alberta transportation projects€¦ · construction industry in the united states, the...

PARTNERING GUIDELINES MANUAL

FOR

ALBERTA TRANSPORTATION

PROJECTS

OCTOBER 2016

Partnering Guidelines Manual for Alberta Transportation Projects

ii


A GUIDE TO PARTNERING ON ALBERTA TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS

This Partnering Guidelines Manual is written for Alberta Transportation (AT), Consulting Engineers of Alberta (CEA) members, and Alberta Roadbuilders & Heavy Construction Association (ARHCA) members working at the project level to convey AT, CEA, and ARHCA’s commitment to working in a collaborative environment, and to provide information on completing AT projects using a construction partnering approach.

A Partnering Toolkit that includes detailed information for the AT Project Sponsor, the AT Project Administrator, the Consultant, and the Contractor is also available to assist in administering and applying the construction partnering approach at the project level.

This manual is available online in PDF format at https://www.alberta.ca/partnering-and-dispute-resolution-process.aspx

© COPYRIGHT, October 2016

The Crown in right of the Province of Alberta, as represented by the Minister of Alberta Transportation. Holders of this document in hard copy and/or electronic format are hereby given permission to reproduce

all or a portion of this document without modifications.

Project Management Office, Construction and Maintenance Division Alberta Transportation

https://www.alberta.ca/partnering-and-dispute-resolution-process.aspx

https://www.alberta.ca/partnering-and-dispute-resolution-process.aspx


iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONSTRUCTION PARTNERING – WHAT IS IT AND WHY SHOULD I DO IT? ......................................... 1

WHAT IS PARTNERING? ........................................................................................................................... 1

PARTNERING VALUES AND ATTRIBUTES ....................................................................................................... 2

HISTORY OF CONSTRUCTION PARTNERING IN NORTH AMERICA ........................................................................ 3

THE BENEFITS OF PARTNERING .................................................................................................................. 3

CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY INSTITUTE (CII) RESEARCH ............................................................................... 3

JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING RESEARCH ........................................................................... 5

CALTRANS PARTNERING PROGRAM & ARBITRATION TRENDS ...................................................................... 5

BENEFITS OF PRE-CONSTRUCTION PARTNERING ON AT PROJECTS ............................................................... 6

PARTNERING – AT’S WAY OF DOING BUSINESS ............................................................................... 8

COLLABORATION BETWEEN AT, CEA AND ARHCA ....................................................................................... 8

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES GROUP (SPG) .................................................................................................... 8

TRI-PARTY OPERATIONS COMMITTEE (OPS COMMITTEE).......................................................................... 8

ANNUAL TRI-PARTY TRANSPORTATION CONFERENCE ................................................................................ 8

ABOUT THE PARTNERS ............................................................................................................................. 9

ALBERTA TRANSPORTATION (AT) .......................................................................................................... 9

THE CONSULTING ENGINEERS OF ALBERTA (CEA) .................................................................................... 9

THE ALBERTA ROADBUILDERS & HEAVY CONSTRUCTION ASSOCIATION (ARHCA) .......................................... 9

TYPES OF PARTNERING ........................................................................................................................... 10

PUBLIC PARTNERING ......................................................................................................................... 10

STRATEGIC PARTNERING .................................................................................................................... 10

CONSTRUCTION PROJECT PARTNERING ................................................................................................. 11

AT’S PARTNERING PROGRAM .................................................................................................................. 13

THE 3 LEVELS OF PARTNERING ON AT PROJECTS ............................................................................ 14

THE PARTNERING PROCESS FOR AT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS....................................................................... 14

THE AT PROJECT RISK INDICATOR (PRI) .................................................................................................... 17

RISK EVALUATION CATEGORIES AND SCORING POINT RANGES .................................................................. 17

ASSIGNING THE LEVEL OF PARTNERING ................................................................................................. 18

TEAM PARTNERING DISCUSSION – LEVELS 1 & 2......................................................................................... 18

DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT SCORECARDS™ – LEVEL 2 ................................................................................. 19

FORMAL PARTNERING SESSIONS – LEVEL 3 ................................................................................................ 25

KEYS TO EFFECTIVE PARTNERING .................................................................................................. 27

DETERMINING WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS ................................................................................................. 27

RESOLVING ISSUES ................................................................................................................................ 28

THE ISSUE RESOLUTION LADDER ......................................................................................................... 28

THE ISSUE RESOLUTION PROCESS ........................................................................................................ 28

ISSUE RESOLUTION GROUND RULES ..................................................................................................... 29

CELEBRATIONS OF SUCCESS ..................................................................................................................... 30

MONITORING THE PARTNERING RELATIONSHIP ........................................................................................... 31

TOOLS TO ASSIST IN MAKING PARTNERING A SUCCESS ................................................................. 32

REGULAR MEETINGS ............................................................................................................................. 32


iv

COMMUNICATION ................................................................................................................................. 33

FAIRNESS AND GOOD FAITH .................................................................................................................... 33

SEPARATING PEOPLE FROM THE PROBLEM ................................................................................................. 33

FOLLOW-UP PARTNERING SESSION(S) ....................................................................................................... 34

TEAM BUILDING ACTIVITIES .................................................................................................................... 34

APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................. 35

APPENDIX A: AT PROJECT RISK INDICATOR ................................................................................................ 36

APPENDIX B: TEAM PARTNERING DISCUSSION – AGENDA DETAILS ................................................................. 46

APPENDIX C: TYPICAL PROJECT & PARTNERING SUCCESS GOAL STATEMENTS ................................................... 49

APPENDIX D: SAMPLE PROJECT SCORECARD™ SCREEN SHOT ......................................................................... 51

APPENDIX E: SAMPLE PROJECT SCORECARD™ REPORT PAGE ......................................................................... 52

APPENDIX F: PARTNERING TOOLKIT .......................................................................................................... 53

REFERENCES AND SOURCES........................................................................................................... 54

This Partnering Guidelines Manual is intended to be a guideline manual, and is not intended to replace or supersede any legal documents including, but not limited, to contracts, specifications, and/or other construction documents.

October 2016 Partnering Guidelines Manual for AT Projects 1

Who Wins Here?

The resident engineer watched with arms folded as the contractor’s

crew began a complicated concrete pour. He shook his head and

said, “They’ll never make their schedule with that equipment. The

bucket is too small and they’ll need another crane – they’ll spend all

their time filling buckets instead of pouring concrete.” He turned and

walked back to the management office, mentally preparing to deny

the request for a time extension that he knew would be coming. Why

didn’t he let the contractor’s project manager know of his concerns?

“That’s their responsibility. They’ll find out soon enough!”

~U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Pamphlet 91–ADR–P–4

CHAPTER 1

CONSTRUCTION PARTNERING – WHAT IS IT AND WHY SHOULD I DO IT?

“Three-fourths of the miseries and misunderstandings in the world will disappear if we step into the shoes of our adversaries and understand their view point.”

~Gandhi

WHAT IS PARTNERING?

Partnering is a commitment to a collaborative approach to construction rather than an adversarial approach. It is a way of conducting business in which two or more organizations make long-term commitments to achieve mutual goals. This requires team-based relationships with open communication among the participants based on trust, understanding, and teamwork. Partnering is a relationship in which:

Trust and open communications are encouraged and expected from all participants.

All parties address and resolve issues and problems promptly and at the lowest possible level. They strive to develop solutions that are agreeable and meet the needs of everyone involved (a “win-win-win” approach).

All parties agree on mutually common goals for the partnering relationship, and at the same time are aware of and respect each others’ individual goals and values.

Partners seek input from each other in an effort to find better solutions to issues and problems as they arise. This creates synergy in the relationship that fosters cooperation and improves the productivity of the partnering relationship.

Partnering is not to be construed as a legal “partnership” with the associated joint liabilities. Partnering does not replace or supersede any legal documents including, but not limited, to contracts, specifications, and/or other construction documents.


“The project team and the project greatly benefitted from the partnering workshops…”

Alberta Transportation (AT) developed a new design-build (DB) project delivery framework to deliver a systems interchange at Anthony Henday Drive and Stony Plain Road/100 Avenue in Edmonton. The project team worked closely in partnership with the construction and consulting industry, carried out problem solving, and made improvements as a result of feedback received from the partners. The DB procurement process generated a lot of interest from the construction and consulting industry.

The DB contract was awarded in March 2009 and the project was completed in November 2011, one year earlier than conventional delivery, and at a cost savings of more than $80m (compared to traditional design-bid-build delivery).

Partnership workshops were held throughout the course of the project. The project team and the project greatly benefitted from those workshops. As a commitment to partnering, the project team worked together in a spirit of trust, respect, fairness and cooperation, which helped in successfully achieving the project goals.

Aamer Shakoor, P. Eng.

Urban Construction Engineer - Edmonton Major Capital Projects Branch

Alberta Transportation Government of Alberta

PARTNERING VALUES AND ATTRIBUTES Following is a list of partnering values and attributes that are important in a collaborative working environment:

Open and honest communication

Trust

Respect

Common Goals

Fairness

Cooperation

Teamwork

Joint problem solving

Rapid issue resolution at the lowest possible level, using an Issue Resolution Ladder developed by the team


HISTORY OF CONSTRUCTION PARTNERING IN NORTH AMERICA

Construction partnering is not a new concept. In 1987, largely in response to increasing litigation in the

construction industry in the United States, the Construction Industry Institute (CII) established a task

force on partnering to evaluate the feasibility of applying partnering to construction projects. After

researching nearly 300 projects that used a partnering approach, the CII confirmed significant benefits to

using the collaborative team approach (see CII Research results on next page.)

