ustainable Constructio

Iowa State University
Integrated Team
Development for the
Advancement of
Sustainable Construction
Aaron Brncich
09

2
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 3
What is Sustainable Construction? ............................................................................................................... 3
Influences for Sustainable Construction in the Global Economy: ................................................................ 4
Not just a passing fad: ................................................................................................................................... 5
Effect on the Construction Industry: ............................................................................................................. 5
Constructability: ........................................................................................................................................ 5
Educating the public and industry:............................................................................................................ 6
Certification Programs: ......................................................................................................................... 6
Solar Decathlon: .................................................................................................................................... 6
Integrated Teams: .......................................................................................................................................... 7
What is Integrated Delivery? .................................................................................................................... 7
Controlling Changes: ................................................................................................................................ 7
Improving Communication: ...................................................................................................................... 8
Research: ....................................................................................................................................................... 8
Case Study: ............................................................................................................................................... 8
The Planning Phase: .............................................................................................................................. 9
The Design Phase: ................................................................................................................................. 9
The Construction Phase: ..................................................................................................................... 12
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................. 15
Final Thought .............................................................................................................................................. 15
Works Cited ................................................................................................................................................ 17

3
Executive Summary
The concept of sustainability has become a cornerstone for most companies, organizations and
governments around the world. “Sustainability” found its niche in a 1987 Commission which
defined sustainability as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising
the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”(Bruntland Commission, 1987) In 1993
President Bill Clinton created a U.S. President’s Council on Sustainable Development. That
commission combined the elements of economic progress, environmental improvement with
social responsibility. Since that time, the concept of sustainability has exploded worldwide with
a wide array of activities being covered under the “sustainable” definition.
Some countries include social, economic, and cultural factors as part of their sustainable
construction programs, while others focus on environmental factors. With the ever increasing
levels of communication between different societies, it is clear that interest in Sustainable
Construction is growing and changing building and infrastructure construction is conducted.
(Bourdeau et al, 1998) This document will provide a high-level overview of Sustainable
Construction and its attributing factors. It will discuss the reasons why the Sustainable
Construction trend is positive and how it requires a modernized project delivery system to work
effectively. Finally, the document concludes by discussing a few of the primary impacts of
Sustainable Construction on the construction industry and how Iowa State University has
attempted to use integrated teams to advance this concept in the classroom environment.
What is Sustainable Construction?
Sustainable Construction includes not only environmental considerations, but also the integration
of environment with cost, schedule, operations, maintenance, and worker/employee relations. As
J. McLennan describes in his book “The Philosophy of Sustainable Design”:
:
“Sustainable design is the philosophy of designing physical objects, the built environment
and services to comply with the principles of economic, social, and ecological
sustainability. The intention of sustainable design is to "eliminate negative environmental
impact completely through skillful, sensitive design."
In order to understand this concept, consider not only how Sustainable Construction can affect
society in a positive way, but also how this concept varies from one society to the next. Charles
Kibert proposes that Sustainability can actually change societies over time for the better. His
reasoning for this claim is outlined in the following diagram, which depicts a sustainable
construction road map. (Bourdeau et al, 1998)

4
The figure below from Vanegas, DuBose and Pearce (1996) illustrates how the traditional project
management factors will be widened to incorporate Sustainable Construction to include
environmental demands. The figure attempts to illustrate Globalization’s effect on the initial and
the modified project management factors. When presented in the global context, the economic
and cultural factors need to be considered together with environmental issues and competitive
factors in order to achieve the most Sustainable Construction method. (Bourdeau et al, 1998)
Influences for Sustainable Construction in the Global Economy:
It is necessary to understand, at the outset, why there has been a need for Sustainable
Construction and why Globalization has so readily accelerated its development. The countries
most focused on Sustainable Construction have become aware of the international side effects of
their own development in terms of carbon emissions, consumption of non-renewable materials,
Greenfield degradation, etc. They recognize the need to mitigate these side effects for the
environmental health of their own nation and for others. With the communications and
understanding of global impacts that accompanies Globalization; countries not only become
responsible for their own impacts, but are able to influence others by promoting the idea of
sustainability for the future.

