck, is the grandson of the founder. In the late 1980s a troubled
project led to the loss of most of the firm’s capital, and Peter decided that the
industry was broken. He set out to find a solution to the problem. He decided
that a solution might be found with technology. Starting in the mid-1990s
Beck proceeded to develop DESTINI (Design, Estimating and Integration), a
program that could design, engineer and price a building based on selections

111
 RICK DEL MONTE

in a series of dialogue boxes. After a few years it became apparent that with-
out architects on board Beck would not have the capability to fully use and
develop DESTINI, so in 1999 Beck merged with Urban Architecture, a
46-person office in Dallas also known for its use of technology.
Peter Beck, with Rick del Monte and Kip Daniel, the two original
Urban partners, are the remaining partners from the merger. In 2012 a
38-year-old architect who joined Beck through the Urban merger was named
CEO. The construction volume is currently at $1 billion, with about 40% of
this integrated. The architecture group has expanded to 150 architects in six
offices, and is currently ranked as the fifty-ninth largest architecture firm in
the US based on architectural revenue.

Management of the firm

Beck is a partnership with nine partners, three of them architects. The firm
is organized around a corporate group and six offices. Each office has a direc-
tor, who can be either an architect or a contractor. Each office has an inte-
grated leadership team, consisting of the head of architecture, construction
and preconstruction (estimating). This group is tasked with making sure the
region operates as one company rather than as independent architecture and
construction groups.
The architecture staff in the offices varies from 8 to 80 (Figure 7.1).
Approximately 50% of the architecture volume is integrated work; the rest

7.1 The Beck workplace

112
 THE BECK GROUP: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH

is done as a standard third-party practice. The larger offices are organized

into a series of studios based on project types: health care, faith-based, mixed
use, entertainment, and so forth. The smaller offices typically have one or
two specialties. The corporate office is located in Dallas and architecture is
overseen by a chief design officer, who oversees design, and an operations
officer, who oversees the finances. These are the two senior partners from
the original Urban Architecture office. Their role is not only to ensure the
performance of each office but also to ensure a high level of cooperation and
sharing of staff among the offices.
The profitability of each service is tracked independently to make
sure that they remain competitive in the marketplace. Without this track-
ing it would be difficult to know how efficiently each group is being run.
The employee bonuses are, however, based on the overall profitability of
the firm, not the profitability of each discipline. Integrated accounting
has been a challenge, and the architecture group now uses a construction-
based accounting system called CMIC. Adapting this system to an hourly
based architecture practice proved to be a significant challenge, but it has
allowed the firm to account for the profitability of projects on an inte-
grated basis rather than maintaining two sets of numbers.
The structure of the firm has been set up to maximize sharing of
resources and collaboration. Both the employee and partner distributions are
based on the overall profitability of the company, not the profitability of indi-
vidual departments or offices. The success of integrated projects is based on
the overall client satisfaction and profitability of the project.
Beck spends a lot of time recruiting and training employees. To develop
an integrated mindset within a fractured industry it is easier to hire graduating
students who have not developed negative attitudes towards other team mem-
bers. Once a person has developed in this system, the firm works hard to provide
training and a clear career path so they will continue their career with Beck.
Internally the goal has been to break down the artificial barriers between design
and construction and to blur the lines between the two roles. Seating arrange-
ments are by teams and not by discipline. Everyone shares the same open office
seating arrangement. Young architects will spend between nine months and two
years in the field working with a construction team to understand how a project
they have drawn gets turned into a building. Salary and bonus reviews are con-
ducted jointly to make sure that compensation is balanced, and focused on the
overall success of the team, not just the success of the department.

113
 RICK DEL MONTE

Technology
The internal development of DESTINI was one of the main drivers for the
merger with Urban Architecture. After the merger Beck continued its devel-
opment for another five years, building a high level of detail and intelligence
into the application. It could apply building codes, determine the correct
number of toilets and elevators and design the mechanical system. However,
this high level of detail and intelligence came at the cost of very limited flex-
ibility, so a new product was developed. This application was called DProfiler,
and the decision was made to sell it commercially in 2006 (see Figure 7.2).
The concept of DProfiler was to build a very simple 3D massing model
and link it to component assemblies tied to a cost database. In this manner
the program can infer that a single line represents a floor plate that contains
concrete, reinforcing steel, sprinklers, mechanical ducts and so forth. The
individual line items in the components can be easily adjusted to provide

7.2 Technology DProfiler

114
 THE BECK GROUP: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH

great flexibility. Creating a 3D estimate at a conceptual level of design allows

a team to develop multiple Go/No Go scenarios, which might include scenar-
ios such as structured vs. on-grade parking, site location, multiple low build-
ings vs. fewer taller buildings and so forth. A typical scenario review would
involve a team of decision makers working in real time with a model, examin-
ing alternatives in order to come to an overall direction for the project.
Beyond the conceptual phase the design moves into Revit. The
advantage of an integrated organization is that there are no barriers for the
sharing of information between design and construction. The model can be
optimized by the design team for its use in estimating and coordination. Typi-
cal architecture firms optimize the BIM for use in creating a set of 2D contract
documents; in an integrated environment the model has to be optimized for
all of the design and construction activities.
One of the challenges of working in an integrated environment is that
the quality of the drawings is no longer measured on the ‘standard of care’
that applies to typical professional services. Beck is held accountable for all
coordination, as well as any errors and omissions, which often falls to the
owner in a standard process. So the drawings must be developed to a higher
standard. The initial assumption that we could draw less in an integrated
environment has proven to be incorrect.

The start of integration: Studio i

AFTER THE MERGER the immediate question was how to bring the two firms
together. In order to develop the integrated process a small group of archi-
tects and contractors were brought together under the name Studio i. Their
first task was to design and build a new office space for themselves in a sepa-
rate building from the main offices. It took them six months to build out their
4,000 square-foot office. Despite some initial struggles the space turned out
well and won a Dallas AIA award. Working through the initial struggles and
developing trust among team members have proven to be one of the keys to
a successful integrated project.
Soon after finishing their offices they began work on Pinnacle Park,
a 250,000 square-foot corporate office building (Figure 7.3). The owner
needed to move into the space 11 months from the start of design, and this
compressed schedule gave the team the freedom to experiment with the

115
 RICK DEL MONTE

7.3 Pinnacle Park

process. Subcontractors were brought in at the start of the job to participate

in the development of the drawings. The shop drawings for many compo-
nents were incorporated into the construction documents, creating a series
of pre-approved components. This allowed significant overlap between the
completion of the documents and the start of construction. The end result

116
 THE BECK GROUP: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH

was that the building was completed on time, with a lease rate 10% below
the competing buildings in the area. The relationships and working processes
developed on the small office space allowed the team to succeed on a much
larger scale. The team was also able to incorporate DESTINI, Beck’s propri-
etary BIM software, in the development of the schedule and budget. Their
input led to the evolution of DESTINI into DProfiler.
At the end of the project, Studio i was integrated into the Dallas office.
The lessons learned from Studio i were used to create the Beck Integrated
Practice Manual. It laid out the integrated process and four fundamentals
that need to be implemented on every integrated project:

1 Define the criteria before you design the job.

The team must focus on developing a clear game plan before commit-
ting to a design or a budget on a project. Some projects may start with
a Charrette or conceptual design to help an owner define the project,
but before moving into schematic design the team needs to have the
criteria clearly defined. They need to understand and align Beck’s and
the owner’s standards for success. They must diligently and consistently
spend the appropriate amount of time preparing a program, budget, and
expectation of quality through outline specifications, as well as ensuring
that they have defined a schedule for the project.

2 Select the integrated project leader (IPL) at the beginning.

Every project must have an IPL as every good team must have a cap-
tain. The IPL needs to be a facilitator, a key point of contact with the
owner and the internal orchestrator of the team. The IPL is the person
ultimately responsible for the integration of the team, the application
of integration standards and the overall delivery. This person must be a
skilled technician, and an even better leader.

3 Collocate the leaders of the team.

Living together allows for quicker responses, makes input from all mem-
bers easier, speeds up trust and on-boarding and creates a sense of own-
ership of the project for the entire team much earlier. As part of this
strategy it is vital for key members of the team to not only live together
but also involve each other in all aspects of the project. While Beck is
building a ‘firm-wide’ approach to architecture, making it possible to

117
 RICK DEL MONTE

leverage the design talent across the entire company when necessary, it
is vital that the leaders of the project be collocated to speed up trust and
effectiveness during the implementation of projects.

4 Establish the key team early and keep them together.

Keeping the team together is as important as selecting the team early.
Keeping teams together means less opportunity for communication gaps
and fractured decision making. Teams develop chemistry over time,
and in a real sense it would be good to have teams work together over
multiple projects as cross-disciplined teams. While multiple projects
together would be ideal, it is essential that once a team is established at
the beginning of the job, team members are not removed from the team
midstream; this halts momentum, causes losses in information and is
distracting for the team and owner.

Using the fundamentals and the lessons learned from Studio i, Beck began
expanding its integrated services across the company. The integrated portion
of the work has gradually expanded to make up 50% of the overall volume of
the company and 100% of the healthcare work. From this work, case studies
were prepared on multiple projects so the lessons learned on those projects
could be shared with other team members. Ahead are two of these case studies.

Case study 1 – federal office building

Start date: March 2011

Completion date: April 2013
Building type: 9-story, 252,000 SF office tower + 1,000 space parking deck;
final project cost: $75,000,000
Project location: Atlanta, GA

Setting the stage

This federal agency had bought past projects using a design/build approach. They
preferred it over conventional design/bid/build, but were frustrated with the poor
relationships between construction and architecture firms who formed ‘shotgun
marriages’ for individual projects. The federal agency shortlisted five teams, includ-
ing Beck, for consideration to design and build its newest office tower on a campus

118
 THE BECK GROUP: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH

in Atlanta. Each team’s proposal included a design response to the requirements

listed in an outline specification document, based on a similar building directly
adjacent to the new building site. Beck proposed a design that exceeded the
quality of the adjacent building in many aspects, including enhancement to
the main lobby area, the landscaping package and selected finishes.
The proposals included a lump sum cost for design and construction ser-
vices. Beck did not propose the lowest cost, ranking second lowest. Beck’s schedule
was very aggressive, listing a completion date two months prior to the federal agen-
cy’s stipulated date. This was an important factor, as the agency was eager to move
into the new building and stop paying rent for off-campus office space. During the
project interview the federal agency felt the culture of the Beck team was similar
to its culture, and it was clear the team members knew each other well. Despite
Beck’s disadvantage of being the only team that had not previously worked on
the campus, the federal agency ‘took a chance’ and awarded Beck the job.

Team structure and management

The architectural team was led by a project manager with extensive expe-
rience working on integrated Beck projects, with a deep knowledge of the
construction process. The design principal was out of the Austin office and
very experienced with office buildings of this scale. The team started the
project in the Atlanta office, working closely with the head estimator to help
develop the cost for the project. Once construction started the entire Atlanta
architecture team moved out to the job site. The construction project man-
ager was a senior Beck employee and was made the integrated project leader.
This position is responsible for overseeing all aspects of the project, including
the client relationship. The position can be filled by either an architect or
contractor. In this project the position was really shared between the two key
individuals leading the construction and architecture teams.

Scope and budget management

When the federal agency notified Beck that it had won the project, it also
informed it that the budget included in the proposal was the final contract
amount. The team had expected budget refinement when the federal agency
provided further detail about the project. Beck’s proposal included a fairly
developed design package, closer to a schematic design than just a conceptual
package. This allowed Beck to get pricing input from the major subcontrac-
tors, bringing early validation to the larger budget items.