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers embraced the construction partnering concept on its projects, and in

1990 said “Clearly, the best dispute resolution is dispute prevention… By taking the time at the start of a

project to identify common goals, common interests, lines of communication, and a commitment to

cooperative problem solving, we encourage the will to resolve disputes and achieve project goals.”

In 1991, the Associated General Contractors of America (AGC) endorsed the Corps of Engineers’

concept of partnering, and in 1993 created the Marvin M. Black Excellence in Partnering Awards for

construction projects that epitomized the principles of partnering.

Formal construction partnering came to Canada in 1995 when the Department of National Defence and

Defence Construction Canada adopted partnering in the delivery of the Department’s facilities

infrastructure program. The concept has spread across Canada, and is gaining acceptance as project

owners, designers, engineers, architects and contractors come to understand the benefits to all parties of

applying the principles of construction partnering.

THE BENEFITS OF PARTNERING

Much research has been conducted on the benefits of completing construction projects using a collaborative partnering approach. The following pages highlight some of the partnering research findings.

CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY INSTITUTE (CII) RESEARCH

A Construction Industry Institute (CII) research team (November 1996) researched nearly 300 projects that were completed using the partnering approach, and found significant benefits:

COST

Area Results

Total Project Cost (TPC) 10% reduction

Construction administration 24% reduction

Marketing 50% reduction

Engineering $10/hour reduction

Value Engineering 337% increase

Claims (% of TPC) 87% reduction

Profitability 25% increase

SAFETY Area Results

Hours without lost time accident 4 million vs. 48,000 industry standard

Lost work days 0 vs. 6.8% industry standard

Number of cases requiring medical attention

74% reduction

Safety rating 5% of national average


The CII research identified that partnering will significantly benefit owners, contractors, engineers, architects, designers, and other participant parties in the following areas:

1. Improved Ability to Respond to Changing Business Conditions 2. Improved Quality and Safety 3. Reduced Cost, Schedule and Improved Profit (Value) 4. More Effective Utilization of Resources

SCHEDULE Area Results

Overall project 20% reduction

Schedule changes 48% reduction

Schedule compliance Increased from

85% to 100%

QUALITY Area Results

Rework 50% reduction

Change orders 80% reduction

Direct work rate 42% increase

CLAIMS Area Results

Number of claims 83% reduction

Projects with claims 68% reduction

Claims costs as a % of total project costs

87% reduction

OTHER Area Results

Personal job satisfaction 30% increase

Projects were less adversarial 85% of respondents

Improved resource planning 85% of respondents

Increased openness on projects 82% of respondents

Increased trust on projects 78% of respondents

Fewer errors 82% of respondents

Improved quality 96% of respondents

Engineering cost reduction 10% of respondents

Improved communication and teamwork

82% of respondents

“As a result of the strong partnering environment, the barrier system was completed significantly under budget and schedule.”

When each party comes together with a sincere commitment to partnering, it has a real powerful impact on the project - either turning a good project into a fantastic one, or a ‘train wreck’ of a project into something salvageable. One of the best examples of partnering for me was the construction of the cable barrier on Highway 2 between Red Deer and Calgary. This was the largest contract of its size in North America and we required all of the work to be done at night, which introduced a real challenge for the contractor. The strongest asset to the project was the strong spirit of partnering from beginning to end, which helped the team tap into a number of innovative ideas which were incorporated in the project. As a result of the strong partnering environment, the barrier system was completed significantly under budget and schedule.

Mike Damberger, P.Eng

Executive Director Project Delivery Branch Alberta Transportation Government of Alberta


JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING RESEARCH

In 1995, Dr. Erik Larson, Professor of Project Management at Oregon State University, researched 280 construction projects. The study compared the effectiveness of controlling costs, schedule, technical performance, customer satisfaction, avoiding litigation, and project team satisfaction rates under four different approaches to managing the owner-contractor relationship: adversarial, guarded adversarial, informal partnering, and formal partnering.

Dr. Larson’s findings showed that formally partnered construction projects produced superior results to all of the other approaches in every researched category. The success of formal partnering was found in projects regardless of whether the contract was awarded on a low-bid or non-low-bid (i.e. negotiated) basis.

CALTRANS PARTNERING PROGRAM & ARBITRATION TRENDS

The California Department of Transportation* (Caltrans) has been partnering on its construction projects since before 1992. In 2006, Caltrans re-established their Caltrans Construction Partnering Steering Committee (CCPSC), and began developing a more robust Partnering Program to help make their construction partnering more effective.


Caltrans found that since 2006, even though contractors were bidding extremely aggressively on their projects (due to an extreme recession), Caltrans annual Arbitration totals have trended downward since the reinvigoration of their Partnering Program.

Mark Leja, Caltrans Construction Division Chief, also stated that “thousands of projects have been delivered by our twelve districts on budget and on time in spite of incredible challenges. The vast majority of those jobs did not apply for awards, but Partnering helps our project teams enjoy the work more and successfully deliver some REALLY tough projects.” Source: *Partnering Pioneers, Partnering Magazine, May/June 2014, pp 10-13, International Partnering Institute (IPI), (www.partneringinstitute.org)

BENEFITS OF PRE-CONSTRUCTION PARTNERING ON AT PROJECTS

Over 600 AT, CEA members and ARHCA members have participated in formal Pre-Construction Partnering Sessions on 34 projects since 2007. Following is a summary of the Partnering Session participants’ ratings of the effectiveness of these partnering sessions.

EVALUATION STATEMENT SESSION

RATING

%

SESSION

RATING

AVERAGE

1. The project will benefit from this partnering session… 90.2% 4.51 / 5

2. My organization will benefit from this partnering session… 87.1% 4.36 / 5

3. I benefitted from this partnering session… 87.3% 4.37 / 5

4. The partnering session, overall, was… 90.0% 4.50 / 5


“A critical component to deliver a project on time and on budget…”

A critical component to deliver a project on time and on budget is partnering. What is partnering and why is this critical?

Partnering is a commitment to working together in a team environment in a trusting and open manner in order to get contractual work done effectively. Partnering is important because it focuses on achieving the shared goals of the team, and shares risks of the participants; therefore, it avoids or minimizes the number of contract claims. The team depends on its members for success.

The project in which I was involved and partnering helped the most, was the Highway 4 realignment project at Milk River. This multi-year project included 12 kilometres of new four-lane roadway, relocation of the Canadian Pacific Railway line, two new highway bridges, and one new rail bridge over the Milk River.

Many issues were faced by the delivery team, including utilities relocations, an archeological dig, environmental sensitivity of Milk River, Species at Risk, and service roads. There were multiple stakeholders on this project, including CPR, the Town of Milk River, the County of Warner, the local businesses, and the community.

Partnering was vital to the success of the project, to bring it in on time and on budget. The team used the partnering charter to achieve the established goals in an open, honest, trustworthy, and respectful work environment. I can’t even imagine to think what would have happened if the partnering approach was not used on this project.

Nino De Laurentiis, P.Eng.

Construction Manager Project Delivery Branch Alberta Transportation Government of Alberta


CHAPTER 2

PARTNERING – AT’S WAY OF DOING BUSINESS

“I don’t like that man. I must get to know him better.” ~Abraham Lincoln

COLLABORATION BETWEEN AT, CEA AND ARHCA

AT, CEA, and ARHCA have practiced construction partnering on select projects since 1999. The collaborative approach between AT, CEA and ARHCA is supported and enhanced through many initiatives, as described below.

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES GROUP (SPG)

The SPG is comprised of ten members appointed by AT, CEA, and ARHCA. This group develops strategies to develop, review, and accomplish long range objectives and related tasks or actions.

One of the SPG’s main objectives is to work together to ensure a strong and sustainable industry by promoting an atmosphere of trust, respect, and open communication between the three organizations, and encouraging healthy, long-term relationships.

TRI-PARTY OPERATIONS COMMITTEE (OPS COMMITTEE)

The Operations Committee consists of up to eleven members appointed by AT, CEA, and ARHCA. This committee addresses technical and operational issues that affect any of the three partners, in the areas of planning, design, construction, and/or rehabilitation of Alberta highways and bridges.

The Operations Committee is considered to be a primary body for bringing all issues with all partners to the table. This group receives direction from the SPG; as well, OPS Committee members also bring forward issues for the committee’s consideration.

ANNUAL TRI-PARTY TRANSPORTATION CONFERENCE

An annual Tri-Party Transportation Conference is held each spring. Design, engineering and construction professionals from AT, CEA, and ARHCA attend this two-day event which includes keynote speakers, breakout forums, workshops, and a tradeshow. This large collaborative event is planned by an Organizing Committee with representatives from AT, CEA, and ARHCA, and is hosted and arranged by the CEA.


ABOUT THE PARTNERS

Following is information about AT, CEA, and ARHCA’s commitments and contributions to a collaborative, partnering environment.

ALBERTA TRANSPORTATION (AT)

Alberta Transportation strives to provide a safe, innovative, and sustainable world-class transportation system that supports Alberta's economy and quality of life.