5
Not just a passing fad:
Europe has already demonstrated a well developed and continually improving green design
program for construction which is causing the rest of the world to follow suit. For example,
London has set up a sustainable incentive program well in advance of the U.S. and is ahead of
the U.S. in integrating sustainability into its construction projects. In addition, India and China
have established a number of green design principles and are home to a number of LEED
certified structures. Indian clients are increasingly seeking out the expertise of firms with
established reputations and records of sustainable design.
The current global environmental focus and the state of economy in terms of incentivizing cost
reductions and resource savings should do much to progress the status of green initiatives in
Asia, Europe, the U.S. and beyond. For many U.S.-based construction companies, sustainable
design makes sense and works relatively consistently across similar client markets. For other,
more locally based U.S. companies; some clients are more willing than others when it comes to
building green.
The industry will have to adapt to these new and emerging green construction markets because
they do not seem to be decreasing. Construction businesses will be expected to integrate, and
fully consider, the issues valued by others at all levels where the driving forces will be a mixture
of political, social and market forces, requiring products which respond to genuine need.
(Bourdeau et al, 1998) Sustainable Construction is here to stay.
Effect on the Construction Industry:
Constructability:
With the rise in Sustainable Construction across the world, the most direct effect on the
construction industry (other than cost, social and geographical factors) is its effect on
constructability. Constructability reviews are typically undertaken on a facility design to
improve construction ease and anticipate the effect on cost and schedule. A constructability
review entails getting experienced construction personnel involved with the project from the
earliest stages to ensure that their experience can properly influence the owners, planners, and
designers of the project. . Constructability reviews involving integrated teams from a broad
perspective will be required for successful Sustainable Construction projects. It is for this reason
that the future construction industry needs to focus more on Integrated Team Development
especially within the curriculums of our nation’s educational institutions.
To further iterate this point; in 2003 the Construction Research Congress published a study
researching the relationship between constructability and sustainable design at the Pentagon in
Washington DC. The results of the study found that the two cannot be fully accomplished if
viewed separately. For this reason, the authors established a list of best practices for building a
sustainable project in the U.S., and many of these best practices can be easily translated to other
locations. Their best practices are as follows:
• Form an integrated sustainable design and constructability team
• Establish a facilitative organizational structure and supportive contracting
strategies

6
• Use U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED rating system when possible
• Treat the built facility as an integrated whole, a key tenet to both sustainable
design and constructability.
• Establish early integration of Green Design and Constructability reviews.
(Sustainable Design, 2003)
Integrating green design into a construction project is an ethical decision in today's world.
However, this goal cannot be fully accomplished without making the right decisions about
constructability. Constructability reviews need to be performed on a project to determine the
feasibility of green concepts, not only for the owner’s wallet but also in terms of potential
indirect effects caused by their implementation. Even ideas that might not seem feasible at first
might become reality through the constructability reviews, assuming that the entire team has
input on the review. It is for this reason that the integration of all parties needs to happen early to
determine if the Green Design will truly be “Green” in the end.
Educating the public and industry:
The advancement of Sustainable Construction to a global concept did not occur without help.
Many developed societies have recognized its importance for some time, and have been working
to inform the public and industry personal. The U.S. government in particular has developed
many programs that aim to increase public and industry awareness of sustainability, among them
the two programs that follow:
Certification Programs:
LEED is a U.S EPA approved, internationally recognized certification system measuring how
well a building or community performs across categories that the U.S. Green Building Council
has determined are most effective for aiding in sustainability. These categories consist of energy
savings, water efficiency, carbon emission reduction, improved indoor air and environmental
quality, stewardship of resources and impacts on the surrounding environment. The LEED
program provides building owners and building users a simple structure for identifying and
implementing practical and quantifiable building design, construction, operations and
maintenance solutions that minimize the impact on the environment.
The LEED program has been designed to be flexible enough to apply to commercial as well as
residential construction. The LEED program has been developed to not only consider the
building lifecycle but also, design and construction, operations and maintenance, and renovation
when needed. Furthermore, the LEED program for Neighborhood Development incorporates the
goals of LEED into the community that the project occupies, thereby minimizing cultural impact.
(USGBC)
Solar Decathlon:
The Solar Decathlon is a student competition involving universities from around the world and is
fashioned after the Olympic decathlon, with ten contests testing performance in selected areas.
Instead of focusing on athletic ability, however, the Solar Decathlon focuses on the application
of solar energy and other sustainable building techniques to the construction of residential
structures. Its purpose is to illustrate the feasibility and to encourage the use of alternative energy
sources and renewable energy technologies in everyday homes. The decathlon gets its name from
the 10 specific areas of competition: architecture, engineering, market viability, communications,
comfort, appliances, hot water, lighting, energy balance and transportation. In addition to