119
 RICK DEL MONTE

The journey leading to the successful completion was not an easy one.
At points issues arose that threatened the success of the project. The team
credits their willingness and ability to collaborate as a major success factor.
A significant challenge was a lack of clarity across the Beck team, their
consultants and the specification writers on what they were contractually obli-
gated to provide. There were many documents that collectively encompassed
the project scope, including the bridging documents, outline specifications, a
written narrative in the proposal and the request for proposal requirements.
A lack of coordination between the specification writer and the own-
er’s outline specifications caused a significant impact. A lesson learned for
the team was to place greater focus on coordinating across these documents.
The team bought several of the major trades under a design-build
agreement to help develop the design while adhering to the budget. Early
in the design process RFPs were sent to mechanical/plumbing, electrical, fire
protection and curtain wall subcontractors. Four to five firms for each scope
were interviewed. Selection criteria were based on cost, but also heavily
considered qualifications included their BIM capabilities and ability to col-
laborate. The mechanical/plumbing and electrical firms were selected under
a guaranteed maximum price, not a lump sum agreement, allowing for greater
cost transparency. Images of the project can be seen in Figure 7.4.

7.4 Federal office building

120
 THE BECK GROUP: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH

7.4 continued

Reflection

COMMUNICATING THE CONTRACTUALLY agreed design scope across the

team is challenging yet critical to integrated delivery.
The design/assist process for the mechanical scope was a particularly
important aspect of keeping the project within budget. When proposals were
first received for the mechanical scope, all of the bids were higher than the
target budget. The lowest number was about $1 million over the target. Even
though these prices were based on early design information, this was a con-
siderable portion of the budget to reduce. The selected subcontractor was
awarded the project, provided they worked with the design team to create a
functioning system that could be purchased for the target budget. The design-
build team was able to find efficiencies in the design and delivered it for the
target amount. The team considers this collaborative effort a major accom-
plishment and a strong factor in the project’s success.
Although the nonmajor trades were not bought using a design-build
agreement, the team collaborated with bidding subcontractors to establish
a final scope that met the design requirements and fitted within the budget.
Door hardware, always an important scope, was an example of collaboration

121
 RICK DEL MONTE

between subcontractors, architecture and construction. One of the subcon-

tractors was brought in to collaborate with Beck, working through coordina-
tion issues and finalizing the scope. The job was not committed to them;
they still had to compete on cost, but they had input on the design and the
final scope. They ultimately were the lowest bidder. This may seem similar
to what takes place on conventional construction projects but the difference
was the close involvement of the design team in the process. These coordina-
tion meetings took place on-site with the entire team, allowing decisions to
be made quickly. The team emphasized the value of reviewing subcontractor
scope packages with the design and construction team prior to release. This
helped make sure everyone was on the same page, and to catch gaps in scope
that may otherwise have been missed.
The integrated project leader was tasked with deciding what to do
when the team could not reach agreement. The IPL for this project was a
project executive with a background in construction. He tried to judge fairly
and in the best interest of the project on issues where the design and con-
struction team members were in disagreement. This was a difficult task at
times, but a necessary one to maintain balance of the added risks and respon-
sibilities Beck assumes on integrated projects.
The Beck team compiled a list of the major value-added items they
delivered to the federal agency over the course of the project. These items
include design enhancements that were included in the original proposal,
absorption of owner-driven schedule impacts, and other items that the team
accomplished through integration.

Fast-track schedule challenges

Once Beck was awarded the project the team was released promptly to begin
design work. The schedule was ‘fast-track’, with construction beginning on
the early packages before the rest of the project’s design was complete. The
schedule was compressed further with the addition of a floor to the building
by the federal agency midway through the schematic design phase. The proj-
ect budget was increased for the added scope, but no extension was given to
the federal agency’s contractual completion date. The permitting process for
the city also delayed the start of the project. The Beck team worked closely
with the city to mitigate this impact, allowing them to start construction on
the parking garage. The main tower would not start without the issuance
of the storm water permit, which was delayed two months. This delay was

122
 THE BECK GROUP: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH

absorbed into the schedule and did not extend the completion date. The
schedule demands put considerable pressure on the Beck team. It was clear
that the time constraints would be the one of largest challenges facing the
project.
Efficiency and good communication were central to completing the
project successfully. The team put priority on collocating the construction
and design team as much as possible. The team attributes collocation to
fostering collaboration, multidisciplinary thinking and rapid decision mak-
ing. The team initially collocated in the Beck Atlanta office during early
design and preconstruction. When construction started, the architecture staff
moved on site.
The on-site collocation was critical to meeting the compressed sched-
ule. The fast-track schedule caused the concrete structure to be poured prior
to the completion of the rest of the design. The designers were actively
involved in the field with edge form layout to help coordinate with the artic-
ulations in the curtain wall. In-slab conduits were also an area of heavy coor-
dination. The design team gave direction in the field for outlet needs where
they were not yet shown on the documents. Spare conduits were included to
provide some flexibility. The design team’s involvement with on-site coordi-
nation was constant and critical to fast-track delivery.
The early involvement of the major trades also proved critical to
meeting the schedule. The mechanical subcontractor and engineer espe-
cially worked well together. The subcontractor was heavily involved in the
mechanical design process, allowing them to begin shop drawings before the
design was finalized. This resulted in an expedited shop-drawing process,
where in some cases, completed shops were produced within five days of the
design being issued.
BIM was a significant part of the team’s coordination process. Not only
used for 3D coordination and clash detection, it also helped the team visual-
ize what the completed project would look like. The 3D visualization brought
light to coordination issues that were not likely to be recognized early through
a conventional 2D process. This allowed the team to be more proactive and
work through issues prior to the work going in. This helped the flow of work
in the field as well as reducing rework. The Revit model was used to extract
layout points that were loaded into the robotic total stations. The radiused
perimeter of the building and walls that were not square to each other made
layout a difficult task. The Beck team did layout for many of the trades who

123
 RICK DEL MONTE

did not have robotic station capabilities. The accuracy and efficiency of the
robotic layout helped the work keep pace with the fast-track schedule.

Team communication and staffing lessons learned

The team credits their ability to collaborate and work across disciplines as
the key to getting this project completed under challenging circumstances.
While they did this well, there are areas where they would do things differ-
ently to improve communication.
The team recognized early that frequent communication would be
important to keeping alignment of scope and budget as the design progressed.
They set up a standing weekly meeting to review details during design. How-
ever, when attendance at these meetings began to fall off, problems ensued. A
key lesson learned was to get more early input from field superintendent staff.
This can be difficult sometimes, given the limited availability of superinten-
dents to engage in preconstruction and drawing review. However, experience
has shown that construction superintendent input into the design documents
is extremely valuable.
Because of the tight schedule, the team felt pressure to start design-
ing immediately. In hindsight, the team should have been more deliberate
up front to strategize and develop a more thorough process plan. The tight
schedule and complexity of the project led to confusion at times. More orga-
nization within the decision-making process, such as implementing a decision-
making log, would have helped bring clarity across the project team.
The team strongly emphasized the importance of having the right
people in the right positions as a key to making integration work. The federal
agency team had a good culture of working together and doing what was
necessary to get the job done. It was important that everyone on the team
had this attitude.
The team had the right people, but at times they were understaffed,
which caused considerable stress. On reflection, the team noted that accom-
plishing success at the cost of high stress levels is not sustainable. They
believe that with additional resources dedicated at the right points during
the project, stress levels would have been reduced.
It was important to maintain engagement from the estimating staff
throughout the buyout process. The preconstruction manager had a deep
understanding of the design intent but stepped out of the project to focus on
other projects earlier than was ideal. Keeping the preconstruction manager

124
 THE BECK GROUP: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH

engaged for longer would have helped bring continuity to the complex pro-
cess of finalizing scope and budget.
The design team felt they were at times scrambling to keep up with the
schedule. This required all of the architects, including the project manager, to
hold production responsibilities. An additional production architect on the
team would have freed up the project manager to provide valuable coordination
with consultants and the specification writer. This person was not covered in the
architectural budget, a significant reason why the role was not added. The team’s
lesson learned is that on fast-track projects the design staffing plan and budget
need to adjust accordingly to meet the demands of a compressed schedule.
During the construction phase the team should have had a dedicated
quality control person to catch items that may otherwise be missed in the
rush. The project would have also benefited from a dedicated MEP superin-
tendent as well as in-house MEP expertise within the Atlanta office to assist
with preconstruction and provide a peer review for the MEP documents.
The team acknowledges that while these changes would be in the best
interest of this project, the resource needs across the firm make it difficult to
have exactly the right resources available when needed. Considering the risk
Beck assumes when we integrate, it is important to do what we can to give
priority to these projects.

Case study 2 – university residence hall

Start date: fall 2011

Completion date: summer 2013
Building type: 11-story, 193,000 SF university residence tower; final project
cost: $34,500,000
Project location: Florida

Setting the stage

Beck has a 14-year relationship with this university and over the years has
built four dormitory towers and several other small projects for it. While Beck
had completed smaller integrated projects on the campus, the university was
initially not interested in integrated delivery for larger projects. Their interest
in integrated delivery grew when they learned about the AIA integrated proj-
ect delivery (IPD) process from their colleagues at other universities. They

125
 RICK DEL MONTE

also learned about the potential value of prefabrication. The university would
experiment with both on its newest student housing tower, Residence Hall 7.
Five teams were invited to respond to an request for qualifications for
a new residence hall, specifying an IPD process for the delivery method. The
university selection criteria included team member qualifications, building
type experience, IPD experience and BIM. Beck was determined to be more
qualified than the other teams proposing and was awarded the project.
Initially the university was hesitant with Beck Architecture serving
as architect. They did not feel Beck’s design team had relevant experience,
and were not yet comfortable with the team’s capabilities. Beck brought the
university to their Tampa and Dallas offices in order to meet the staff and gain
a better understanding of the firm’s resources and experiences. That assured
the university that Beck Architecture could do the job.

Client changes
The student residence tower was a straightforward project with an achiev-
able budget. Beck’s Tampa team had built several residence towers before
and knew how much they cost. What made this project challenging was the
schedule and, in particular, late and frequent changes made by the client.
This was not unexpected. The decision-making process among the various
university departments that were stakeholders in design and construction
matters was known to be complex and late changes were not uncommon.
The largest change to the project scope was the addition of three floors
to the building during schematic design. This raised the building from 8 to
11 floors. The university also wanted a major prefabrication element incor-
porated into the project. Exterior prefabricated wall systems were evaluated
and determined to not be a good fit for the project. After consideration the
university was quickly sold on the concept of prefabricated modular bath-
room units. These bathrooms are built in a manufacturing facility, delivering
a superior quality product in comparison to traditional on-site construction.
The repetition of similar bathroom units in the building created an opportu-
nity for the pods to potentially save time.
The decision to move forward with the pods was made during sche-
matic design. Eggrock, an Oldcastle company, was selected through a com-
petitive bid process between the three largest prefab bathroom manufacturers.
The units were not a lower-cost option than conventional construction;
however, it was felt that they would provide schedule and safety improve-
ments. Both the change in project scope and the inclusion of prefabricated

126
 THE BECK GROUP: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH

bathroom units caused the design process to compress. The team had to back
up and make adjustments for this additional work within the original design
schedule because the construction start date remained the same.
The inclusion of the pods created more of an impact than the addi-
tion of three floors. Modifying the already approved room layout to accom-
modate the pods presented a major design challenge for the team. Pods can
provide efficiencies and time savings when room layouts are designed initially
with pods in mind. However, these efficiencies are hard to achieve when
an existing room layout is modified to accommodate them. Minimizing pod
types/configurations, coordinating with shaft wall and rated wall assemblies
adjacent to the pods, and access are all factors that require consideration to
make the pod installation efficient. The team did what it could to accom-
modate the pods within the established room layout but had to add walls to
achieve shaft wall and fire wall ratings as well as other additional work. In the
end, the pods did not bring the hoped-for time savings to the project.