The department leads the planning, construction, and preservation of our provincial highway network to connect Alberta’s communities, and support the province’s economic and social growth.

As the owner of the infrastructure, AT strives to be a leader in construction partnering activities.

THE CONSULTING ENGINEERS OF ALBERTA (CEA)

The mission of CEA is “CEA promotes a sustainable consulting engineering industry for the benefit of society. We provide exceptional value to our member firms and their clients.”

CEA is committed to enhancing a collaborative approach between its members, AT and ARHCA. Their initiatives towards a partnering approach include the following:

Annual Tri-Party Transportation Conference – CEA hosts and makes all arrangements for this major annual collaborative conference.

Showcase Awards Gala – CEA’s annual Showcase Awards Gala recognizes excellence in the engineering sector of the province, including the projects’ owners and contractors.

CEA/AT Annual Mixer – CEA hosts this annual event that provides CEA and AT staff the opportunity to meet socially to discuss projects and issues affecting the industry.

Transportation Committee – CEA’s Transportation Committee is focused on strengthening members’ relationships and addressing issues related to transportation in Alberta, mainly (but not exclusively) with AT. This group works closely with AT, and provides input into CEA’s collaborative, partnering focused events.

THE ALBERTA ROADBUILDERS & HEAVY CONSTRUCTION ASSOCIATION (ARHCA)

The ARHCA is the largest heavy construction association in Canada. ARHCA’s members include contractors, suppliers, and consulting engineering firms who work actively in Alberta’s transportation industry (and other heavy construction sectors).

ARHCA is also committed to fostering a partnering approach between its members, AT, and CEA. ARHCA’s initiatives towards a collaborative approach include the following:

Annual Convention and Expo – ARHCA’s annual Convention and Expo is a major industry networking event, including speakers, workshops, industry sector meetings (including Paving & Road Materials), and an industry expo.

Paving & Road Materials Committee – ARHCA’s Paving & Road Materials Committee includes experts who focus on paving and road materials issues that may affect the industry. This committee works closely with AT.


Highway Maintenance Committee – ARHCA’s Highway Maintenance Committee includes representatives from highway maintenance contractors. This committee also works closely with AT.

TYPES OF PARTNERING

AT’s collaborative approach to partnering includes Public Partnering, Strategic Partnering, Project Partnering, and Highway Operations Partnering.

PUBLIC PARTNERING

Public partnering includes using a partnering approach to working with other levels of government or related agencies, including municipalities, counties, other provinces, First Nations, and other non-governmental stakeholders.

Public partnering may be used to achieve cooperation among multiple jurisdictions, to coordinate efforts of a variety of organizations, and to ensure mutual understanding and develop synergies when stakeholders share common involvement and/or interests in a project or initiative.

STRATEGIC PARTNERING

Strategic partnering includes working collaboratively with other stakeholder groups that share a common interest and whose inputs affect each organization. Strategic partnering may include partnering with utility providers, railways, and other industry organizations.

Strategic partnering is an effective approach to share information and resources, identify challenges and issues that may be addressed proactively, and maintain ongoing collaborative relationships for the mutual benefit of all of the stakeholder organizations.

The previously mentioned Strategic Priorities Group (SPG) and Tri-Party Operations Committee (OPS Committee) are examples of Strategic Partnering.

“There’s no doubt that the partnering session helped contribute to a successful project…” The partnering session held between CP, AT, and the other project stakeholders for the Queen Elizabeth II & 41 Avenue SW Interchange Project was extremely helpful to start the project off on the right foot. Speaking on behalf of CP, I can say that the session fostered a constructive and professional environment where concerns and thoughts on the project could be shared openly between stakeholders. This positive atmosphere then continued throughout the life of the project. There’s no doubt that the partnering session helped contribute to a successful project for all involved.

Trevor Lenehan, P.Eng. Project Manager

CP


“The partnering session allowed you to interact with project team members in a neutral setting…”

I have been involved in a few projects in which partnering was initiated and progressed throughout the project by Alberta Transportation.

One thing that really stood out for me is that Alberta Transportation took the initiative to forge better relationships between Consultants, Clients, and Contractors, for a greater good.

In all areas of our industry, there are people who are naturally good at partnering and people who aren’t. But even taking the first step and saying that “I want to partner” already begins to break down some of the walls for all personality and industry types. It’s like extending out a hand, and the other person can choose to shake it or not, and usually they will. It’s a grand gesture.

More recently, I was involved in partnering at Wolf Creek Bridge Replacements on Hwy 2 near Morningside. The project involved the removal and replacement of the north and southbound bridges. We attended a partnering session prior to the project beginning, continued doing Project Scorecards and progress reports throughout the project, and reviewing the results at the bi-weekly meetings.

In a lot of projects, you get to know people during the project, and the communication strategy is not set up, nor do you have any knowledge of the person outside of this potentially stressful situation. When you first encounter project disagreements, you only see the other person as one dimensional, which makes it easy to be less considerate in your communication. The partnering session allowed you to interact with these people in a neutral setting, and then you get to know them on a more personal level, and realize that they are more than what they do. These people have families, hobbies, friends, and goals.

In completing the Project Scorecard™ surveys and reviewing them at the meetings, the importance of partnering was reinforced throughout the project. Reviewing the Scorecard reports also highlighted issues and allowed them to be discussed openly and initiate a resolution, some of which were resolved right in the meeting. Disagreements and lack of clarity cost money, and the ability to speak openly and honestly between each other provided clarity of the issues, agreement, and timely resolution.

The project flowed smoothly, was on budget, on schedule, and the goals of all parties was achieved.

For particular individuals, partnering may not be successful; however, if the vast majority of the industry is open to partnering (and I think they are) and projects are better because of it, it’s worth it.

Laurie McCarron, P.Eng

Bridge Engineer Stantec

Red Deer AB

CONSTRUCTION PROJECT PARTNERING

Construction project partnering involves developing and maintaining collaborative working relationships with all relevant stakeholders working on a specific project. Project partnering is beneficial on all projects, regardless of the size and delivery method of project delivery, including design-bid-build, design-build, and P3 projects.

Construction project partnering is the most common partnering initiative undertaken by AT, CEA, and ARHCA, and is the main focus of this manual.


“The successes that both parties have achieved in our ‘Partnering Relationship’ are a direct result of the level of commitment and hard work we have all dedicated to this important process…”

It is truly great to share this success with Alberta Transportation, our “Partners”.

The successes that both parties have achieved in our “Partnering Relationship” are a direct result of the level of commitment and hard work that we all have dedicated to this important process.

As you know, both parties accepted the challenge to take on the necessary measures to improve our working relationship, and the execution of our work programs.

We also recognized that through effective “Partnering”, we could accomplish those important, mutual goals.

Over the last 3–4 years, we have continued to grow as a team, and are now to a point where it is difficult to tell the contractor from the government representative in the meeting room.

We have achieved an enviable level of cooperation, and now our challenge is to continue maintaining those higher levels of achievement.

I am very proud of our highway maintenance team and the leadership that our management and supervisory groups have given to cultivating our successful relationship with Alberta Transportation, and the accomplishments that have resulted from it.

Well Done Everyone!!

Kelly McManus President

Transportation & Highway Operations LaPrairie Group of Companies

Calgary AB

HIGHWAY OPERATIONS PARTNERING

The maintenance of Alberta’s highways is carried out by private contractors. AT oversees all highway operations work to ensure that it meets contract specifications.

Highway operations partnering between AT and the private contractors enables each organization to understand each others’ challenges and concerns, and can lead to improved relationships and more effective and efficient maintenance of Alberta’s highways.


AT’S PARTNERING PROGRAM

AT’s partnering program has evolved since its formal inception in 1999, and will continue to evolve. Following are key components of AT’s partnering program.


AT developed the first Partnering Guidelines Manual in 2008. The manual was updated in 2012, and re-written in 2016 to reflect the growth and updates in AT’s partnering program. The Partnering Guidelines Manual is a “living document”, and will be updated regularly as AT’s partnering program evolves.

There is also a Partnering Toolkit available to assist in administering and applying the construction partnering approach at the project level.

CONSTRUCTION PARTNERING STEERING COMMITTEE (CPSC)

To ensure that the collaborative approach between AT, CEA, and ARHCA is as effective as possible, AT is planning to establish a Construction Partnering Steering Committee (CPSC).

The CPSC will include representatives from AT, CEA, and ARHCA. The mandate of the CPSC will be to maximize the effectiveness and benefits of partnering on behalf of all three organizations, and to make improvements regarding partnering within any or all three organizations if necessary. The CPSC will likely include representatives from the SPG and the Tri-Party Operations Committee, and other parties that can impact or may be impacted by AT’s partnering program.

While the roles of the CPSC may change or evolve over time, they may include bringing forward any partnering concerns of any of the organizations, review of the Partnering Guidelines Manual, partnering training, and AT’s Partnering Recognition Program.

PARTNERING TRAINING

AT considers partnering training to be an important component of the partnering program. AT has recently developed partnering training for all AT Project Sponsors, Project Administrators and other key AT project delivery personnel, as well as Highway Operations and Major Capital Projects staff.

Developing and offering partnering training for CEA and ARHCA team members on an ongoing basis is also planned, as AT’s partnering program evolves.