7
producing enough electricity and hot water to perform all the functions of a home, each home
must produce surplus energy that will be metered and returned to the grid.
Integrated Teams:
Change is one of the most significant sources of cost and schedule growth on a construction
project. This is a significant problem on a Sustainable project due to the added complexities and
documentation. Many of these changes can be controlled, yet few firms extend the extra effort to
do so. With the rise of the Integrated Delivery method, this control is somewhat inherent in the
overall construction process, as contrasted with the traditional Hard Bid method. The following
section will discuss Integrated Delivery’s effect on changes and communication on a
construction project in comparison to traditional methods of delivery, along with a case study of
an Integrated Sustainable Construction project currently underway at Iowa State University.
What is Integrated Delivery?
Integrated Delivery focuses on combining the design, permit, and construction schedules in order
to simplify the traditional Hard Bid process. This does not shorten the time it takes to complete
the individual tasks of creating construction documents, acquiring building permits, or actually
constructing the building. Instead, the project team strives to bring together design and
construction professionals in a collaborative environment to complete these tasks at the same and
therefore shorter time.
An Integrated Delivery project typically makes one team responsible for both design and
construction of the project. In many cases, if this team is lead by a contractor, the process is
known as Contractor-led Design-Build. If the team leader is a design firm, the process is known
as Design-led Design-Build. In either case, the organization employed by the owner rarely
handles both aspects of design and construction in-house. In fact, the organization often
subcontracts with either on-site personnel or architects and engineers to aid in completing the
project.
Controlling Changes:
In order to understand how Integrated Delivery positively affects construction projects, consider
a common problem on many projects -- controlling change. These changes can either be Owner
Generated or Field Generated.
Owner Generated Changes occur both during design and construction. The owner, usually after
visiting the site or reviewing plans, decides to add to or retract from the project. This is often
done in an effort to add some item that was overlooked from the design, or to reduce the scope of
the project so as to control the total cost. Owner Generated Changes are common on almost all
projects and are inevitable.
Field Generated Changes occur out in the field during construction. These changes are most
commonly associated with conflicts between design features and or errors in the original design
or construction methods. Field Generated Changes are the most easily controlled and can usually
be avoided or minimized with good communications among all parties involved. (Riley, 2005)