Teamwork
The majority of the Beck team had just completed another integrated proj-
ect together, a medical building for the University of South Florida. It was
a complex job that taught the team a lot about integration, as well as about
each other. While working together helped build familiarity, more important
was the time spent together away from work. Friendships were built through
mountain bike riding and socializing outside of the office. Based on those
experiences this team proved that friendship and trust aren’t just soft and
illusive concepts. Combined with equal parts competence, this team regards
its trust of one another as the key to the successfully delivery of this project
under challenging circumstances.
Beck’s Tampa architecture group grew their staff for this project.
Growing the department at the same time that project production needed to
begin was challenging and caused a slow start. This challenge, compounded
by client changes, resulted in some of the design packages being rushed.
These were issued without the level of review and completeness that the
team would have liked. Building from incomplete information was challeng-
ing, although the construction staff knew the tough position the design team
was in. There were times when the construction staff helped out, picking up
the slack, and everyone on the team worked hard and contributed. While
there were disagreements and frustrations along the way, everyone was work-
ing towards the same goal. Images of the project can be seen in Figure 7.5.

127
7.5 UoF, Tampa
 THE BECK GROUP: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH

Reflection

WHEN TEAMS ARE able to continue working together on multiple projects,

they generally perform better as they become more familiar with each other.
The team worked closely together in groups to work through the
issues – and the group meetings were frequent because there were many
problems. However, the team viewed these as everyone’s problems to solve.
These were not architectural, estimating and construction problems; they
were ‘just problems’. The architectural project manager commented that the
most powerful part of their team was how quickly they could resolve issues. If
a late mistake in the plans was discovered and the best solution was adjusting
a partition location, moving a sleeve or something similar, he could give that
direction and it would be done immediately. The team exhibited trust that
his decision was best for the project and did not question ulterior motives.
The strength of the team allowed the integrated project leader, who
also served as the construction senior project manager, to focus on managing
the client’s needs and the financials. It was unnecessary for him to officiate
disagreements between the construction and design staff, as IPLs are some-
times forced to do. The team understood the project goals well enough to
work through those issues on their own.
A key member of the project team was the lead estimator. He was the
‘glue’ that kept the design in line with the budget. He was deeply involved
during design development phase and helped the design team work towards
target budgets. He also worked closely with the construction staff on the sub-
contractor buyout. He kept a hand in the project throughout and is cred-
ited as being a significant part of guiding the project to a successful financial
outcome.

Project partners
Under the project’s IPD agreement the major subcontractors and design con-
sultants were brought on early as partners. They all put a portion of their fee
at risk in a shared pool, which the client would match at the completion
of the project if the project goals were met, and the cost did not rise above
the target budget. The subcontractors and design consultants were selected
based on qualifications to collaborate effectively and be a strong member of
an integrated team. Over the course of the project it became clear that some
firms were better at doing this than others.

129
 RICK DEL MONTE

One example in particular was the team’s experience working with the
MEP engineer as compared to its experience working with the light gauge
framing and drywall subcontractor. The difference in their expertise was not
as significant as the difference in their approach to integration. The MEP
engineer was not collaborative. He was reluctant to spend time exploring
options during conceptual design. In short, he wanted to be given back-
grounds, at which point he would do his design and hand it over to be priced.
Despite efforts by Beck and the rest of the team to get him to change his
behavior, he did not. He provided a duct layout that was not coordinated
with other elements of the building, causing the mechanical subcontractor
and Beck to spend considerable time coordinating and rerouting the duct.
The engineer claimed he did not have the money or the time to engage fur-
ther in the process. When issues arose his response was inadequate.
The light gauge framing and drywall subcontractor took the opposite
approach. The owner of the firm directly engaged in the project. He met fre-
quently with the architects to understand design intent and provided working
solutions that were also affordable. His close collaboration with the architects
helped them to more efficiently complete the document set. This was the case
with the layout plans. During a work session he indicated the dimensions that
he needed and the ones he did not. He also highlighted sections and details
that were critical and the information needed on them. This allowed the archi-
tects to focus on what was needed for construction rather than spending time
detailing information that was not required. These kinds of working relation-
ship with the subcontractors allowed the design team to draw more efficiently.
Beck considers this subcontractor an extension of its team. Since the
completion of this project he has become a common fixture in Beck’s archi-
tecture office, reviewing plans and SketchUp models. It is critical on inte-
grated projects to identify consultants and subcontractors who are able to
work in an integrated environment.

Value of integration
At the completion of the project the team had successfully met the four goals
established by the client at the onset of the project.

■ Schedule – The project finished early and absorbed the addition of three
floors and several owner-directed changes, and accommodated an accel-
erated furniture move-in date.

130
 THE BECK GROUP: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH

■ Value – The final cost per square foot was lower than any of the other
four residence towers Beck built on the campus. The project included
several design enhancements that others did not, including a solar hot
water heating system and a LEED Silver rating.
■ BIM – The team delivered BIM content in accordance with the univer-
sity’s BIM execution plan. It provided coordination value during design
and construction and was delivered in a format that could assist with
facility management after turnover.
■ No change orders – The client did not receive any contractor- or
architectural-initiated change orders.

The team feels strongly that a nonintegrated team could not have met these
goals, especially the schedule.

Lessons learned
The project was successful but the team would do certain things differ-
ently in the future to improve the process. The design team would dedicate
more resources early in the design process to develop the documents to a
more complete level earlier than they did. The challenges they experienced
while completing the design as the work was going in made it clear that
early and complete information is fundamental to maximizing the efficien-
cies of integration. To help develop the design efficiently, they would also
incorporate into the project schedule an appropriate amount of time for
drawing review and input from the building trades prior to issuing a set.
The team felt it would have been valuable to develop an integrated
delivery plan to build a clear understanding of the project objectives across
all the team members and how they were going to meet these objectives. This
would include Beck’s criteria for success, a shared financial plan, integrated
staffing, project challenges and the team’s solutions to meeting them. This
plan would bring additional structure to the integrated process.

Conclusion – final thoughts on the integrated firm

IT HAS BEEN 17 years since the merger and it has been a challenging but highly
rewarding time. Few architects or contractors get the ability to look behind the
curtain and see the operational and financial structure of the other profession.

131
 RICK DEL MONTE

Understanding others’ financial motivation and sharing a common bottom line

go a long way towards helping teams work together more effectively.
It takes time to change the culture of organizations in an industry used
to being in adversarial relationships with the other professions. The more
teams work together, the more effective they become. Once they have an
opportunity to work on an integrated project, very few people are willing
to go back to a traditional adversarial process. The integrated profitability
has not been dramatically higher than a traditional third-party process, but
the experience has been better for both the clients and the staff. Some final
thoughts for those considering a merger with another group:

Choose your partner carefully: do not underestimate the fundamental

differences between architects and contractors. For an architect it is
critical that a potential construction partner cares about design quality
at least as much as they do. Likewise an architect needs to care about
budget, schedule and process to be an effective partner on the team.
Before the merger Beck and Urban spent nine months in intense dia-
logue, including cultural and psychological profiles of all the partners.
Without this cultural alignment the other challenges would have been
impossible to overcome.
People matter more than processes: even with the best processes, people
who are not collaborative will disrupt any team. Selecting the right
people and spending time to develop the relationships among the team
members are as important as optimizing the process. It is also important to
make sure that employee incentives encourage collaboration and overall
project success rather than the success of the individual disciplines.
Changing the building industry is a huge challenge: there are deeply
entrenched institutions that are based on the separation of architec-
ture and construction: university departments, professional associa-
tions and program managers, to name a few. The idea that architects
and contractors can work as one firm to build a building can be a very
difficult idea to sell. However, the focus on collaboration has really
accelerated in the last five years, and the AIA’s integrated project
delivery model has helped to open the eyes of many owners to alterna-
tive forms of project delivery. In the future these alternative delivery
models will continue to grow, offering an owner a way to reduce the
risk and improve the efficiency of the delivery process.

132
 chapter 8

Veidekke : Collaborative planning

in design

Vegard Knotten and Fredrik Svalestuen

Vegard Knotten, MSc, has over 20 years of experience in the AEC industry and is
currently pursuing an industrial PhD at the Faculty of Architecture and Fine Arts
at the Norwegian University of Technology and Science. The topic of his PhD
is the early stages of building design. In addition to his PhD work he is currently
employed by Veidekke Entreprenør as head of design management development.

Fredrik Svalestuen, MSc, is currently pursuing an industrial PhD at the Fac-

ulty of Engineering, Science and Technology at the Norwegian University of
Technology and Science. The topic of his PhD is communication in design.
In addition to his PhD work he is currently employed by Veidekke Entre-
prenør as a site manager.

Veidekke

VEIDEKKE IS THE largest Norwegian construction company and the fourth

largest in Scandinavia. Veidekke’s business involves a network of Scandi-
navian construction operations, rehabilitation work, major heavy construc-
tion contracts and also the development of dwellings for the company’s own
account as well as buildings for public use.
Veidekke’s roots go back to 1863 in Denmark (H. Hoffmann & Sønner)
and in 1896 in Norway (Høyer Ellefsen). Veidekke was founded as a company on
February 6, 1936 by Nico S. Beer and Gustav Piene. In its early years Veidekke
was primarily concerned with constructing roads and laying cobblestone. When
the Second World War broke out the company fulfilled all signed contracts
and then shut down all operations until after the war. In 1948 the small and
virtually unknown Veidekke won the contract for construction of runways at

133
 VEGARD KNOTTEN & FREDRIK SVALESTUEN

Stavanger Airport, Sola. This was the first of a number of major airport contracts
for Veidekke and the start of its growth into a major construction business. The
company’s core activities are now linked with construction, property develop-
ment and industrial operations (asphalt/aggregates and road maintenance).
Veidekke has developed expertise in concrete works, carpentry and road opera-
tions and has a clear ambition to be a leader in these market segments.
In an effort to increase efficiency and effectiveness (Samset, 2010) of
both construction and design Veidekke started to look at a new way to conduct
the design phase of construction projects. This resulted in the implementation
of an approach called collaborative planning in design (CPD). In this chapter
the key elements of the approach are described, supported with examples.

Collaborative planning and collaborative

planning in design

IN 2002 VEIDEKKE started exploring means to increase productivity and reduce

sick days, with an improvement process inspired by lean construction called
collaborative planning. Implementing tools like the Last Planner System and
focusing on collaboration led to better control over the production process.
Letting the workers plan their own work increased their responsibility and also
their involvement in their work. This change also resulted in workers taking
fewer days off sick. The Norwegian skilled workers are independent and are
used to having a high degree of involvement in the way they solve their tasks.
However, they were failing to deliver to schedule because of late or missing
information from the design team. We found that the designers could not keep
up with the demand from production. Therefore, Veidekke started exploring
the means to increase productivity in the design phase and at the same time
started to bridge the gap between the designers and the constructors.
A workgroup of design managers in Veidekke started working with the
task of adapting the work of production towards design. This was undertaken
based on the principles of collaborative planning. The work resulted in a guide
to collaborative planning in design (Veidekke, 2013) for use by the company.
The original guide is written in Norwegian, and the English version was made
for the International Group for Lean Construction (IGLC) workshop in 2014.
Unfortunately it has some peculiar translations of the technical terms of the pro-
cess. We will therefore try to explain CPD with the most commonly used terms.

134
 COLLABORATIVE PLANNING IN DESIGN

Theoretical background to collaborative planning in design (CPD)

The theoretical background of CPD is based on five foundations. They are
listed here, and will not be discussed further in this chapter.

1 Both design and production are value-creating processes consisting of

transformations and flows (Koskela, 2000).
2 Both design and production can be managed through the Last Planner
System (Ballard, 2000).
3 There can be pooled, sequential, reciprocal and intensive interdepen-
dencies between tasks (Bell & Kozolowski, 2002; Thompson, 1967).
4 Both design and production are logistical, economic and social processes
(Andersen et al., 2008).
5 Dialogue is a precondition for design (Bølviken et al., 2010).

Applying collaborative planning in design (CPD)

CPD IS BASED on four major areas, as shown in Figure 8.1:

■ Start-up process
■ Scheduling system
■ Obstacle (constraint) analysis
■ Meeting structure.