Note : The Partnering Toolkit (see Appendix F) includes detailed information for the AT

Project Sponsor, the AT Project Administrator, the Consultant, and the Contractor to assist

in administering and applying the construction partnering approach at the project level.


CHAPTER 3

THE 3 LEVELS OF PARTNERING ON AT PROJECTS “Individual commitment to a group effort – that is what makes a team work,

a company work, a society work, a civilization work.” ~Vince Lombardi

THE PARTNERING PROCESS FOR AT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS

Every AT construction project will be completed using a partnering approach. The AT Project Sponsor and AT Project Administrator play key roles in all levels of successful partnering on AT projects.

AT has developed and refined a Project Risk Indicator (PRI) to help evaluate the levels of risk on AT construction projects. The levels of risk identified on the PRI are then used as a guide to determine the appropriate level of partnering for each project.

While the numerical ratings from the PRI provide strong indicators of the optimum level of partnering for each AT project, the AT Project Sponsor and AT Project Administrator have the discretion to assign a level of partnering different than that indicated by the PRI score.

There are three potential levels of partnering on AT projects:

LEVEL 1 – TEAM PARTNERING DISCUSSION, conducted by the AT Project Sponsor or Project Administrator at the pre-construction meeting, for lower risk projects, OR

LEVEL 2 – DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT SCORECARDS™, through a Team Partnering Discussion, led by the AT Project Sponsor or Project Administrator at the pre-construction meeting, for medium risk projects, OR

LEVEL 3 – FORMAL PARTNERING SESSION, conducted by a qualified Partnering Facilitator, held prior to the pre-construction meeting, followed by Project Scorecards™, for higher risk projects.

In this chapter, we will look at the PRI and at each of the three levels of partnering on AT construction projects.


“Partnering has played an important role in delivering this project and keeping it on budget and on schedule…”

The Northeast Anthony Henday Drive (NEAHD) project is the single largest highway construction project the province has undertaken to date. It is a Public-Private-Partnership (P3) contract worth $1.81 billion in 2012 dollars. It includes a 30-year maintenance period. With the completion of this project in fall of 2016, the Edmonton ring road will provide 80 kilometres of free-flow traffic around the entire Capital Region. Partnering has played an important role in delivering this project and keeping it on budget and on schedule. A partnering workshop was held, and all parties involved in this project agreed to work as partners in the delivery of the quality infrastructure for the final link of the ring road to facilitate economic and social benefits for the citizens of Alberta.

A partnering charter was developed and signed off by all parties. As part of this charter, it is recognized by the project team that working together we will:

Strive to bring a level of quality that meets or exceeds the contract requirements.

Communicate the agreed on quality standards to all levels of the team, especially to the “hands-on” working level, and complete the construction to meet the quality standards.

Collaboratively develop and support the project schedule to achieve traffic availability on or before October 1, 2016, and construction completion on or before October 1, 2017.

Strive to achieve zero lost time incidents.

Maintain public safety through the life of the project.

Create and live by our common collaborative culture.

Promote, use and abide by our issues resolution ladder.

Communicate through the established adaptable structures, through which we will promote ongoing conversation throughout the duration of the project.

Continuously develop ourselves personally, organizationally, and inter-organizationally in order to upgrade our skills and knowledge.

The project team is working together to achieve the common goal of delivering this project in the spirit of collaboration, trust and respect.

Aamer Shakoor, P. Eng.

Urban Construction Engineer - Edmonton Major Capital Projects Branch

Alberta Transportation Government of Alberta


The processes for partnering on AT construction projects are outlined in the chart below.

PARTNERING ON AT PROJECTS

PARTNERING ON AT PROJECTS

PR

E-C

ON

ST

RU

CT

ION

D

UR

ING

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

PO

ST

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

Evaluate partnering efforts and effectiveness at Post Construction Tri-Party Meeting, and recommend

improvements for future projects

TE

ND

ER

ST

AG

E

AT Project Administrator completes the Project Risk Indicator (PRI) for the project at the beginning of the tender preparation phase, and submits to AT Project Sponsor. AT Sponsor signs off, and AT

Administrator advises Engineering Consultant which Partnering Special Provision to include in their tender.

Document lessons learned and the improvements for future projects in the Department’s Lessons Learned Library

The assigned level of partnering is identified in the Tender Package, and included in the Partnering Special Provision for the contract

LEVEL 2 PARTNERING Medium Risk

LEVEL 1 PARTNERING Lower Risk

LEVEL 3 PARTNERING Higher Risk

Team Partnering Discussion, led by AT Staff, at Pre-Construction Meeting (using the Partnering Toolkit)

Develop Project Scorecards™ during Team Partnering

Discussion, led by AT Staff, at Pre-Construction Meeting (using

the Partnering Toolkit). AT Project Administrator may

contact the Project Management Office (PMO) in the event they do not have the contact information

of a Qualified Facilitator for Project Scorecards™

Formal one-day Partnering Session led by qualified Partnering Facilitator, prior to Pre-

Construction Meeting. AT Project Administrator contacts the Project Management Office

(PMO), to set up partnering session

Qualified Facilitator designs and delivers online Project Scorecard™, and issues

Project Scorecard™ Report

Qualified Facilitator designs and delivers online Project

Scorecards™, and issues Project Scorecard™ Report

Project Scorecard™ Report

reviewed at Project Meetings and incorporated into the project

Project Scorecard™ Report reviewed at Project

Meetings and incorporated into the project

Status of partnering reviewed at Project

Meetings

Suggestions to improve partnering incorporated into

the project

AT Project Administrator reviews the Lessons Learned Knowledge Base looking for applicable Tri-Party Meeting minutes from previous projects that may benefit this project.


THE AT PROJECT RISK INDICATOR (PRI)

The AT Project Risk Indicator (PRI) is a tool to help evaluate the levels of risk on AT construction projects. The levels of risk identified on the PRI are then used as a guide to determine the optimum level of partnering for each AT project.

The PRI is completed by the AT Project Administrator at the beginning of the tender preparation phase. The AT Project Sponsor reviews and signs off on the recommended level of partnering. The AT Administrator then advises the Engineering Consultant which Partnering Special Provision to include in their tender.

If the AT Project Administrator and Project Sponsor assign a different level of partnering than what is indicated by the PRI score, they will outline their reasons for the variation in the comments section on the last page of the PRI form.

Following is a description of the PRI process.

Note: See Appendix A: AT Project Risk Indicator (PRI) – Risk Analysis Tool

RISK EVALUATION CATEGORIES AND SCORING POINT RANGES

The AT PRI identifies Potential Risk categories which are evaluated for every AT construction project. AT has determined that some risk categories have the potential to impact the success of the project more than other risk categories.

For this reason, some risk categories may be assigned more points than other risk categories, as outlined in the table below (e.g., Safety may be scored from 1 to 9 points, while the scoring range for Inclement Weather is from 1 to 3 points.) However, while the upper scoring range for some potential risks is higher than for others, a minimum score may be assigned for any risk category.

The following table outlines the Potential Risk categories included in the PRI, and the scoring points range for each risk category.

POTENTIAL RISKS & SCORING POINT RANGES

Potential Risk Scoring Points Range

Potential Risk Scoring Points Range

Project Size 1 to 9 Traffic Management 1 to 6

Project Duration 1 to 9 Environmental 1 to 6

Safety 1 to 9 Future / Adjacent Projects 1 to 3

Project Complexity 1 to 9 Jurisdictional 1 to 3

Public / Community / Stakeholders

1 to 9 Resources 1 to 3

Utilities 1 to 9 Scope Creep 1 to 3

Schedule 1 to 6 Inclement Weather 1 to 3


In the PRI, each Potential Risk includes a description of the potential risk, and examples of applications on AT projects that may correspond to different scoring point levels. The evaluator may also include comments with each risk category.

ASSIGNING THE LEVEL OF PARTNERING

Once the AT Project Administrator has completed reviewing the Potential Risks and has assigned scoring points to each category, the next step is to compare the Total Score of the assigned points to the Potential Levels of Partnering, as outlined in the PRI Score Evaluation Table below.

PRI SCORE EVALUATION TABLE

Total Score Range

Level of Partnering

Description

14-28 1 Team Partnering Discussion conducted by the AT Project Sponsor or Administrator at the pre-construction meeting

29-43 2 Development of Project Scorecards™, through a Team Partnering Discussion, led by the AT Project Sponsor or Administrator at the pre-construction meeting

44 or higher 3 Formal Partnering Session, conducted by a qualified Partnering Facilitator, held prior to the pre-construction meeting. Followed by Project Scorecards™

As outlined previously, the AT Project Administrator and Project Sponsor have the discretion to assign a level of partnering for the project different than the level indicated in the PRI Score Evaluation Table.

Once the AT Project Sponsor has confirmed the level of partnering for the project, the AT Project Administrator advises the Engineering Consultant which Partnering Special Provision to include in their tender.

The completed PRI will also be discussed at the pre-construction meeting.

Note: See Appendix A: AT Project Risk Indicator (PRI) – Risk Analysis Tool

TEAM PARTNERING DISCUSSION – LEVELS 1 & 2

A Team Partnering Discussion conducted at the beginning of the pre-construction meeting and led by the AT Project Sponsor or Project Administrator is a requirement for AT construction projects rated as either Level 1or Level 2 Partnering projects.