8
Knowing what types of changes need to be controlled is only the first step in the process. The
parties involved in a project also need to be able to identify the initial cause of the change. Was it
a lack of communication or miscommunication, a design error, a defect in a material or process,
a construction error, a cost overrun, or just something that was forgotten?
Improving Communication:
Communication on a construction project is essential; however, it is something that few project
teams have mastered well. Robert S. Done (2004) found communication to increase satisfaction
and safety of all parties involved with a project. As Done summarized:
“Communication establishes expectations that in turn set the threshold for satisfaction.
Satisfaction is experienced when expectations are met or exceeded. Accordingly,
improving construction communication will improve customer satisfaction, and to
improve construction communication, a better understanding of this process is required.”
Improving communication techniques will benefit everyone and should become a primary focus
of all project teams. Furthermore, an increase in communication will result in naturally numbers
of changes to a project and better cost control throughout. Bringing the Integrated Delivery
process into the classroom setting assures that new engineering and design professionals entering
the workforce will be prepared for the future of the construction industry.
Integrated Delivery is particularly valuable on a Sustainable Construction project where the
numbers of unknowns are greater. The following case study shows why Integrated Delivery is
the best avenue for completing a Sustainable project.
Research:
Case Study:
The case study chosen is the Solar Decathlon project mentioned earlier. Since the Iowa State
Solar Decathlon is still in progress and the final outcome and data are not available, the effects of
Integrated Delivery will be illustrated through a Chronological narrative depicting the various
stages this project has completed as well as those that have yet to come. The chronology
highlights the obstacles that the team has overcome while experiencing the Integrated Delivery
process for the very first time. Furthermore, it is important to remember that this particular case
study is not the norm. The parties involved are not professionals with a great deal of industry
experience, nor have they ever been exposed to Integrated Delivery in previous practice. Iowa
State University’s Architecture, and Engineering curriculums has been focused on the industry
standard; Design-Bid-Build, and the Integrated approach is an innovation.
The Iowa State Solar Decathlon has been divided into three phases: the Planning Phase, the
Design Phase and the Construction Phase. In a true integrated project, these three phases have a
significant amount of overlap, however, and have no definite start or completion dates apart from
the overall Project Start and Completion. However, for the purposes of communicating
information in this document, the phases have been identified based on the bulk of the work that
has been undertaken thus far. The current status of the project is nearing the end of the
Construction Phase.

9
The Planning Phase:
The planning phase began in the fall of 2007 when the most recent Solar Decathlon took place
and when Iowa State began the process of applying to participate in the 2009 Decathlon. The
Integrated process began at this early stage, though many may not have realized it. The
Integrated Delivery entails the combined effort of multiple disciplines to complete a given task.
At this early stage what would become the integrated team consisted of the College of
Architecture and Design, Engineering and the College of Business. Even before the first needed
change was encountered, this group of participants was exposed to Integrated Delivery’s
necessity for communication. The three colleges worked together to develop a proposal to the
Department of Energy in order to be considered for the next competition. Undertaking this task
was undoubtedly difficult. The three colleges had not attempted a project of this type before, nor
had they any experience working on other interdisciplinary projects. However, key individuals
from each of the colleges were able to recognize the need for a higher level of communication
and developed a working strategy that lead the team as a whole to complete the task. The
proposal was submitted in the fall of 2007 on time and resulted in Iowa State Universities’
acceptance in the 2009 competition.
The Design Phase:
This was the first phase to truly encounter the subject of change on a large scale. On an
Integrated project, Change during the Design Phase is actually more common than a comparable
Design-Bid-Build project. This is the result of the increased communication of all parties
involved. In theory all parties are more closely linked and can achieve a higher level of detail
with the design verses traditional methods. Parties that might not have a large role at this stage,
or even a minimal role, can still have input in the design. This is where Integrated Delivery gains
its ground over Design-Bid-Build. Because all parties ideally have had their input, unforeseen
conflicts are kept to a minimum. Integrated Delivery has the inherent ability to rapidly tweak
the design as each party reviews and anticipates future needs during the Design Phase. The end
result should be a well planned and thought out design that the owners, builders and designers
have worked together to achieve. This should drastically reduce the previously discussed Owner
and Field Generated Changes.
Iowa State’s Design Phase was challenging because it was structured around coursework, with
the phases of the work constrained via the spring, summer, and fall semesters. Each of these
semesters is discussed separately to reflect that artificial chronology.
The Design Phase began in January of 2008 with the start of the spring semester. In this
semester, the bulk of the design work was assigned to an Architecture studio class. Ironically,
the concept that was to help the Planning Phase excel, Communication, was the biggest obstacle
that this new team of students struggled to overcome. The students simply lacked experience in
the design studio. Though most professors of such disciplines would like to believe that their
students are trained to communicate with disciplines other than their own, the reality of the
situation was that most students had never encountered an opportunity to force themselves to
learn the art of working with professionals with thought processes other than their own.
Architects were quickly troubled by the thought of designing with an engineer who cared more
about how something worked rather than how it looked. Likewise, engineers struggled with
understanding why the architects’ would choose to create overly complex and inefficient designs
in favor of a good look. Unfortunately, during the spring 2007 semester, the communication