The start-up process

Each time a new projects starts it is important to transform the chosen group
of people into a team. In Veidekke this is done by having a start-up meeting,
or a start-up session. The duration and the agenda will vary according to the
project, but these events are highly focused on team building and the further
development of the team. Each major participant of the project needs to get
to know each other, not only what technical knowledge they have but also
their interpersonal skills (e.g. team roles, such as plant, research investigator,
coordinator, shaper, monitor evaluator, team worker, implementer, completer
and specialist; Meredith Belbin, 2010). We know that a good mix of skills is
preferable for a fully functioning team, and knowing the diversity of the skill
sets in the team is important when it comes to setting the team roles in a
project. A social gathering with dinner and some games to increase the trust

135
 VEGARD KNOTTEN & FREDRIK SVALESTUEN

MAIN ELEMENTS

The start-up process The obstacle analysis

Start-up meeting/assembly 6 conditions for sound designing
● Go through description ● Design basis
● Make a phase schedule for design ● Expectations and requirements
● Draw up a group agreement ● Dialogue
(joint goals) ● Decisions
● Clarify roles and expectations ● Team
● Set up the project team ● Methods and tools

The scheduling system Meetings structure

Progress plans/schedules General meetings
● Overall progress plan (entire project) ● Start-up assembly
● Phase schedule, design ● The design meeting
● Weekly schedule (weeks 5–9) Special meetings
● Lookahead schedule (weeks 10–15) ● Section meetings/thematic meetings
Other schedules ● Meetings between the architect and
● Purchasing schedule the consultant engineer from
● Decision schedule construction
● Meetings between the production
section and the architect

8.1 The main elements of CPD

between the different participants usually follows this process. Setting the
goal for the project and the rules for the team is another important agenda in
the start-up meeting. By involving all the team members in the goal-setting
process they become more committed to the goal and hence they are more
likely to succeed (Lunenburg, 2011).
The project manager is responsible for the entire start-up process;
however, because the design phase usually starts before the production phase,
the design manager is responsible for the start-up meeting. The participants
of the meeting are what Veidekke refers to as the core team, which con-
sists of those with the largest interest in the project – that is Veidekke’s site
manager, client, architect, engineering consultants and the largest of the

136
 COLLABORATIVE PLANNING IN DESIGN

subcontractors. The result of this meeting is a ‘team-charter’ document that

describes the goal for the project and a set of rules for behavior within the
project team. Another output from this initial meeting is the first design
schedule.

The scheduling system

The scheduling system of the design phase is closely linked to the production
schedules. Figure 8.2 shows this connection as it is described in the Veidekke
guide to CPD. The master schedule is usually produced in the tender phase,
and is part of the contracting document with the client. This schedule sets
the milestones for the project, including the start and end dates and other
critical dates in between. Based on this schedule the purchasing schedule and
the phase schedule are then produced.
For design the first schedule is made in the start-up meeting. This is done
in collaboration with all participants of the design team, contractors, subcon-
tractors and the client. Each team member has different colored sticky notes
with their deliveries written on them. These are placed on a wall in sequence
by the individuals. Important dates concerning the construction start date and
end are usually already set, and individuals will place his or her colored notes

Plan levels
Master schedule

Purchasing schedule

Delivery schedule
Public permission and proceedings etc.

Phase schedule, design Phase schedule, production Strategic plans

Decision schedule Lookahead schedule,

production – Week 5–9
Operational
Lookahead schedule, design
Weekly work plan, plans
Week 10–15
production – Week 5–9

Weekly work plan, design

Team plan, production
Week 5–9
Week 1

Design production Production

8.2 The scheduling system for CPD

137
 VEGARD KNOTTEN & FREDRIK SVALESTUEN

8.3 Collaborative planning from the Sjetnan Nedre project

between these dates. As the notes appear, the team starts to identify and figure
out the interdependencies of various tasks, challenging each other to link their
activities together. This process involves a degree of compromise as the colored
notes are repositioned to better represent the process.
Figure 8.3 shows members of the core team on the project participating
in the process of making the phase schedule for one of Veidekke’s projects,
called Sjetnan Nedre. A comment on this process states that a process like this
also involves the team members and creates discussions. One of Veidekke’s
design managers puts it rather nicely: “It is not necessarily the mapping pro-
cess which is the most important but it is all the discussions we have” (Knot-
ten et al., 2015). The phase schedule might include all major decisions and
dates of public applications, or this can be captured in a separate schedule. It
is essential to link the design work to the decisions and procurement, so that
there is enough material to make decisions and acquisitions timely.
After the phase schedule is made in the start-up meeting the design
manager writes the schedule down in a Gantt chart with a tool like Excel
or MS Project. This is when the team starts working on the schedule: fur-
ther breaking down the different tasks, linking them together and removing
all the known constraints. Figure 8.4 shows an operational plan for design

138
 U Utkast fra arkitekt / underlag fra byggherre T Tegningsgranskning/kollisjonskontroll/til byggherrel K KPR Uavhengig kontroll
1 Arkitektunderlag for RIB / RIG ferdig utarbeidet A Arbeidstegning/underlag rev 0 skal foreligge Ferie
2 Arkitektunderlag for tekniske fag ferdig utarbeidet x Utført eller besluttet IG Søknad om igangsettingstillatelse
3 Teknisk underlag og underlag for kjerneborring 0 Forsinkelse ES Endringssøknad til ramme
Revisjon: Planleggingsvindu 2+4 uker
19/05/15
Januar Februar Mars April Mai Juni Juli August September Oktober November Desember

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52

Endret i møte
FAG Tegning/aktivitet
IG SØKNADER OG SAKSBEHANDLING
IG0 Garasje - IG Ledningsomlegging og bygningsmessige tiltak K IG0
IG1 Peling, fundamentering, og bunnplate, yervegger garasje K IG1
IG2 Søyler i kjeller, betongvegger, råbygg kontor og mesanin. Utvendig VA og samferdselsanlegg. Bunnplate hotell K IG2
IG3 Råbygg hotell, bolig og næring K IG3
NVF Nabovarsel fasade NVF
ES Endringssøknad fasader ES
IG4 Fasader alle bygg, utomhus boliger (takhager) K IG4
IG5 Innredning bolig, næring (plan 1), garasje, kontor, hotell K IG5
IG6 Utomhusarealer og veier IG6

BREEAM (Dato for ferdig underlag avklares)

Råbygg-Produksjonsunderlag for prefab
ARK Geometri x
KYN Forankring vegger og søyler. Grensesnitt mot plasstøpt x
ARK Nedsenker inngangspartier og kjøkken. Plassering sprang x
VD Endelig plassering sluk og gulvbrønner storkjøkken, underlag råbygg x1
ARK/VD Kotehøyder dekker x x1
ARK/VD Avklaringer stålsøyler og betongsøyler. Tverrsnitt og type søyler x1
KYN Kuldebroløsning utvendige søyler x1
ARK/KYN Takkonstruksjon råbygg, arbeidsunderlag for råbygg U 1 0A
RIE/RIV Innfelling trapperomsvegger, EL VVS, arbeidsunderlag for prefab xA 0A
VD Utsparing og trekkerør heis x
ARK Utsparinger adkomst tak i vegg plan 7/8 01
ARK/RIV Utsparing tak trapp/heis 01
KYN Produksjonstegninger Trapperomsvegger plan 1-3 xA
KYN Produksjonstegninger Trapperomsvegger plan 4-10 0A
VD Innfelling brannmannstablå brannheis x
ARK Døråpninger trapperomsvegger x
VD Løsning trappeløp/vaskekant x1
ARK Utsparing dekker sjakter og åpninger x1
RIE/RIV Underlag kjerneborring, må planlegges per etasje. Kynningsrud angir frister per etasje A
VD Plassering og tetthet vinkler i fasader for veggelement 0A
KYN Målsetting dekkekanter x1
BDO Løsning rømningstrapp 8.-10. etg. Avklaring føringsveier og bjelker xA
BDO Arkivsone BDO xA

Tak og fasader (for IG fasader og produksjonsunderlag vegg)

ARK Takplan for IG søknad U 1 x2
ARK Takplan for produksjon 2
ARK Gesimsløsning, inkludert nødvendige detaljer 2
ARK Fasadeinndeling, materialer og farger (inkl. gesims) 2
ARK Fasadematerialer/palett 2
ARK Vindusskjema, produksjonsunderlag 2
ARK/RING Oppbygging vegger, detaljering og grensesnitt 2
ARK/RING Hjørneløsninger 2
ARK/VD Størrelse perisenner 2
Ring/VD Plassering teknikk for persienner 2
ARK/VD System for fasadevask fasade nord, tilpasninger elementfasade 2
Ringsaker Produksjonstegninger fasader 2
ARK Inngangsparti A, glassfelt, vegger, himling, materialer, overflater 2
ARK Inngangsparti B, glassfelt, vegger, himling, materialer, overflater 2

Fellesareal plan 1
Storkjøkken og kantine
ST.KJ Tilbudsmateriale xA
ARK Oppbygging dekker (kjøle og fryserom, tak og himling, fall gulv kjøkken) U 2
ARK Plantegning x1 2
ST.KJ Møblering/kjøkkentegning - Underlag for tekniske fag U 1 2
ARK Himlingsplan - Underlag for tekniske fag U 1 2
EL/VVS Himlingsplan - med teknikk 3
ARK Gulvplan 2
EL/VVS Underlag for kjerneborring fra tekniske fag 3
EL/VVS EL tegning 3
VVS VVS tegning 3
ARK Rombehandlingsskjema, materialvalg himling og gulv 2

Fellesarealer plan 1 (vestibyle, korridor, inngangsparti, garderober, øvrig)

Plantegning U
Møblering - Underlag for tekniske fag U
Himlingsplan - Underlag for tekniske fag 2
Himlingsplan - med teknikk 3
Gulvplan, med materialtype (tykkelse) U
Underlag for kjerneborring fra tekniske fag 2

8.4 Operational design schedule

 EL tegning 3
VVS tegning 3
Rombehandlingsskjema, materialvalg himling og gulv U T

Toalettkjerner
ARK Plantegning
ARK/VVS Valg av møblering og sanitærutstyr/skjema
ARK Himlingsplan - Underlag for tekniske fag
EL/VVS Himlingsplan - med teknikk
ARK Gulvplan, med materialtype (tykkelse)
EL/VVS Underlag for kjerneborring fra tekniske fag
EL/VVS EL tegning
VVS VVS tegning
ARK Rombehandlingsskjema, materialvalg himling og gulv
ARK/VD Våtromsgarnityr

Trapperom
ARK Plan x1
EL Dørmiljø xA
VD Tilpasning råbygg for heis (inkl. trekkerør tablå) xA
VVS Utsparinger vegger (ventilasjon, sprinkler) xA
VVS Utsparinger dekker (røyluke,vifte,sjakt) 0A
VD Flis trappeløp, repos, sluse 1 2
VD/ARK Rekkverk 1 2
Himling 2
Belysning/EL 3
VVS 3
Heiser - Innredning T

Generell leietager
Plantegning med møblering T
Himlingsplan grid U
Himlingsplan m/teknikk, utarbeides ikke
Skjema cellekontor. Himling systemvegg, kontorpult, belysning, grenstav, radiator, ventilasjon, komponenter U T
Skjema typisk møterom U T
Systemvegger cellekontor/møterom - valg av produkt T
Himling - valg av produkt T
VVS teknisk utstyr kontorareal - valg av produkter T
VVS teknisk utstyr toaletter/WC - valg av produkter T
Elektro - Belysning - Valg av produkter T
Elektro - Utstyr - Valg av produkter T
Minikjøkken - Valg av produkt T
Gulv - Valg av produkt (tepper, bellegg, flis, annet? Også plassering gulvboks) T
Listverk og foringer U T
Overflater/rombehandling (utarbeides ikke for generell leietager)

8.etg (ca 3/4 høyre del)