The difference between projects rated at Level 1 Partnering and Level 2 Partnering is that Level 1 Partnering projects are monitored using a Successful Partnering Checklist (see Chapter 4 – Monitoring the Partnering Relationship for the Successful Partnerships Checklist) or holding discussions about partnering at Project Meetings, while Level 2 Partnering projects include the development of Project Scorecards™ to monitor the status of partnering.


The following table outlines the Team Partnering Discussion agendas for Level 1 and Level 2 Partnering.

AGENDAS Team Partnering Discussion

Level 1 Partnering Level 2 Partnering

1. Introductions 1. Introductions

2. Partnering on AT Projects 2. Partnering on AT Projects

3. Ground Rules for Partnering 3. Ground Rules for Partnering

4. Partnering Concept 4. Partnering Concept

5. Review of completed PRI (optional) 5. Review of completed PRI (optional)

6. Identification of Partners’ Key Concerns on

the project – Requires Pre-Work

6. Identification of Partners’ Key Concerns on

the project – Requires Pre-Work

7. Identification of Key Project Risks 7. Identification of Key Project Risks

8. Issue Resolution Ladder and Process 8. Issue Resolution Ladder and Process

9. Celebrations 9. Celebrations

10. Project Team Member Staff Changes 10. Project Team Member Staff Changes

11. Partnering Evaluation using the

Successful Partnering Checklist

11. Development of Project Scorecards™ to

Evaluate Partnering

12. Agreement to Partnering Approach 12. Agreement to Partnering Approach

Note: See Appendix B: Team Partnering Discussion – Agenda Details

DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT SCORECARDS™ – LEVEL 2

The development of a Project Scorecard™ for Level 2 Partnering projects is conducted as part of the Team Partnering Discussion, led by the AT Project Sponsor or Project Administrator, at the pre-construction meeting.

The process for developing and using Project Scorecards™ is outlined in the chart on the following page.

Note : The Partnering Toolkit (see Appendix F) includes detailed information for the AT

Project Sponsor, the AT Project Administrator, the Consultant, and the Contractor to assist in

administering and applying the construction partnering approach at the project level.


Project Scorecards™ have been

trialed and used on AT projects since

2007. Research conducted shows

that 93% of AT Project Scorecard™

users found them to be helpful, and

over 70% recommended their use on

large, complex AT projects.

What are Project Scorecards™?

Project Scorecards™ are on-line surveys conducted by a Qualified Facilitator on large complex construction projects while the projects are underway. On AT projects identified by the PRI as projects that will be completed using Level 2 Partnering, the AT Project Sponsor or Project Administrator will lead the development of the Project Scorecard™’s Evaluation Statements at the pre-construction meeting. A Qualified Facilitator will then conduct the on-line scorecard surveys, working closely with the AT Project Sponsor or Administrator, and issue the Project Scorecard™ Reports.

What is measured on Project Scorecards™?

In developing the Project Scorecard™ at the pre-construction meeting, the AT Project Sponsor or Project Administrator distributes a Project Scorecard™ Preparation Package (included in the Partnering Toolkit). The AT leader then works closely with the pre-construction meeting attendees to develop the Project Scorecard™’s Evaluation Statements, which include Project and Partnering Success Goals, and mitigation strategies/actions to address identified Key Project Risks. Project and Partnering Success Goals, and Key Project Risks are outlined in the following tables.

PROJECT SUCCESS GOALS

Project Success Goals focus on project related performance measures that are key to the

successful completion of the project. Typical Project Success Goals often include the

following categories:

Safety

Quality

Schedule

Budget/Cost/Profit

Environmental Stewardship

Issue Resolution

Scope

Risk Management

Traffic Management

Communications - External

Utility Coordination

Inclement Weather Management


PARTNERING SUCCESS GOALS

Partnering Success Goals focus on partnering related performance measures that are key

to effective partnering with all stakeholders. Typical Partnering Success Goals often include

the following categories:

Teamwork

Trust

Communications – Internal

Health of Partnering

Monitoring the Partnering Approach

Recognize Achievements & Celebrate

Successes

Note: See Appendix C: Typical Project and Partnering Success Goal Statements

KEY PROJECT RISKS

Key Project Risks are risks that could prevent the team from achieving the Project and

Partnering Success Goals. Typical Key Project Risk categories may include:

Utility relocation

On-site physical coordination

Scheduling of specific items

Minimizing impact of design and scope changes

Weather – mitigating negative results of inclement weather

Safety – site specific safety issues

Human resources and/or materials availability

Schedule and contractor coordination

Environmental concerns – site specific

Once the Key Project Risks have been identified, the team proactively develops risk

management strategies and/or actions to eliminate or reduce the likelihood of the risk

occurring, or to mitigate the impact of each Key Project Risk if it does occur. These strategies

and/or actions are then measured on each Project Scorecard™.

After the team has developed the Project and Partnering Success Goals, identified the Key Project Risks, and developed strategies/actions to address these risks, the next step is to create the Project Scorecard™ Participant List.


Who participates in Project Scorecards™?

Two different groups of individuals often participate in Project Scorecards™. The Project Scorecard™ Participant List includes Contributors and Recipients.

Project Scorecard™ Contributors

Project Scorecard™ Contributors are team members who are familiar with the on-site project activities. All Contributors are invited to participate in the online Project Scorecard™ survey, and will receive a copy of the completed Project Scorecard™ Report. Project Scorecard™ Contributors include representatives of the owner, the consultant(s), and the contractor(s), and possibly other stakeholders. These representatives should have a strong working knowledge of the project, and may include, but are not limited to:

Owner – Project Sponsor, Project Administrator, Field Support Technologist

Consultant – Corporate Support, Project Director, Project Manager, Technical Support

Contractor – Corporate Manager, Contract Manager, Site Superintendent, Foreman, Technical Support, Sub-Contractors

Other key project stakeholders may also be invited to participate as Contributors to the Project Scorecard™, including but not limited to:

Municipal representatives

Key suppliers

Utility representatives

Safety and environmental organizations

Other AT staff (e.g. Regional Director, Regional Environmental Coordinator, Safety Officer, Aggregate Coordinator, Maintenance Contract Inspector, etc.)

Project Scorecard™ Recipients

Project Scorecard™ Recipients are generally senior project team members who are not actively involved in the day-to-day project activities, but have a strong interest in the project’s activities and its successful execution. Recipients will not receive or complete the online surveys, but they will receive a copy of the completed Project Scorecard™ Report. Being included as a Project Scorecard™ Recipient enables senior project team members to monitor emerging project trends and allows for early identification and possibly proactive intervention on potential problem areas. It is intended that the AT Executive Director responsible for the project is included as a Project Scorecard™ Recipient for Project Scorecards™ conducted in their areas. Senior members of consulting and contracting companies may also be Recipients.


How are the online Project Scorecard™ surveys conducted?

Each Project Scorecard™ Contributor is sent a link to the online Project Scorecard™ survey. Each Contributor accesses the survey through the link, and provides their rating of the status of the Project and Partnering Success Goals, and the team’s identified strategies to address the Key Project Risks. As well, the Contributors may provide any comments they wish in an anonymous environment; however, they have the option to identify themselves regarding their specific comments if they wish. The Contributors are also asked to identify any key concerns and/or issues they may have that may be coming up on the project during the next month, and may also add any additional comments they have about the project and/or the partnering approach. The online Project Scorecard™ survey link is typically left open for approximately one week, and Contributors are given reminders as required to keep the participation rate as high as possible. Note: See Appendix D: Sample Project Scorecard™ Screen Shot

What is the Frequency of Project Scorecards™?

During the Team Partnering Discussion, the AT Sponsor or Administrator works with the project team to determine the optimum frequency of Project Scorecards™ for the project. Project Scorecard™ frequencies range between two weeks and bi-monthly, depending on the complexity of the project, the length, and the potential intensity and frequency of identified Key Project Risks. The most common frequency of Project Scorecards™ is either monthly or bi-monthly. For multiple season projects, Project Scorecards™ are often completed approximately one month prior to shut-down to assist the team with potential shut-down issues, and prepare for the following construction season. Project Scorecard™ participants find this to be a helpful proactive project management tool.

What is done with the Project Scorecard™ Report?

Within four days of the Project Scorecard™ survey closing, a Project Scorecard™ Report will be issued that includes a summary of the ratings and comments for each Evaluation Statement, and a graph showing the trends for each item (to identify progression or regression). Items that show a strong negative trend since the last report, or receive a “Poor” rating from any individual, are highlighted to identify potential problem areas that the team should focus on. Note: See Appendix E: Sample Project Scorecard™ Report Page The Project Scorecard™ Report should be thoroughly reviewed and discussed at the next project meeting. Based on their review of the Project Scorecard™ Report, Project Scorecard™ Recipients may also wish to attend the meeting, or may wish to provide input through others from their organization who will attend the project meeting. The review and discussion of the Project Scorecard™ Report, and the subsequent recognition of project successes and development of action plans to address any concerns, provide the most significant benefit of using Project Scorecards™.


FORMAL PARTNERING SESSIONS – LEVEL 3

Level 3 Partnering, for higher risk projects, consists of a formal one-day partnering session led by a qualified Partnering Facilitator. The formal partnering session is held prior to the pre-construction meeting, and is followed by Project Scorecards™ for the duration of the project.