10
issue was never solved. This created an explosion of problems within the Design team. Lack of
communication led to many members of the team not being able to truly understand the technical
requirements of the design, which in turn lead to many designs being developed that could not be
built under competition rules. Furthermore, a lack of defined leadership was apparent during the
bulk of the semester, which lead to multiple instances of conflicts of personality, non
professionalism, and individuals not performing their fair share of work. The head leaders of the
Design Team finally understood their misdirection toward the end of the semester period, at
which point it was too late to make any real progress. Mistakes that were made during this time
consisted of not clearly defining what was expected of the people involved, having a lax meeting
structure that allowed non-workers to go un-noticed or un-punished, a failure to promote the idea
of a right solution verses a best of everything solution, and finally, not getting the construction
teams full support at the proper time.
Summer semester began were the spring semester left off, with a design that was incomplete and
illegal when analyzed for competition rule compliance. The more pressing issue was the
deliverable that was due in early June. With the spring semester ending, most of the students had
gotten away with doing very little on the design and then just going home for the summer. This
created a frantic rush between the Design Team members that chose to stick with the project
throughout the summer. Fortunately, through the efforts of the original team and the few
remaining members the spring semester team, the June deliverables were fulfilled. The effort to
meet this deadline drove the realization that dramatic changes needed to be made. Through the
help of some construction management tools offered by the construction team, a new leadership
structure was developed for implementation in the fall semester. This tool was called a RACI
(Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed) diagram which specifically identifies all
known tasks and clearly specifies who is accountable for the completion of each task. It
identifies who else needs to take part in the completion such tasks. Once this new team structure
was implemented, it created a sound method for enforcing team members’ individual roles and
as such created an avenue for higher levels of communication for the students who would return
in the fall. In addition, once the hurdle of defining roles through the use of the RACI diagram
was overcome, new team members found their position easily for the remaining of the project
without the need to re-create the RACI diagram with every personnel change.
Fall semester began with a whole new compilation of students within the design studio.
However, with the new leadership structure, the new students were finally able understand the
concepts and goals for the project from the start. To kick the semester off with the new strategy,
the Design Team asked the studio to look at what had previously been designed and comment on
it. After a week of review, the studio took advantage of Integrated Delivery’s major benefit and
chose to perform a rapid re-design. At this point, there were multiple other disciplines working to
design and or construct areas of the project, but the Integrated Delivery method allowed these
areas to continue or modify their work to coincide with the newly developed design. In the end,
the new design far exceeded the quality of the first.
During this semester the Construction Team began to take on a larger role in the project, which
amplified the benefits of the Integrated Delivery method. The Construction Team decided that
they would host their own course in order to study the constructability of the design along with
performing some problem solving with regard to construction techniques and detailing. The

11
communication between the design studio and the construction class reached new levels that the
project had not been able to accomplish before this time. Working together, the two courses were
able to solve design problems by constructing mock-ups of the various features, thus allowing
the construction team to comment on the constructability and the design studio to examine the
visual appeal. In the end, the increased communication among all parties involved was a
complete success. The involvement of the construction team in the project before the design was
finished allowed for a stronger design that offered an excellent compromise between visual
appeal and constructability. As the Design Phase of the project neared its end and the next set of
deliverables came due, preparation for them was rolling smoothly.
Scope of work for the fall 2008 construction class:
Class Structure:
This fall ConE 490 course consisted of researching, constructing and testing concepts and
designs for the Iowa State Solar Decathlon House. The students were composed of both
engineers and architects in order to further promote the concept of integration at all levels. These
students were expected to take partially designed concepts and complete these designs through
research and testing. The class schedule allowed for a number of research and development days,
construction, and several days for testing the effectiveness of the designs. Students were
expected to have prior knowledge of residential construction techniques and be self-motivated to
complete the required tasks on time and to the highest quality. Once new designs were
constructed, students took part in testing their effectiveness according to strict scientific
procedures. After the testing, evaluations were conducted to determine if modifications would be
necessary.
Objectives:
The objective of the course was to expose students to the basic concepts involved in designing
energy efficient homes and to provide students with practice in developing detailed designs for
the Iowa State Solar Decathlon House. When the class was finished, the students should have
been able to:
Recognize the scope of planning and design effort that will be required.
Be able to communicate with other participants about construction facilities using
appropriate terminology.
Independently design uncomplicated systems using appropriate design codes and
resources provided from the class.
Act as the technical point of contact for the constructor when a facility is designed by
others.
Demonstrate skills that show an understanding and the ability to develop energy efficient
construction techniques on projects in their futures.
Identify areas of weakness in residential structures and derive methods of reinforcement
while validating these through performance and analysis of self designed testing
procedures.
Formulate and justify tests for proving the effectiveness of designs of residential
structures in regards to energy savings.