ARK Plantegning med faste rom (fellesfunksjoner/møterom/datarom/arkiv) U T 2
ARK Plantegning cellekontor/åpent landskap U T 2
ARK Møbleringstegning for EL U T 2
VD Spesifikk leietagerbeskrivelse (omforent beskrivelse) U T T 2
ARK Himlingsplan grid U T
EL/VVS Himlingsplan m/teknikk 3 T
ARK Skjema cellekontor. Himling systemvegg, kontorpult, belysning, grenstav, radiator, ventilasjon, komponenter T
ARK Skjema møterom T
ARK/VD Systemvegger cellekontor/møterom - valg av produkt T
Foliering T U T
ARK/VD Himling - valg av produkt T
VVS VVS teknisk utstyr kontorareal - valg av produkter T
VVS VVS teknisk utstyr toaletter/WC - valg av produkter T
VVS VVS - plantegning T
EL/VVS Elektro - Belysning - Valg av produkter T
EL/VVS Elektro - Utstyr - Valg av produkter T
EL/VVS Elektro - plantegning T 3
ARK/VD Minikjøkken/drikkestasjon, tilkobling, møbler og valg av produkt T
ARK Gulvplan type materiale (inkl. gulvboks) T
ARK/VD Gulv - Valg av produkt/overflate(tepper, bellegg, flis, annet? Også plassering gulvboks) T
ARK/VD Listverk og foringer T
ARK Overflater/rombehandling T

3M (1/2 5. og 6. etg)
Planunderlag
ARK Plantegning med faste rom (fellesfunksjoner/møterom/datarom/arkiv) U T 3
ARK Plantegning cellekontor/åpent landskap U 2 T
ARK Himlingsplan m/grid U 2 T
EL/VVS Himlingsplan m/teknikk/belysning U 3 T
Møbleringstegning som viser plassering og bestykning U

8.4 continued
 ARK Gulvplan med material type (tykkelse) og gulvbokser U 2 T
ARK/VD Gulvplan med produktvalg T A
ARK Prinsippskisse cellekontor 23 T
ARK Prinsippskisse møterom 23 T
ARK Prinsippskisse stillerom 23 T
ARK Skjema minikjøkken og øvrige fast innredning U 2 T

Bygningsmessig arbeider
ARK/VD Kontorfronter - farge/utførelse U T A
ARK/VD Himling - produkt/utførelse U T A
ARK/VD Gulv - produkt og farge U T A
ARK/VD Dører - Produkt og farge U T A
Fast inventar U T A
ARK Spikerslag (vises på skjema) U 3 T
Innvendige gardiner/oppheng U 3 T
ARK Rombehandlingsskjema malerarbeider U T A
ARK Showrom - bygningsmessige arbeider U 3 T

VVS
VVS Valg av synlige VVS tekniske komponenter T
VVS Føringer frem til fast innredning, vann/vanntårn/avløp U 3 T
VVS Plassering og spesifikasjoner i fast innredning vann/vanntårn/avløp U 3 T
VVS Data serverrom brannslukking 3 T
VVS Kjølebehov U 3 T
VVS Ventilasjonsbehov U 3 T
VVS Plassering komponenter VVS i fellesareal 3 T
VVS Plassering komponenter VVS i møterom 3 T
VVS Plassering komponenter VVS i cellekontor/åpent landskap 3 T
VVS Plassering komponenter VVS i toaletter/garderober 3 T
VVS Plassering komponenter VVS i showroom og butikk 3 T

EL
EL Grunnbelysning fellesarealer, møterom, kontor/landskap, butikk, showroom U 3 T
EL Effektbelysning U 3 T
EL Valg av produkt belysning m/lysstyring U 3 T
EL Valg av produkter el-komponenter (bryter, grenstav, følere, gulvboks, etc.) T
EL Uttaksgrupper, spesifikasjoner T
EL Uttaksgrupper plassering, teknisk grid U 3 T
EL Data/serverrom bestykning U
EL Bilde og AV utstyr møterom plassering og tilkoblinger/uttak U
EL ITV anlegg U
EL Trådløst anlegg U
EL Antenne U
EL UPS U
EL Teknikk og spesifikasjoner til faste innstallasjoner kaffemaskin, hvitevarer….. U 3 T
EL Showrom - EL U 3 T

Sikkerhet og automatisering
EL/VD Adgangskontroll U 3 T
VD Låssystem U 3 T

Andre installasjoner
ARK Avfallshåndtering og plassering, i kontorlokalene U 2 T
VVS Sentralstøvsuger U 2 T
ARK/VD Universell utforming 2 T
Foliering
Skiltplan innvendig U 2 T
U 2 T

Sum aktiviteter
Prosent i forhold til planlagt

8.4 continued
 VEGARD KNOTTEN & FREDRIK SVALESTUEN

for the project Portalen, where week 5–6 and week 5–9 (before produc-
tion) are marked up with a red line. The plan shows different color-coding
for activities that are sound or activities that need attention. Week 5–9
marks up the weekly work plan for the design team and week 5–6 marks
up the dialogue matrix. The constraint analysis, which is further described
in the next section, is undertaken in this planning window. The team uses
a further collaborative session to remove each constraint in the dialogue
matrix. Although the dialogue matrix mainly looks at the planning win-
dow in week 5–6, activities in that window might be interdependent on
activities further ahead (e.g. fire protection is an activity that needs to be
completed early, but it is dependent on the type of locking system used for
the building, which is usually a later activity). When dependencies like
this are discovered in the matrix the team brings these activities into the
weekly work plan.

Constraints analysis
In order to have an efficient design process it is important that all constraints
are removed before the task is carried out. Figure 8.5 shows the six constraints
of a design process. When all six constraints are removed you can have an
efficient design task (Bølviken et al., 2010).

Dialogue
Expectations and Decisions
requirements

Deciding
Processing
Design Informing Construction,
basis or basis for further
designing

Team Methods and tools

8.5 Constraints of a design process

142
 COLLABORATIVE PLANNING IN DESIGN

■ First you need the design basis, which means that the input from the
other designers needs to be finished – that is the architect’s floor plans.
■ Second, the expectation and requirements of the client and contract
must be clear – for example do you know what to design at this particular
floor?
■ Third, the team executing the design must have the capacity and com-
petence to do the task – for example do you or your designers have
enough time to finish this task before the agreed date?
■ Fourth, the methods and tools to do the task must be available – for
example computer tools and programs.
■ Fifth, all necessary decisions must be taken – that is choices by the
client – regarding special equipment to be included in the design.
■ Finally, there must be an arena for good communication so that all unex-
pected problems can quickly be resolved.

We try to create an arena for good communication through the meet-

ing structures and the start-up session. By actually asking these six questions
and addressing the issues that are not complete it is easier to deliver on time
and to the expected quality. There is, of course, a challenge of converting all
of this tacit knowledge into explicit tasks for everyone. When this is present
the design process of deciding, processing and informing can begin, ending
up in a design basis for another design task or for production. The constraint
analysis is usually performed at the look-ahead schedule or weekly work plan
in line with the Last Planner. To change the mindset of the design partici-
pants in order to fully analyze the constraints in each design task is very dif-
ficult to achieve, but worth the effort.

The meeting structure

The meeting structure is proposed to help the design phase (see Figure 8.6).
The number of meetings and types of meetings will vary according to the
size and complexity of the project. Some projects try to implement several
of these meetings through a longer session based on the key principles of
integrated concurrent engineering (ICE), working with the same challenges
at the same time, with all the relevant stakeholders present.
Typically the first part of the session is to get everyone updated by
summarizing the development in the project. Using BIM is an effective way

143
Meeting Contents Recommended Basis and outcome Recommended Meeting
date/frequency participants owned by
Start-up assembly for the A process (using the post-it note technique) of generating As soon as all of Basis Management trio from Design
design process decisions and design activities is initiated at this gathering. the designers Overall progress plan Veidekke (PM, PRM, manager
Post-it note meeting The gathering also marks the starting point for the work on have signed their Results DL) All of the designers
the phase schedule for design. contracts Phase schedule for design Owner; possibly
(draft) subcontractors and
suppliers
Progress meeting for the At the meeting, status updates since the previous meeting are Every week or Basis
design process given. Next, activities for the next two weeks are presented and every other week Phase schedule for design
Design meeting detailed in preparation for production handover. At the same time, depending on Outcome
the rolling schedules are updated by moving two new weeks from project scope Review and updating of
the phase schedule into the lookahead schedule, and allowing two and needs lookahead schedule and
new weeks to glide from the lookahead schedule to the weekly weekly design schedule,
schedule. On some projects, ICE (see below) will be part of the plus preparation of
meeting. documents for production
handover

ICE-møte The ICE meeting builds on the idea that clarification and correct Every week or Basis
Integrated Concurrent decisions are achieved faster if all relevant stakeholders in the every other week Lookahead schedule and
Engineering decision are involved and allowed to share in the decision making. depending on weekly schedule
This is done by organising the designing at the design meeting as project scope Outcome
individual or group efforts, in addition to the reviewing and and needs Missing documentation
updating of status and schedules. needed for further
designing is uncovered

Special meeting Any member of the design team can call this type of meeting. As needed Basis Everyone involved in Everyone
Themating meeting At the meeting, areas or topics requiring closer examination or Phase schedule and the area or topic
in-depth attention one way or another are addressed. Thematic lookahead plan for design addressed by the
meetings can also be dedicated to scrutiny of the project or to Outcome meeting
going through drawings with the operations unit. Detailed designing for –
or other processing of –
selected project areas
or topics

Evaluation meeting The meeting is held to adjust for – and learn from – any defects Halfway through Basis Management trio from Design
or shortcomings (so far) in the design process. the design The design process Veidekke (PM, PRM, manager
process and at Outcome DM). All of the desig-
the end of the What can and should be ners Owner; Possibly
process improved subcontractors and
suppliers
Meetings: Meetings attended by the architect and the production unit. Once a week Basis PRM, Foremen, Design
Consultant engineer/ A series of such meetings is also held between the consultant Lookahead schedule and Gangers/bosses manager
Architect engineer from construction and the production unit. Efficient weekly schedule Architect.
Consultant engineer/ meetings with few participants, focussed on choosing solutions, Outcome The consultant
Operating unit and on reviewing draft drawings and progress/priorities. Review of drawings, engineer from
solutions singled out construction

8.6 The meeting structure

 COLLABORATIVE PLANNING IN DESIGN

to update the design team. By viewing each participant’s update since the
last session each team member is informed and hence aware of the project
development. This also makes it possible to ask questions of the presented
solutions if something is unclear (see Figure 8.7). Since everyone is present it

8.7 The architect uses BIM and Smartboard to propose changes in an ICE session

145
 VEGARD KNOTTEN & FREDRIK SVALESTUEN

is important to keep this session short, and noting the questions and discrep-
ancies to be solved by the parties later.
The second part consists of different work sessions. The sessions are
planned ahead so each session has a clear task to address, identifying who is in
charge of the session and who is needed to do the tasks. There can be several
sessions going on at the same time, or in sequence. The sessions can be special
meetings or meetings with consultants and the production team. The ICE ses-
sion ends with summarizing the key decisions of the sessions and a look at the
design schedules. The aim is to review what has been accomplished and what
needs to be addressed in the next period. This also includes unsolved issues
addressed in the different sessions. Instead of meeting minutes the session is
recorded by using a spreadsheet containing information about key decisions,
the work accomplished and what needs to be done in the next session.
The planning of the next period is done by using a dialogue matrix.
The matrix is organized in advance so it shows the look-ahead time until
the next session. Together with the design schedule, looking at the longer
perspective allows the work of the coming weeks to be planned. With a
predefined coloring system it is possible to mark and identify what tasks are
complete, and what output is expected from the tasks – that is do we need
a sketch, a 3D model or complete workshop/production drawings? From the
dialogue matrix the design team can conduct a constraint analysis, checking
if their tasks can be done, and giving other participants tasks that need to be
completed in advance. The dialogue matrix then shows the planned tasks to
be done and the relation to other tasks.