Role of AT Project Sponsor or Project Administrator

The AT Project Sponsor or Project Administrator contacts the Project Management Office (PMO), who arranges with the Partnering Facilitator to conduct the partnering session. Once the facilitator has been confirmed, the timing of the partnering session is determined and pre-session preparations for the workshop commence.

Pre-Session Preparations

Pre-Session preparations for the Level 3 Partnering Session can impact the success of the partnering session and the potential effectiveness of partnering on the project. Following are pre-session preparation considerations.

Venue Arrangements – A suitable venue is arranged for the expected number of partnering session attendees, including audio visual requirements, food and beverages, room setup, and other details.

Determining Workshop Participants – It is recommended that all project team members and stakeholders that have an influence over the success of the project, and stakeholders where key relationships need to be developed, be considered for invitation to the partnering session. (See Chapter 4 – Keys to Effective Partnering for further information on Determining Workshop Participants)

Participant Pre-Work – Each invited stakeholder organization should be prepared to provide their organizations’ key challenges and concerns about the project, the key project risks from their perspective, and their organization’s lines of authority and communication for the specific project.

If an invited stakeholder is not able to attend the workshop, it is recommended that they provide their key challenges and what they feel are key project risks, in writing so their viewpoints will be known and can be considered by the other participants at the workshop.

Partnering Session Agenda

The agenda for every partnering session should be developed to ensure that the specific needs of each stakeholder are addressed, as well as any project specific considerations. Typical Level 3 Partnering Session agenda items include:

Informal Networking and Refreshments

Opening Comments

Partnering Overview Presentation

Participant Introductions

Overview of the Project

Project Risk Indicator (PRI) Review

Develop Project and Partnering Success Goals

Organizational Challenges and Concerns on the Project*

Organizational Lines of Authority and Communication*

Team Communication Flow


Key Project Risk Identification*

Risk Mitigation Strategy Development

Issue Resolution Ladder Development

Partnering Monitoring

Celebrations of Success

Partnering Champions

Lessons Learned From Prior Projects

Signing of the Partnering Agreement

Partnering Session Adjournment * Requires Pre-Work

Having adequate time to complete all workshop agenda items is always a concern at Level 3 Partnering Sessions. The facilitator must carefully monitor the timing of agenda items. If there are a large number of participants (e.g. 20 or more), and depending on the complexity of the project and the levels of stakeholders’ concerns (as determined during the Participant Pre-Work), the agenda may have to be shortened.

Partnering Monitoring

The success of the construction partnering approach is highly dependent on monitoring the status of the Project and Partnering Success Goals, the developed mitigation strategies/actions for identified Key Project Risks, and other feedback from the project team and other key stakeholders.

Project Scorecards™ are used to monitor the status of partnering on Level 3 Partnering projects. At the partnering session, the AT Project Sponsor or Administrator and the project team members will determine the desired frequency of Project Scorecards™ for the project.

Typically, Project Scorecards™ on Level 3 Partnering projects are completed monthly or bi-monthly. If there are months when a Project Scorecard™ is not completed on a Level 3 Partnering project, it is recommended that Partnering be a project meeting agenda item during those months.

Multiple Season Projects

For complex projects that are completed during more than one construction season, Season Kick-Off Partnering Sessions may benefit the project and the team, especially if there have been challenges on the project during the previous construction season. As well, on multiple season projects, Project Scorecards™ are often completed approximately one month prior to shut-down to assist the team with potential shut-down issues, and prepare for the following construction season.

“The lack of formal follow-up is the primary cause of failed partnered projects…The

partnering process will only produce positive results if project team members are willing

to commit themselves to it throughout the life of the project”

~Dr. Sai On Cheung

City University of Hong Kong


CHAPTER 4

KEYS TO EFFECTIVE PARTNERING

“Alone we can do so little, together we can do so much.” ~Helen Keller

DETERMINING WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS

One of the most important contributors to successful partnering workshops is the invitation and attendance of all stakeholders that have an influence over the success of the project, including AT, consultants, contractors, and third party stakeholders. Feedback from successfully partnered AT projects is that third parties that are invited appreciate the recognition and opportunity to participate. Third party participants often report that the relationships developed during the partnering workshop usually carry on through the execution of the project. As well, specific challenges and concerns of all parties, including third parties, are identified and discussed, and strategies to address the concerns are developed.

POTENTIAL PARTICIPANTS AT LEVEL 3 PARTNERING SESSIONS

Consideration should be given to inviting the following to attend Level 3 Partnering Sessions:

AT Consultant Contractor(s) Third Parties

Project Sponsor Corporate Support Corporate Support Key Suppliers

Project Administrator Project Director Project Manager Alberta One-Call

Construction Engineer(s)

Project Manager Project Superintendent

Major Municipality Representatives

Bridge Engineer(s) Construction Inspector Site Foreman Environment Officials

Field Support Technologist

Construction Surveyor Technical Support Safety Officials

Safety Officer Key Sub-Consultants Key Sub-Contractors Federal Department of Fisheries

Environmental Coordinator

Utility Representatives

Aggregate Coordinator

Maintenance Contract Inspector


RESOLVING ISSUES

A timely issue resolution process is very important to maintaining a collaborative working environment on AT construction projects.

THE ISSUE RESOLUTION LADDER

One of the cornerstones of partnering is the Issue Resolution Ladder. An Issue Resolution Ladder helps to ensure that issues that inevitably arise on the project are addressed in a timely manner, and at the appropriate level.

An issue may be defined as “anything that requires discussion or resolution, in anyone’s mind”. If anyone feels that there is an issue, then there is an issue.

SAMPLE ISSUE RESOLUTION LADDER

(Note – Assign names during creation of the ladder at the Partnering Session)

Level AT Consultant Contractor Sample

Max. Time

D Project Sponsor Corporate Support Corporate Support 2 days

C Project Administrator

Project Director Project Manager 2 days

B Project Manager Project Superintendent

1 day

A Field Technologist Site Foreman 1 day

On AT projects, it is expected that the maximum time an issue will remain in the ladder will be 6 days. This will ensure that the claimant may still file a Notice of Claim within the seven day limit set out in the General Specifications.

The Issue Resolution Process

As with Level 1 and 2 Partnering, the Issue Resolution Ladder is also created by the team during the Level 3 Partnering Session. At the top of the ladder are the three primary parties to the project, AT, the Consultant, and the Contractor. Sub-Consultants and Sub-Contractors are generally represented by the Consultant and the Contractor, per their contractual arrangements.

When an issue arises on the project, it is important that each party clearly communicates their positions around the issue; inevitably, the positions of the different parties regarding the issue are different. In fact, these different positions about issues are often the cause of the issue in the first place.

It is important that each party to an issue understands the other parties’ positions well enough that they can explain all parties’ positions to the others’ satisfaction.

The Issue Resolution Ladder process simply consists of ensuring that each party understands the other parties’ positions around the issue, and then defining how long the issue can remain


unresolved within each level of the Issue Resolution Ladder. If the issue cannot be resolved at a level of the ladder within the maximum assigned time, the issue is elevated to the next level of the ladder. The process continues until the issue reaches the top of the Issue Resolution Ladder.

If the issue is elevated to the top of the ladder and remains unresolved within the ladder, the claim resolution mechanism defined in the contract and/or specifications is the next available step.

On AT projects, it is the responsibility of the party who is in disagreement with the decision of the other party to file a Notice of Claim within the timelines set out in the contract documents, typically within seven (7) days of the circumstance giving rise to the claim.

At any time in the issue resolution ladder, any party may begin the claim resolution process under the contract by submitting a Notice of Claim.

Issue Resolution Ground Rules

1. Issues must be reported to all affected parties as soon as possible (ideally the day of noting the issue).

2. Resolve issues at the lowest possible level. 3. Unresolved issues will be elevated upwards – without delay. 4. Elevating an issue is not a negative or bad thing; it is part of an efficient process. 5. Ignoring an issue or making no decision on an issue is unacceptable. 6. Any party can decide that it’s time to elevate an issue. 7. No jumping levels on the ladder by any of the parties. 8. No one is expected to make a decision outside their authority (i.e. all partners are expected to act

within their authority limits). 9. Responses at each level of elevation should be completed within the time limit for that level – even

if the decision is to elevate to the next level.

Guidelines for Elevating Issues

1. Be clear if you are elevating an issue or just providing information 2. Identify and summarize the issue / problem 3. Identify potential impacts on schedule and costs 4. Identify current positions / viewpoints 5. Identify investigations that have been done to date 6. Identify potential options to resolve the issue,

including schedule and cost estimates 7. Identify your recommendations

If all parties agree, the timelines to resolve a specific issue can be extended, provided the impact to all parties is minimal, and critical path work can continue.

The Issue Resolution Ladder process works if it is diligently used. One of the major benefits of diligently using the Issue Resolution Ladder is that it preserves relationships at the different levels. One of the main causes of relationship problems on projects is the festering of unresolved issues – the Issue Resolution Ladder can help to avoid these relationship problems.

“If you’re in an argument, try to see the other point of view. If you don’t agree, you don’t agree; just don’t let emotions get the best of you.”

~Yogi Berra


CELEBRATIONS OF SUCCESS

“Things that get rewarded and appreciated get done!”

The success of a partnering approach depends very much on the commitment of all parties and team members involved in the project. Celebrations of success on the project and the partnering approach go a long ways towards keeping team members’ commitments and morale as high as possible. Even things as simple as saying “Thank you!” to other parties for something they have done well can go a long way towards promoting a healthy relationship.

Celebrations should be conducted periodically throughout the project rather than waiting for the end of the project to recognize successes and build morale. The team should look for opportunities to celebrate the successes of a project. As well, celebrations are often held to recognize specific milestone achievements. Identifying the milestones at the pre-construction meeting or partnering session is a great way to ensure that the successes are recognized!

A good option is to have each of the three parties alternate responsibilities for hosting/handling celebrations. A minimum recommended time between celebrations is one month, with celebrations of some sort held every second Friday being preferred.

Some celebrations that work well on construction projects include:

BBQ lunch on-site Schedule a “Finish one-hour early” day

Order pizza for site lunch Implement “Partnering Excellence Awards”

Hardhat stickers Coffee mugs

Host VIP tours of the jobsite Letters of acknowledgement

Feature employee in newsletter T-shirts with team logo


MONITORING THE PARTNERING RELATIONSHIP

It is recommended that the status of the partnering relationship be included as an agenda item at least monthly.

The following Successful Partnering Checklist is adapted from a checklist developed by R.D. Huddleston, formerly of AT. It is an excellent checklist to use to monitor the health of construction partnering relationships. Statements can be modified, removed, or added to suit the project.

SUCCESSFUL PARTNERING CHECKLIST

The partners are committed to safety and successful traffic accommodation on this project.

Senior members of all organizations demonstrate a leadership role in the promotion and support of the partnering approach.

Partners refer to each other in positive terms when communicating with other partners, employees, divisions and the public.

Partners utilize a consultative process in all areas that are exceptions to the defined contract procedures.

Project employees of all partners meet on a periodic basis.

Partners develop performance standards and monitor the progress of the relationship.

Partners identify potential key issues, problems and concerns on the project (outside of the specifications and contract documents), and work together towards proactively addressing these potential issues, problems and concerns.

Partners continue to work at maintaining shared values of trust, openness, and respect.

The team is fulfilling the Partnering Charter.

There have been adequate celebrations of successes in the partnering approach (initiated by management).

Comments:

Note: See Chapter 5: Tools to Assist in Making Partnering a Success


CHAPTER 5

TOOLS TO ASSIST IN MAKING PARTNERING A SUCCESS

“If everyone is moving forward together, then success takes care of itself.” ~Henry Ford

REGULAR MEETINGS

Regular project meetings can be one of the best partnering tools. Good communications and planning are critical to a successful project. A well-planned and run progress meeting provides the team with an opportunity to bring up issues, concerns, and ideas on a regular basis. A regularly scheduled project meeting can help everyone working on the job understand the schedule, coordinate work, identify and resolve issues, discuss the status of the project, and plan the week ahead. A good meeting has these attributes:

Starts on time - A project meeting should always start on time; this will train everyone to be on time.

Ends on time - There should be a set amount of time allotted for the meeting.

Have an agenda - The Consultant’s and the Contractor’s on-site supervisors should jointly develop the agenda. The agenda, while fixed, should be flexible enough to discuss new issues as they occur. The agenda also must not "lose" old issues that are still open. A good agenda covers:

The schedule (what work is planned) and how the team is going to accomplish it over the next week

Unresolved or outstanding issues - so that you can either resolve them or elevate them up the Issue Resolution Ladder

New issues which need resolution

Action items and deadlines, so that each person knows what tasks they are responsible for, and when the tasks are to be completed

Stubborn or particularly complex issues may need a separate meeting for their resolution.

A record is made of agreements and outstanding issues (minutes) - Meeting minutes are required so that everyone knows what was agreed to and what is still unresolved (the minutes may be very helpful in the future when questions arise). The Consultant will take the minutes, and distribute the minutes to the entire project team.

The people needed for discussion and to make decisions are at the meeting – Be sure that the appropriate people are invited and attend the meeting.

Attention is on the meeting, not elsewhere – Interruptions from smart phones distract everyone. Make a rule to put them aside. If everyone stays focused on the meeting it can start on time and end on time.


COMMUNICATION

Good communication means that there are no surprises on the project. The project team should commit to not writing letters without talking to each other first. Talking first gives everyone an opportunity to make sure they understand the issue(s) and to try to work things out before positions are put in writing. If you do end up putting your position in writing, the recipient should know that the letter is coming, and what it will say.

Experts tell us that 75-80% of good communication is listening – so if you want to improve communications on your project, listen, listen, listen.

Personality conflicts can get in the way of communications and can disrupt the project. Each person on the project brings a unique personality, and some accommodation should be made for these differences. Egos and personalities are present on every project; however, project issues should remain project issues, and not become personal issues.

FAIRNESS AND GOOD FAITH

It is your job to be fair, and to act in good faith while seeking resolution to project issues and problems. If you keep this objective in mind, you should never be too far from finding a solution.

Even if all the parties cannot agree on what is fair, by using fairness as the benchmark you will know where you are heading, keep the dialogue open, and dramatically improve the chance for resolving the problem. Work together to come to an agreement on the definition of “fairness,” and then work together towards achieving that goal.

Additionally, if all sides work to do what is in the best interest of the project, all sides’ interests will usually be satisfied, and everyone can walk away with a sense of accomplishment. These concepts, fairness and doing what is best for the project, are basic guidelines for partnering success. It takes discipline and perseverance to keep these two principles in mind in the heat of conflict, but it will pay off in more successful projects and improved working relationships.

SEPARATING PEOPLE FROM THE PROBLEM

Often, when conflict erupts on projects, people begin to look for who is to blame. It is easy to get caught up in the "fight", and in "winning", and not in getting the issue resolved while ensuring that relationships remain undamaged. Don’t forget that everyone will still have to work together to complete the project.

Because we sometimes become engaged in the fight over "winning" (and especially in not losing), we often don't take the time to really understand the problem - we make assumptions. Frequently the assumptions turn out to be only partially correct. They we find we can't come up with a good solution (or even a good "blaming") because we are working with false assumptions.

Following are steps that can be taken to avoid being trapped in this vicious cycle:


Step 1 - Seek to Understand the Problem Ask probing questions to try to determine all aspects of the problem - no matter how angry or hostile the other parties seem to be. Don't become defensive; you are trying to understand the problem and the assumptions each of the other stakeholders have. This will give you a clearer picture of what the real issues are. Step 2 - Don’t Make It Personal Take an objective point of view - don't become engaged in the battle. Take the role of negotiator or fact finder. The more people get wrapped up in the battle and in trying to win, the more likely they are to start feeling that the issue is a personal matter. But remember, it's a project issue, and your success will depend on your ability to not take things personally. Step 3 - Don’t Seek to Blame Don't seek to blame - instead, seek solutions and understanding. People generally act logically; your job is to find the logic behind their actions. It is almost always there, and often has nothing to do with the stated problem. Pointing fingers makes everyone defensive, stopping communication. Project problems are never solved by blaming someone. Everyone is in this project together - everyone will succeed or fail together. Step 4 - Agree on the Problem Work to gain agreement on what the problem is before you attempt to find solutions. If people don’t agree on exactly what the problem is, it is not possible to reach the best solution. If we follow these four steps we will go a long way to having productive problem solving on our construction projects.

FOLLOW-UP PARTNERING SESSION(S)

Partnering requires an on-going commitment. Although Partnering Scorecard surveys are conducted on a regular basis, the need to reaffirm that commitment may be necessary. You may consider holding a follow-up partnering session when there is a significant change of personnel on the project, when issues remain unresolved, when the project enters a new phase of work, or when the project extends over multiple construction seasons. Holding a follow-up partnering workshop will help to keep the partnering relationship strong and the project on track.

TEAM BUILDING ACTIVITIES

Construction projects do not go well when the people working on them do not have a sense of enjoyment, or do not like coming to work. It is important to the success of the project that project personnel enjoy their work. Holding regular joint team events or celebrations can help increase project team members’ levels of satisfaction and enjoyment on the project.

Management is responsible to monitor the status of the project team, and when necessary, to lead discussions with project team members regarding potential team activities that can increase team members’ appreciation of one another, and ensure that identified team activities are carried out.

* Reference - UDOT – Partnering Field Guide. (April 2015), Utah Department of Transportation


APPENDICES


APPENDIX A: AT PROJECT RISK INDICATOR

Completing the AT Project Risk Indicator (PRI) is the first step in determining the optimum level of partnering for each AT construction project.


APPENDIX B: TEAM PARTNERING DISCUSSION – AGENDA DETAILS

A Team Partnering Discussion is conducted for all AT Level 1 Partnering and Level 2 Partnering construction projects.

Following are details on the Team Partnering Discussion conducted at the pre-construction meeting for AT construction projects identified as Levels 1or 2 Partnering projects. The Team Partnering Discussion is led by the AT Project Sponsor or Administrator. Note – the Team Partnering Discussion agenda is the same for Level 1 and Level 2 Partnering projects, except for “#11 – Project Evaluation for Level 1 Partnering projects”, or “#11 – Development of Project Scorecards™ to Evaluate Partnering” for Level 2 Partnering projects.

AGENDA – Team Partnering Discussion

1. Introductions

2. Partnering on AT Projects

Review the Partnering on AT Projects flow chart for Level 1 and Level 2 Partnering, and discuss as required.