Concluding remarks

THE USE OF CPD is based on efforts from lean construction and virtual design
and construction (VDC), and some may say that this is nothing new but
just the most sensible way to conduct building design management. To this
we agree, and conclude that all it really takes is a will to change the way we
conduct design management today.
Even though we have a good framework for design management
with CPD, we see that there are several ways to use the tools in a project.
In Veidekke every design manager is free to choose which tools he or she
wants to use, and how to integrate them in his or her design execution plan.

146
 COLLABORATIVE PLANNING IN DESIGN

This leads to many different variations of the tools. Acknowledging this,

there is an ongoing process to revise the CPD guide so that it will reflect more
of the best practice in the use of CPD. This, we feel, will help to improve the
level of consistency across projects within the company. The new revision
should be finished by the end of 2016.

References

Andersen, B., Bjølviken, T., Dammerud, H. S., & Skinnarland, S. (2008). Approaching
construction as a logistical, economical and social process. Proceedings for the 16th
Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction.
Ballard, G. (2000). The Last Planner System of production control. PhD thesis, University
of Birmingham, UK.
Bell, B. S., & Kozolowski, S.W.J. (March 2002). A typology of virtual teams, implica-
tions for effective leadership. Group and Organization Management, 27(1), 14–49.
Bølviken, T., Gullbrekken, B., & Nyseth, K. (2010). Collaborative design management.
Paper presented at the IGLC-18, July 2010, Technion, Haifa, Israel.
Knotten, V., Svalestuen, F., Lædre, O., & Hansen, G. K. (2015). Organizational power
in building design management. Paper presented at the Proc. 23rd Ann. Conf. of the
Int’l. Group for Lean Construction, 28–31 July, Perth, Australia.
Koskela, L. (2000). An exploration towards a production theory and its application to con-
struction. Doctor of Technology thesis, Helsinki University of Technology. VTT
Publication 408, Espoo, Finland.
Lunenburg, F. C. (2011). Goal setting theory of motivation. International Journal of
Management, Business, and Administration, 15(1), 3.
Meredith Belbin, R. (2010). Management teams: Why they succeed or fail (Third edition).
Oxford: Elsevier.
Samset, K. (2010). Early project appraisal: Making the initial choices. New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative
theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Veidekke. (2013). Collaborative planning in design – A guide to. Oslo, Norway: Veidekke.

147
 chapter 9

ARPRO: project delivery in

emerging markets — a case study
from Colombia

Rodrigo Rubio-Vollert
ARPRO Arquitectos Ingenieros, Bogotá, Colombia

Rodrigo Rubio-Vollert is an architect from Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá,

with a master’s degree in design studies from Harvard University. He is the
founder of GIV, a research group on housing and urban development based
at Universidad de los Andes, where he was appointed head of the School of
Architecture in 2002. Between 2007 and 2010 he was the design manager
for the Trump Ocean Club in Panama, a 70-story mixed-use development
delivered in 2011. He is currently the chief operating officer of ARPRO,
a Colombia-based construction company. He is a board member of the
ARPRO-ELLISDON Joint Venture, an enterprise in charge of the construc-
tion management of Bogotá’s ATRIO towers, a 260,000 square-meter office
complex comprising two towers, designed by Rogers, Stirk, Harbour and Part-
ners (London).

Prologue

THE DEVELOPMENT OF WORLD-CLASS buildings in emerging markets poses

complex challenges to the construction industry. Diverse teams with uneven
skills must align their interests around an alien building that is introducing
new materials and construction methods in an unfamiliar market. Substantial
efforts are required to align design and construction teams with different ori-
gins and expertise around an integrated solution. Special caution is essential
to execute, control and follow the plans, specifications and drawings that
guide all actions to (hopefully) the same goals.
Cultural differences impose additional stress during the delivery and
control of construction planning and cost. A labor-intensive local culture

148
 PROJECT DELIVERY IN EMERGING MARKETS

will clash against a global construction logic based on design + shop-drawing

+ fabrication + installation sequences that increase accuracy and integration
requirements. The paradox of introducing global knowledge into local mar-
kets has to be solved, avoiding oversimplified solutions that ignore the local
context. Plans and specifications delivered by designers in a market that is not
fully developed will greatly differ from the design scope of large-scale inter-
national projects. However, in countries with a local practice used to rapid
growth, such projects will encounter local design teams demanding involve-
ment beyond the successful compliance with local regulations. On the other
hand, local suppliers not well equipped for complex construction tasks do
have significant labor capabilities that are greatly needed. Local construction
companies that are not used to conducting preconstruction services, such as
thorough constructability reviews and detailed planning exercises, may find
themselves in leading roles. Success is determined by the ability to add addi-
tional forces.
To succeed in delivering complex projects in emerging markets
requires collaboration and communication. Innovative team building cen-
tered on advanced communication techniques may foster precise roles and
mutual trust. Conveying meaning instead of transferring information may
challenge managerial capabilities. Team integration, strict communication
protocols and mutual trust are critical conditions for successful delivery of
integrated projects in complex environments.

Project delivery conditions in emerging markets

HISTORICAL CONDITIONS OF BOTH local design development and the local

construction industry determine project delivery – its conditions, capacities
and success. In emerging markets such as Colombia, the ‘local’ construction
sector has had sporadic exposure to international markets. This has made
for a strong local culture and familiar project delivery procedures, developed
to suit a specific context. This has resulted in the development of specific
means, methods and features within the local economic frame, making the
most of the circumstances available. Sometimes this has resulted in inter-
esting creative solutions based on the use of local materials and technolo-
gies, and sometimes it has resulted in inadequate development for complex
projects. A quite isolated status with poor research and development policies

149
 RODRIGO RUBIO-VOLLERT

impacted the construction industry, the capacities, efficiencies and perfor-

mances of such markets. However, the tide is turning. Extraordinary eco-
nomic growth is changing this situation rapidly in places like Colombia.
Despite the fact that Colombian R&D investment is very low,
local materials and technologies have been subject to some innovation
and development by means of the scarce efforts of research centers associ-
ated with universities. In some cases private initiative from designers and/
or construction companies also promoted hands-on practical solutions to
specific needs that stimulated innovative practices, either by introducing
proven foreign solutions locally or by developing particular solutions spe-
cifically designed for the local realm. This is the story of a private effort to
make steps towards a needed innovation in order to deliver the kinds of
buildings that will be appearing in Colombia in the years to come. This
wave of private-induced innovation took place for the first time during
the heroic “modern” times around the middle of the twentieth century,
where the first architects and engineers who earned degrees in the recently
founded Colombian universities acted as pioneers for the introduction of
modern ideas to Colombia. These construction companies were the found-
ing fathers of modern building in Colombia. Unfortunately, not all of them
succeeded in surviving the next generation, which meant a significant loss
for the local construction culture.

Colombia’s modern construction via do-it-all companies

Colombia’s National University offered a degree in architecture for the first
time in 1936. Other institutions, such as Universidad de los Andes (private)
and Javeriana (religious), opened faculties 10–15 years later. This new condi-
tion, together with already well-established civil engineering faculties, helped
to shape an important number of local professionals ready to undertake their
mission: to give shape to modernity in the country.
The construction industry, still attached to neoclassical facades sup-
ported by hidden reinforced concrete structures, started to develop modern
buildings. The basic modern questions were addressed: efficiency, prefabri-
cation and structural expression. Major construction companies had also
developed design capabilities in-house: an interesting mixture of architects
and engineers dominated the arena. The model of a design + construction
company was established early in Colombia, with pros and cons: more inte-
gration, less specialization.

150
 PROJECT DELIVERY IN EMERGING MARKETS

With significant access constraints to an international market of goods

and services, a reinforced concrete technology is mastered by locals based on
local design capabilities both in engineering and architecture, together with
a concrete supply industry sufficiently developed, and a local low-cost brick
supply that evolved during the nineteenth century. However, introduction
of prefabricated elements from windows to drywall was scarce and limited to
local inventiveness.
New capacities to introduce steel structures in buildings and high-
technology aluminum-glass would come much later, as exceptions to the
norm. The local building codes evolved to respond to a reinforced concrete
type of building, in most cases covered with local masonry. International
construction companies specializing in deep foundations, tunneling and
other infrastructural projects were involved in public works, and made some
impact allowing the development particularly of the design of deep founda-
tions capable of performing for high-rises developed in the 1950s and 1960s.

Change of paradigm: mortgages and loans gave

birth to developers
Colombia restructured the financial system in 1972, providing a new mort-
gage and loan regulation that increased tremendously the amount of finan-
cial resources for housing and other real estate endeavors. Developers then
took control by exploiting privileged market decisions and sacrificing bold
innovative proposals for already proven solutions. Construction companies
started to work for developers, or introduced developing capacities in-house
to survive. This changed the nature of the industry, where a conflict of inter-
ests and the expected competition among different companies did not foster
innovation.
Modernity failed to provide better conditions to the majority of the
people, but certainly introduced modern methods with local resources, allow-
ing the possibility of trying audacious projects. This wave broke quickly and
for good after 1972, with a new figure in charge of the vision and manage-
ment of projects: the developer.

Current status
Major construction companies involved in real estate projects to be offered
to the market adopt tasks such as securing land, defining the value proposi-
tion of a real estate project, guiding marketing, and developing and designing

151
 RODRIGO RUBIO-VOLLERT

their projects either in-house or by outsourcing. Projects usually are presented

to the market with only one face: the developer-construction team, with per-
haps one or two consultants at the side. Certainly, this approach could foster
integrated delivery practices together with other innovations. The reality
is that post-1972 very few invested time and effort to consider adjustments
to the typical contractual structure, the well-known recipe of materials and
methods, or the ruling management practice. However, some are making
efforts to keep pace with emerging technologies to be applied in this industry:
many are CAD-oriented, but lack comprehensive understanding about 3D
approaches and BIM environments.
Smaller construction companies use a different approach where a new
developing company is established for every specific project, usually with the
same name of the building being developed. These companies vanish once
the building is delivered, making any claim a major effort for the end user.
Bad idea. But pirates have been out there since ancient times. Let us focus on
the companies that are there for the long run.

The ARPRO case

ARPRO WAS ESTABLISHED in 1978 in Bogotá, Colombia. The original

plan was to offer design and construction services to the local market.
The company managed to secure increasingly complex construction con-
tracts, allowing a steady growth of the business. The company also started
to develop its own projects as a means to survive in a market where all
important construction activities were performed by the same developers,
which actually did not allow a sound construction services market to be
formed.
In 1998, ARPRO had a significant number of projects in the mar-
ket. A major economic recession took place in the country, threatening
the future of the company. The 1998 financial crash was quite severe, and
exposed both buyers and developers to unreal financial conditions where,
for example, a regular mortgage duplicated the value of the asset. New
buyers disappeared; companies with stock in the market and conducting
construction were to complete and deliver buildings in terrible financial
conditions. Banks flourished, certainly. Construction activities came to a
complete standstill.