3. Ground Rules for Partnering

Respectable communication

Everyone participates, no one dominates

Listen and keep an open mind

Agree if it makes sense

Disagree or ask questions if it doesn’t make sense

4. Partnering Concept Partnering helps to define common goals, improve communication, increase trust, and foster a problem-solving attitude among a group of individuals who will work together throughout contract performance. A central objective of partnering is to encourage contracting parties to use a cooperative, team-based approach that can help to prevent claims and disputes. It is about realizing that parties may all get what they want out of a situation, by each doing things in a slightly different way.

5. Review of Completed PRI (Optional) At the outset of the project, the AT Project Sponsor and AT Project Administrator completed a Project Risk Indicator (PRI) – Risk Evaluation Tool for the project, as the first step in determining the optimum level of partnering. Using the PRI as a guide, they then assigned the level of partnering for the project. The Consultant was provided with a copy of the Completed PRI, and reviewed it prior to including the appropriate Partnering Special Provision in the tender for the project. The project team will review the completed PRI, and discuss as required.


6. Identification of Partners’ Key Concerns (from Pre-Work)

Each partner (AT, Consultant, and Contractor) should identify their top three Key Concerns about the project.

The goal is for each partner to understand the key areas of concern for each of the other

partners on the project.

7. Identification of Key Project Risks

The team discusses and agrees upon the top three Key Project Risks, i.e. the top three risks to the success of the project.

These Key Project Risks are often, but not always, identified in the Partners’ Key Concerns.

The team should discuss and agree upon any actions that can be taken to proactively reduce the likelihood of these risks occurring.

8. Issue Resolution Ladder and Process

An Issue Resolution Ladder helps to ensure that issues that inevitably arise on the project are addressed in a timely manner, and at the appropriate level.

An issue may be defined as “anything that requires discussion or resolution, in anyone’s mind.” If anyone feels that there is an issue, then there is an issue.

Level AT Consultant Contractor Max.Time

Corporate

Management

Field

Issue Resolution Process: a. Understand the other parties’ positions well enough to explain them to their satisfaction. b. For each specific issue, agree to a maximum timeframe for each level, before escalating the issue

to the next level. c. Resolve issues at the lowest possible level. d. Escalate unresolved issues without delay once all the information is known and it is realized that

a decision will not be reached within the maximum timeframe for that level. Any party can decide it is time to escalate an issue.

e. It is not a bad thing to escalate an issue, it is just part of an efficient and effective process. f. Ignoring an issue is not acceptable. g. Do not jump levels on the ladder. h. No one is expected to make a decision outside of their authority. i. When escalating an issue, write down the agreed upon problem, the areas where the parties are

stuck, and each party’s best idea for resolving the issue. Also outline when cost or schedule will be impacted, and to what extent.

9. Celebrations

Discussion on the type and frequency of celebrations of successes, or of milestones achieved, that could be done on this project (e.g. BBQ or pizza lunches, other items)


10. Project Team Member Staff Changes

If this project is of a long duration, there is a potential for staff changes.

As the project progresses, it will benefit the project and the partnering to bring all new team members up to speed on the Team Partnering Discussions.

Suggested procedure: o Review the minutes of this meeting with new team members when they join the project, and

ensure that they understand the Team Partnering Discussions that took place. o Include new team members in ongoing partnering meetings and celebrations.

11. Partnering Evaluation (for Level 1 Partnering Projects)

Use the Successful Partnering Checklist (see Chapter 4 – Keys to Effective Partnering)

A final evaluation of partnering will be done at the Post Construction Tri-Party Meeting OR

11. Development of Project Scorecards™ to Evaluate Partnering (for Level 2 Partnering Projects)

Development of Project Scorecards™ is described in Chapter 3

12. Agreement

All parties accept the value of partnering, and agree to follow the above procedures, as discussed today, for partnering for this project.


APPENDIX C: TYPICAL PROJECT & PARTNERING SUCCESS GOAL STATEMENTS

Project Scorecards™ include the team’s collaborative development of Project and Partnering Success Goals, and Goal Statements that describe each goal. These goals and goal statements are then measured at defined intervals during the completion of the project to help the team monitor the status of the project and the partnership, and take corrective actions as necessary.

Following are examples of typical Project and Partnering Success Goal Statements. The Project and Partnering Success Goal Statements are measured on the Project Scorecards™.

PROJECT SUCCESS GOALS

Goal Example Goal Statement

Safety All parties will place a high priority on safety for all workers and the public on

the project.

Quality The quality of workmanship and materials will meet or exceed the

specifications and the standards expected for this project.

Schedule The project will be completed on schedule. The schedule will be reviewed at

project meetings and updated as necessary.

Budget/Cost/Profit Costs and cost impactors will be managed to keep the project on budget,

while providing value to the owner and profit to the other partners.

Environmental Stewardship

The environment will be respected and protected during the construction of this project (e.g. erosion and sediment control, etc.). We will meet or exceed all regulatory requirements.

Issue Resolution Team members and their counterparts will identify and discuss issues as

soon as they become apparent. When necessary, we will use the Issue Resolution Ladder to address issues.

Scope We will effectively monitor and manage changes to the scope of the project

Risk Management We will proactively identify and manage risks to minimize their impacts on all

parties and the project.

Traffic Management Traffic accommodation will ensure the safety of workers on the project and

the safety and convenience of the travelling public. It will be monitored, reviewed, and updated on a regular basis.

Communications - External

We will anticipate public and stakeholders’ concerns, and will provide timely communications to address them.

Utility Coordination We will proactively engage and openly communicate with utility

representatives. We will coordinate their adjustments and relocations within an acceptable time frame.

Inclement Weather Management

We will proactively plan the mitigation measures needed to minimize the negative impact of weather events.


PARTNERING SUCCESS GOALS

Goal Example Goal Statement

Teamwork We will have a true team spirit characterized by respect, trust, and

collaboration. We will strive to create an enjoyable work environment.

Trust We will strive to have an environment of trust between all parties on the

project.

Communications – Internal

We will have timely, open, honest, and clear communications among the team members.

Health of Partnering We will foster a healthy partnering relationship through incorporating all of

the Project and Partnering Success Goals.

Monitoring the Partnering Approach

We will monitor the health of the partnering approach at monthly intervals.

Recognize Achievements & Celebrate Successes

We will recognize contributions and achievements of teams and individuals throughout the project, and will get together as a group to celebrate the successful progress of the project.


APPENDIX D: SAMPLE PROJECT SCORECARD™ SCREEN SHOT

Below is a sample of an online screen shot of a typical Project Scorecard™ survey.


APPENDIX E: SAMPLE PROJECT SCORECARD™ REPORT PAGE

Below is a sample page from a typical Project Scorecard™ Report.


A Partnering Toolkit that includes detailed information for the AT Project Sponsor, the AT

Project Administrator, the Consultant, and the Contractor is available to assist in

administering and applying the construction partnering approach at the project level.

The Partnering Toolkit includes:

The roles of all parties in all levels of partnering

Guidelines for administering partnering at all levels

Identification and locations of all available documents and tools to complete

partnering at all levels, including:

o AT Project Risk Indicator (PRI)

o Team Partnering Discussion Handouts – Level 1 and Level 2 Partnering

o Tips to Conduct a Team Partnering Discussion

o Project Scorecard™ Preparation Package

o Level 3 Partnering – Formal Partnering Session

Other relevant information

APPENDIX F: PARTNERING TOOLKIT

Contact the AT Project Sponsor or AT Project Administrator for access to the Partnering Toolkit.


REFERENCES AND SOURCES

Caltrans – Partnering – Our Way of Doing Business. (2000), California Department of Transportation, written by Sue Dyer, MBA, President, Orgmetrics, Livermore, CA

Partner Your Project. (1997).Dyer, Sue. Pendulum Publishing, Livermore CA

Partnering: Changing Attitudes in Construction. (1995) Washington, D.C.: The Associated General Contractors of America (AGC)

Partnering: A Concept for Success. (1991) Alexandria, VA.: The Associated General Contractors of America (AGC)

In Search of Partnering Excellence. (1991) Bureau of Engineering Research, The University of Texas at Austin: Construction Industry Institute (CII)

The Partnering Guide. (1995) Ottawa, ON.: The Department of National Defence and Defence Construction Canada

ODOT Partnering Handbook. (2000) Brown, Donna K., Ph.D.., Ohio Department of Transportation

CDOT Partnering Guidelines. (2006), Colorado Department of Transportation

UDOT Partnering Field Guide. (2015), Utah Department of Transportation

KCA/KDOT Partnering Program. Kansas Department of Transportation and Kansas Construction Association

Partnering for Success – Second Edition. U.S. Army Material Command, Alexandria, VA

Journal of Management Engineering. March/April 1995

Partnering in Construction. (1999)Carr, Frank, and Hurtado, Kim, and Lancaster, Charles, and Markert, Charles, and Tucker, Paul.. Forum on the Construction Industry – American Bar Association

Project Scorecards™ is a registered trademark in Canada to Allan Lowe & Associates Inc.

This AT Partnering Guidelines Manual was written by Allan Lowe, MBA, B.Comm., C.E.T. Principal of Allan Lowe & Associates Inc. – Construction Team Collaboration Services, www.allanlowe.com

http://www.allanlowe.com/

alberta transportation projects€¦ · construction industry in the united states, the...

Documents