152
 PROJECT DELIVERY IN EMERGING MARKETS

1980 1998 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

ARPRO inception

recession

2009 recession
10,0 1 2 3
ATRIO site
secured 200
8,0
150

1998–2003
6,0
100
4,0
50
2,0
0
0,0 4 5 6 7
Company resilience put to test BIM Plan First 3D First 4D ARPRO
Senior mgmt. long term commitment settled Design/ models models staff
-2,0 build for BIM
projects systems protocols
using int. and with third
-4,0 REVIT quantities parties
take-off
-6,0

-8,0
dic-79
dic-80
dic-81
dic-82
dic-83
dic-84
dic-85
dic-86
dic-87
dic-88
dic-89
dic-90
dic-91
dic-92
dic-93
dic-94
dic-95
dic-96
dic-97
dic-98
dic-99
dic-00
dic-01
dic-02
dic-03
dic-04
dic-05
dic-06
dic-07
dic-08
dic-09
dic-10
dic-11
dic-12
dic-13
dic-14
dic-15
GNP %

Colombia GNP–annual percentage variation (per trimester)

ARPRO staff count
ARPRO IT Plan in place

9.1 ARPRO timeline from 1998 construction crisis to the present day

By the end of 1998 ARPRO had delivered all pending projects and
paid all its obligations, assuming a ten-year debt. Many other companies
defaulted and disappeared. Those ten years put ARPRO to the test on
entrepreneurship, trust and determination. The company was able to retain
key staff members and showed a remarkable resilience by getting involved
in public works, such as public space renewal and bus station construction.
The debt was paid off in 2008, only to find that a new recession was start-
ing in Colombia. This time ARPRO was in much better shape, with all real
estate developments duly financed, and actively participating in a unique,
strategically located renovation project. The project, Urban Plaza, involved
a major effort to secure the land without expelling the original landowners,
and including them as passive partners in a large asset delivered to the market
in 2013 (Figure 9.1).
This new challenging phase for the company triggered several stra-
tegic planning exercises where a full commitment to new tools to enhance
productivity was settled. This commitment was seen as the path to survival
and growth. Younger team members aware of lean construction, BIM proto-
cols and 3D software prepared a four-year plan of action involving important
resources. The solid financial status of the company allowed the business to
secure funds for the change. The following timeline shows the development
of these turbulent times (Figure 9.2).

153
 RODRIGO RUBIO-VOLLERT

9.2 1998 – Urban Plaza before and after

The introduction of lean and BIM protocols simultaneously created

quite rapidly a ‘change of mood’ both in the main office and on the construction
sites. Launching strategies and protocols to be implemented both on site and at
the main office secured success. Involving all relevant team members at different
levels of the organizational chart awoke an appetite for new practices across the
whole organization. Discussions on accountability were naturally happening.
More important, planning exercises during preconstruction stages started to be
considered instead of just executing on a daily basis with poor planning schemes.
A desire for change permeated the company. People were engaged. People are
the ones who make change possible, not the chief operating officer (COO).

Extraordinary projects, extraordinary partners

IN 2006 ARPRO SECURED a unique piece of land strategically located at the

gates of downtown Bogotá together with other major developers and inves-
tors. The project was headed by one of the founders of ARPRO, who secured
Rogers Stirk Harbour and Partners as the architects for the ATRIO project
in 2008, with a very precise demand. ATRIO had to be a project capable of
transforming the city surroundings. This audacious complex of two high-rise
buildings and an art and events venue features a unique public space with a
series of plazas, pedestrian pathways and extraordinary landscaping unseen in
the history of the city. The decision to avoid a retail platform is central to the
value proposition. This project will change Bogotá’s downtown pedestrian
system for good, creating a destiny that celebrates citizenship, entrepreneur-
ship, art and open space (Figure 9.3).
What are the challenges that a company based in Bogotá faces by devel-
oping a project designed in London? Local expertise of steel structures is limited,
and no one has ever attempted to build a steel structure high-rise where the
steel members are part of the architectural expression. The level of detail and

154
 PROJECT DELIVERY IN EMERGING MARKETS

9.3 ATRIO development, Bogotá; to be delivered in 2019 (Phase 1)

the expected result are, of course, world-class. ARPRO also recognized that the
organization had no previous experience in the key performances required for
such a project. Very early a decision was made to establish a joint venture with
an international company that was willing to come to Colombia for a long-term
relationship, bringing in much needed experience. After a long selection pro-
cess, 12 different companies from around the world were approached. ARPRO
celebrated in 2014 a joint venture with ELLISDON Canada (AED) to provide
construction services in Colombia. The first project was ATRIO.
This joint venture (JV) was conceived as a mutual endeavor between
equals, where each organization contributes with its best knowledge to a com-
mon effort. The local conditions that shape the deep foundation/excavation/
basement construction process, among other local conditions, such as labor,
local procurement and selection of sound suppliers and subcontractors, were
part of ARPRO’s expertise. The planning tools, steel structures’ high-rises,
international procurement capacities and high efficiency standards were part
of ELLISDON’s expertise, among others. Availability of a Spanish-speaking
team also allowed a swift and effective integration of the new group, and was
key to making the final choice of partner. A shared set of values between
ARPRO and ELLISDON predicts a good chance of success.
The project organizational chart (Figure 9.4) is based on common
practice in Colombia, with a heavy interaction of several trades that could

155
 CONSORCIO
Representante:
Rodrigo Rubio Vollert
Technical side Management side
A1- Ítem 1.001
Gerente de Ítem 1.030
A.9 Ítem 1.041
Construcción
SOPORTE SOPORTE
Ing. Agustín Bolívar
Soporte técnico ELLISDON CORPORATIVO CORPORATIVO
DE ELLISDON DE ARPRO

C.1 Ítem 1.040 A2-Ítem1.002

Director de Obra Director Administrativo

Ing. Manuel Angulo Ing. Jairo de Vivero

C.3- Ítem 1.070 C.2- Ítem 1.042 B.2

2- Ítem 1.043 B1- Ítem 1.003
Director de Obra
Director SSTA Director de contratación Director Administrativo
Civil y paisajismo
Ing. Fabián Vargas Arias
Ing. Rubén Aririas Arq. Sandra Leon
I
Ing. Mari
Mario
r o Pombo
C.2
2- Ít
ÍÍtem
e 1.042 A.4- Ítem 1.010 A.5-
5 Ítem A.3-
3 Ítem
Íte 1.004
Director de
Directo Coordinador
nador de
Coordinador Coordina
Coordinador de
Estructur
Estructura y Programación
amación /
BIM Costos
Fachada unicaciones
Comunicaciones
Arq. Daniel Arq. Lilia
i
Liliana
T
TBD Margareth
Arq.. Marga
r ret
r th
Rodr
dríguez
Rodríguez Santos
T
Ta chack
Tachack

C.9- Ítem C.10 Ít

ÍÍtem
em A.8-
.8-
8 Ítem 1.011 A.6-
6 Ítem
Í em 1.016
Ít A.7-
7 Ítem
Í em 1.047
Ít B.6
6- Ítem
Í em
Ít B.3
3 Ítem 1.014
C.4 Ítem 1.048 B7- Ítem 1.045 B.5
5- Ítem 1.006 B.4 Ítem 1.005
1.0 B.10
0- Ítem 1.019
1.072
072 1.075 1.007
Residente B6 Residente
Residente
sidente Residente Estructura Gestión B5 Residente C8 Residente d
de Coordinador Residente Administración de
SISO LEED Concreto y Documental
ON-SITECostosSUPPORT Calidad Director
ector de MEP y Coordinador de Compras Administrativo Obra
Coordinador
Jennifer
ennife
f r Ing. Ana Núcleo Ing. José Leonardo
Arq. Leonard
rd o Ing. Javi
v er
Javier nsporte vertical
transporte Estructura
MANAGEMENT Arq. Ángelal Ing. Diego Orlando
Orl
rlando
d
EnvolventeOF
Velandia
ela
l ndi
dia María
Marí
ría Pardo Ing. Hernán
Hern
r án F rn
Fer ando
Fernandod(BIMGacharna
Gacharn
– rCOST
a Andra
d de
Andraded Ing. Omar O Opayome
payome e Metálica Marí
ría To
María T rres
rr
Torres U
Urr
rego
Urrego Camacho
Herrera
Herre
r ra í
García CONTRACTUAL
EXECUTION OF WORKS CONTROL–
RELATIONSHIPS WITH
QUALITY B.11 Ítem 1.021
PROCESS

C.12
2- Ítem C.15
5- Ítem C.1 - Ítem
C.18
THIRD PARTIES
C.11
1- Ítem C.11
1- Ítem ASSURANCE)
1.064 Auxiliar
073
1.073 1.058
Auxiliar Auxiliar Administrativo
Inspector
ector Maestro Residente Residente B.14
4- Ítem
Í em 1.022
Ít Giovanna
Giova
v nna
SO
SISO Estructura y Estructura y Topógrafo
T Sánchez
General de
Soranyi
nyi
y Núcleo Juan
J Carloss Auxiliar en practica
ACCOUNTING–PAYMENT

Obra Núcleo B.13

3- Ítem 1.023
Pachón
ón Arq. Diego Ing. Nicolál s
Nicolás Rodríguez -Santiago
-Santi
tiago Ceballos
Ceballl os
s
Luis
i Romero
Moreno
More
r no Castella
l nos
Castellanos
B.15
5- Ítem 1.057 B8 Auxiliar T.I.
T B.12 Ítem
Í em 1.017
Ít Ítem 1.020, 1
1.024
F iá
Fabi n Loz
Fabián Lozada
B16 y B
B17
Auxiliar en practica Almacenista
cenista Servic
Servicios
C.19,C.20
2-0Ítem 1.060
1.06 -A
-Angie
- ngie García í Daniel Aponte Generales
Gen
C.14- Ítem 1.073
3 C.16
6- Ítem 1.059
Milena Contreras
Milen
Auxiliar en Maestro Civil de Contra Maest
Maestro 1
Practica SISO obra Maestro 2
Contra Ma
ton Camarg
Milton r o
Camargo
Equipo Administrativo
Equipo Técnicode campo Equipo Soporte de obra Equipo Contrataciones, Compras, Coordinación Contractual y Facturación

9.4 ATRIO organizational chart

 PROJECT DELIVERY IN EMERGING MARKETS

have been more suitable for a project of this kind. However, innovation
comes like children, one at a time (two sometimes) if you do not want the
parents to go crazy. So, the JV adapted itself to this particular condition.
Terms and conditions of this joint effort include a commitment to
precise and deep planning techniques (mandatory for these buildings, which
in turn takes BIM protocols to another level), commitment to strict man-
agement techniques regarding plan and drawing submittals, change order
controls, site instructions, shop drawings and so forth, and commitment to
foster a solid integrated team that is capable of solving challenges emerging
from two different cultures approaching the same task (see Figure 9.5 for an
overview).
None of these steps would have been possible if ARPRO had not
previously put effort towards strategic planning and the implementation of
contemporary management tools. The commitment done during the strate-
gic planning sessions back in 2010–2012 prepared the ground for these new
challenges. The ARPRO team quickly understood the importance of this
partnership for our future endeavors.

Joint efforts changed the way

SPECIAL PLANNING TECHNIQUES: The JV committed to use BIM protocols

to visualize planning strategies. Visualizations are a key success factor when
different teams are working together. Expediting the presentation of differ-
ent approaches was of the utmost importance. The site team included a BIM
coordinator, a young Colombian architect savvy about 3D software and fluent
in spoken English, so that ELLISDON support landed easily on site. Again,
people are the ones who make the difference.
ATRIO 3D model development was a responsibility of the local com-
pany in charge of MEP design and building integration systems (see Fig-
ure 9.6). AED offered a close supervision of the 3D model in its different
stages to assure that the model parameters would allow the construction team
to make proper use of the model, proceed with 4D exercises, obtain quantities
and identify construction progress. Those three objectives were defined early
in the process as the desired and, more importantly, feasible goals. For the first
time in our country, a construction team is developing planning scenarios in
a 3D/4D environment.

157
 “Fireman” Approach
Low specialized hierarchical effort
activities: Basic + Productivity Vicious circle
“Stereotomic” planning/logistics Change
Concrete + masonry approach orders -
Hard Copies
building techniques
Isolated planning software
Authority-based protocols

Local
Construction
Company

Intl.
Joint
Venture

“Planner” Approach
High specialized
Team effort
activities: Enhanced Change Virtuous circle
“Tectonic” planning/logistics orders +
assemblage approach
Productivity
building technics Digital Documents Manager -
Integrated planning software to
BIM protocols
3D – 4D – 5D

9.5 ARPRO innovation chart

 PROJECT DELIVERY IN EMERGING MARKETS

9.6 ATRIO, example of schedule engaged with 3D model

Conveying meaning: ATRIO construction process is completely differ-

ent from the current local construction culture: it is based on the “assem-
bly” of elements fabricated off site compared to the “addition” method of
reinforced concrete and brick envelope. The steel structure and curtain wall
building is certainly dominated by a much larger set of instructions. Adding
the (not so desirable) practice of fast-tracking the project has resulted in issu-
ing several versions of plans and drawings during the works (which is the case
for the first phase of ATRIO), and it is clear that the number of plans and
drawings to be managed is quite large.
Conveying meaning instead of transferring information was a major
concern, and certainly a way to raise managerial capabilities. AED designed
early in the process a complete protocol for submittals and information access
that has been implemented mercilessly. After educating all our designers on
how to prepare a PDF format type of plan, we developed a special template
on a PDF reader software with extended programming capabilities, allowing
the construction team a swift and efficient way of consulting all information
available by means of hyperlinks attached on every plan where a reference to
another document exists (see Figure 9.7). For the first time in our company,
we have a controlled database of valid plans and drawings that updates auto-
matically all revised versions, indicating in red any change made by consul-
tants. This is a must for fast-track projects anywhere.

159
 RODRIGO RUBIO-VOLLERT

9.7 ATRIO Sala Digital

One team: A joint venture always poses a major challenge for the cli-
ent. There is always the big JV question in the air: Is what we have now one
solution or two problems? The only way to make the JV a real solution is to
achieve an integrated team that acts as one entity. This is hard to accomplish.
There is certainly no final prescription to solve this puzzle. It is an evolving

160
 PROJECT DELIVERY IN EMERGING MARKETS

landscape that encompasses the complete work experience from beginning to

the end. It requires similar abilities to those of the anesthetist:

■ A fair amount of sensors indicating the status of the patient.

■ Several mechanisms to keep the patient asleep (so that the operation
may occur), but in the right dose to avoid death.
■ The ability to bring the patient back whenever needed to jointly discuss
the procedure and confirm if anything else is needed, always in a con-
trolled environment.

Allow me to report from the front: AED is currently healthy and working
fine. The main reasons for this appear to be related to:

1 Language. The ELLISDON staff deployed on site is fluent in Spanish.

We are not getting lost in translation.
2 Roles. Everyone knows clearly what is expected from him or her, and
knows who is in charge at each level of the organization. However,
authority comes from knowledge and performance.
3 Trust. No one is imposing anything; decisions are to be made after a
complete understanding of the different approaches, always aiming at
how to deploy the best possible ideas in an environment with specific
opportunities and limits. This may take time. However, everyone knows
that his “gang” is not capable of delivering without the help of the other
“gang”. It is a case of “trust, hear, persuade, learn, accept or perish”.

We have been successful so far in promoting a discussing-learning-deciding

atmosphere, based of course on the fragile but resilient human need to inter-
act, belong and succeed.

Final remarks

OUR COMPANY HAS FACED many different challenges in recent years:

■ Building with alien materials and systems (Rogers Steel Structure archi-
tecture) that change the local building means and methods.
■ Finding a partner willing to join efforts with a long-term view.

161
 RODRIGO RUBIO-VOLLERT

■ Raising managerial capabilities to adequately receive and submit instruc-

tions to consultants, subcontractors and clients.
■ Introducing state-of-the-art software technologies that allow detailed
modeling of the construction works.
■ Interacting with both local and international consultancy and designers.
■ Changing the local construction mindset from being a “fireman” con-
structor (who gets medals from solving the day-to-day problems) to a
“stick to the plan” kind of constructor (who gets medals at the end of
the project).
■ Being able to impact other projects and business lines of the company
with the knowledge that is being made available after accepting the
foremost challenge of all: change.

162
 Further reading

There are a small number of books that are specific to design managers work-
ing in the AEC sector. Parallel to this is a larger body of generic material on
design management. To help readers I have included the titles that my stu-
dents and I have found insightful, together with a very brief overview of some
of the early books on the subject. There is also a note about the peer-reviewed
journals should readers be contemplating a more detailed investigation into
the subject area.

Design management for AEC

EARLY PUBLICATIONS IN the field include the work of Brunton et al. (1964) and
Emmitt (1999) in architecture, and Gray and Hughes (2001) in construction:

■ Brunton, J., Baden Hellard, R. and Boobyer, E. H. (1964) Management

Applied to Architectural Practice, George Goodwin for The Builder, Aldwych.
■ Emmitt, S. (1999) Architectural Management in Practice: A Competitive
Approach, Longman, Harlow.
■ Gray, C. and Hughes, W. (2001) Building Design Management, Butter-
worth-Heinemann, Oxford.

There are four books that, combined, cover a wide range of issues from a vari-
ety of perspectives. Readers with backgrounds in architecture, engineering
and construction should find them informative:

■ Emmitt, S. (2014) Design Management for Architects (Second edition),

Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester.

163
 FURTHER READING

■ This is written for students of architecture and contains two interrelated

sections, managing design projects and managing design offices.
■ Emmitt, S. and Ruikar, K. (2013) Collaborative Design Management,
Routledge, Abingdon.
■ Written for students of construction design management, the emphasis
is on demonstrating the value of design to constructors.
■ Eynon, J. (2013) The Design Manager’s Handbook, Wiley-Blackwell,
Chichester.
■ Written for practitioners working with design management. This hand-
book provides a broad assemblage of ideas and guidance.
■ Sinclair, D. (2011) Leading the Team: An Architect’s Guide to Design Man-
agement, RIBA, London.
■ Written for architects, the focus is on the principal designer more than
the design manager, although the roles are similar.

Generic design management

EARLY PUBLICATIONS INCLUDE Farr (1966) and Cooper and Press (1995),
and more recently Best (2010):

■ Best, K. (2010) Fundamentals of Design Management, AVA Publishing,

Lausanne.
■ Cooper, R. and Press, M. (1995) The Design Agenda: A Guide to Success-
ful Design Management, Wiley, Chichester.
■ Farr, M. (1966) Design Management, Hodder and Stoughton, London.

See also the homepage of the Design Management Institute, www.dmi.org.

Peer-reviewed journals

VERY FEW PEER-REVIEWED academic journals regularly publish research

about design management in architecture, engineering and construction.
One exception is Architectural Engineering and Design Management, published
by Taylor & Francis. This journal has published research articles concerning
aspects of design management regularly since its launch in 2005. See http://
www.tandfonline.com/taem.

164
 Index

additional work, charging 50 Colombia 148

American Institute of Architects communication 23, 58, 60–1, 121, 124
(AIA) 18, 25, 98 complex projects 149
architect(s) 13, 55 conflict 58;
assembly, design team 31 conflict management 63
consistency 87–8
behaviors 58–60 constraints analysis 142
books 98, 163–4 construction 12, 41–54
Brazil 75 constructors 13
brief: communication 29; monitoring conveying meaning 159
29, 37 coordinating stakeholders 70–4
briefing 25, 27–30, 35, 37 coordination 39
budget, management 119 coordination meetings 67
Building information management cost plan 35
(BIM) 1, 20, 22, 39, 85, 89, 115, cost variations, managing 51–2
123, 131, 145, 152 creative problem solving, workshop 68
business 14–15, 28 criteria definition 117
business case 30 critiques, design 37
culture 9, 12, 42
case studies: Colombia 148–62; Norway
133–47; USA 97–110, 111–32 dark side 97, 110
change control 37–8, 49–51, 72, 131 definitions 2, 11, 107
Chartered Institute of Builders design: activity 16–17; agreement 39;
(CIOB) 98 briefing 27–30; change control 37,
checklists 47–9 72; checklists 35; collaborative
client: approval 29; changes 126; planning 134–5; coordination 39;
expectations 9; needs 28; sign off 29 cost plan 35–6; critiques 37; culture
collaborative design environments 58 12; defined 10; dependency 34–5;
collaborative digital platforms 17 development 37; information 2,
collaborative planning 68, 133–47 17–18, 47–9, 51; integration 2,
collaborative working 57–60 81–8, 111–32; interactions 57–70;
collocation 117 into construction 42; philosophy

165
 INDEX

43; program 33, 43–4; progress fast-track 122

meetings 67; progress reports 38–9, flow of information 17–18
44; quality 2; responsibility 34–5,
44; responsibility matrix 35, 44–5; handover meeting 43
reviews 38, 45–7, 67; status 38;
strategic 22–4; team meetings 67; identifying interfaces 64
thinking 110; value 25, 26, 41, 54; individual needs, learning 69
valuing 57–70 individual performance 53
design briefing see briefing information see design information
design coordinator 78 information communication
design development 37 technologies (ICTs) 16, 20
design director 79 innovation chart 158
designers 2 innovativeness 51
design information, management of integrated approach 111–32
17–18, 47–9 integrated concurrent engineering 143
design management: books 98; as a bridge integrated projects (IPD) 117, 129
12; career structure 77; commercial integration 81–3, 115–18
factors 14–16; definition 2, 9–12, interface management 63–5, 92
107; elements 14–22; fundamentals internal meetings 65
9–22; hierarchy 78; levels 12–14; investors 26
preconstruction 25–40; programs 105;
roles 75–9; roots 12–13; theater 100, joint venture 157–61
106, 110; tools 63, 65, 69
design manager: challenges of knowledge 84
coordinating and liaising knowledge exchange: events 91–2;
70–4; definition 2, 11–12, 107; meetings 67
integrated project leader 117;
motivation 85–7; preconstruction language 61, 161
39–40; reflections 54–6; remit learning 29, 67, 124, 131
79–80; responsibilities 80–1; learning events 69–70, 88
role(s) 23, 32, 70, 75–9, 84; skills LEED 131
set 73–4, 84 levels: design management 12–14;
design process, management of 18–20 learning 69–70
design team: assembly 31–3; structure 32 liaising with stakeholders 70–4
design value (generation) 25–39 life cycle costs 36
document controller 77–8 limits and boundaries (trust) 62
low carbon 1
education 91
effective communication 60–1 management: defined 10–11; passion for 2
emerging markets 149–52 management of the firm 112–13
engineers 13 managing design activity 16–17
expectation management 92–3 measuring performance 52
exploring, client needs 28 meetings 32, 43, 65–7, 143
external meetings 65 monitoring: asset in use 53–4; the brief 37

166
 INDEX

motivation 72, 85–7 self-reflection 91

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator 59 skills 84–5
South Africa 81
Norway 133 specialist trades, design 46
staffing 124
operation (building) 19 status 38
organizational: chart 156; consistency strategic brief 30
87–8; interfaces 64; learning 69; strategic design management 22–4
performance 52; trust 62 subcontractor design 46
owners 26 Sweden 89–90

people, management of 21–2, 57–74, 132 team(s) 2, 28, 31, 129

performance 1, 52–3 team assembly 25, 118
personal interfaces 64 team building, workshop 68
personalities 59 team meetings 67
postoccupancy evaluation (POE) 53 team structure 119
preconstruction 25–40 teamwork 127
precontract meeting 43 technologies, management of
process plans 18 20–1, 114
program 28, 33, 43 three-dimensional (3D) model 159
programming 23 tips for success 40, 55, 83, 87, 90
progress meetings, design 67 tools 63–70
progress reports, design 38 training 91
project(s): completion 52–3; definition trust 58, 61–2, 161
19, 25; delivery 19; design 19; types of meetings 67
extraordinary 154; needs, learning 70; types of workshops 68
partners 129; performance 53; program
28; quality plan 30–1; requirements UK 22, 39, 70, 85
28; scope 37; team 28; trust 62 USA 97, 111
protocol, change control 49–50 users 2

quality 1 value: delivery 41–56; design 26, 41;

quality plan 30–1 design management 5; generation
25–40; integration 130–1
reflection 121, 129 value engineering 46, 68
requests for information (RFIs) 48 value management 26, 68
reviewing performance 52–3 values 26
review meetings, design 67 valuing design interactions 57–70
roles 54, 161 vignette 22–4, 39–40, 54–6, 70–4,
Royal Institute of British Architects 81–3, 85–7, 89–90
(RIBA) 18, 25, 98 virtuous circle 158
rules of engagement 32
working overseas 89–90
Scandinavia 75 working together 57–70
scheduling 137 workshops 32, 63, 65, 67–8

167