12
Assignments:
For the first assignment all students in the class were required to submit a document that
summarized, in detail, the goals of their project. They were given a list of areas that still needed
development, and each of them took one of these areas and created a solution for the problem.
Once these solutions were submitted, they were reviewed by the rest of the class and either
accepted into the design, modified and accepted, or placed under continued development. The
reason that this assignment was used was to give the students from the beginning a sense that
they had a part in the overall design of the project.
For the second assignment, the students developed a safety plan for the Iowa State team. They
were given this task because it was considered beneficial for them to be aware of all the work
that goes into a safety plan for a corporation, and so that they would be most familiar with the
safety guidelines for the project when they took over roles as teaching assistants in the following
semester. By having these select students exposed to both the construction side of the project and
the concept of integrated delivery, they could promote these concepts to a much larger group of
students in the next semester.
For all subsequent assignments, the students were given tasks that helped them to develop their
final report. These included, but were not limited to, weekly updates, daily journals, outlines and
concept ideas.
Final Paper:
The final report contained the chosen designs and construction techniques established throughout
the semester. The document discussed the results and recommendations from tests that the
students designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the final concepts for construction. The
student’s final report was then submitted along with a presentation to the Solar Decathlon Design
Team.
Lessons Learned:
A well-defined schedule at the beginning of the project is a good way to get everyone on
the same page for what is expected.
Giving team members a chance to make themselves a part of the project early on is a
good way to get higher quality work later on.
Frequent progress updates are useful because these updates hold each student
accountable, and the process allows for guidance if necessary.
A motivated leader will naturally motivate the team to do its best work.
A small percentage of the team will take up a large percentage of your time, and you need
to budget for that expectation.
Frequent positive reinforcement will create an enjoyable working environment for the
team.
The Construction Phase:
The Construction Phase of the Iowa State Solar Decathlon house officially began in mid January
of 2009. The Design and Construction teams both predicted that the amount of changes that
would occur after this date would be kept to a minimum due to the communication and
involvement among all disciplines during the Planning and Design Phases. They were correct,

13
with the only changes limited to detailing of features and redesigns for visual appeal and or
functionality
Scope of work for spring 2009:
Class Structure:
The spring ConE 490 course consisted of researching and constructing the project based on
drawings for the Iowa State Solar Decathlon House, while simultaneously studying four specific
potential obstacles to a successful construction project: communication, conflict resolution,
personality types, and leadership styles. Students in this class were expected to participate in an
interdisciplinary work environment and function as a team to complete the construction of the
Decathlon House and their research. To aid in achieving this goal, students were given multiple
assignments throughout the semester that were intended to help them to better understand the
four particular issues identified that affect modern construction projects. Each of these reports,
homework assignments and presentations were requested to emphasize the obstacles of
significance in a multi-disciplinary work environment.
Objectives:
The objective of the course was not only to expose students to the basic concepts involved in
designing energy efficient homes but also to provide students with practice in developing
working relationships within teams of individuals representing disciplines other than their own.
When the class was finished the students should have been able to:
Recognize the scope of planning and design effort required for projects.
Be able to communicate with other participants about construction issues using
appropriate terminology.
Independently design simple systems using appropriate design codes and resources
provided from the class.
Act as the technical point of contact for the constructor or designer when their
professional knowledge differs from your own.
Demonstrate skills that show an understanding of teamwork and ability to develop teamworking
techniques on projects.
Identify areas of weakness in team structures and derive methods of improvement while
validating these through accepted practices.
Assignments:
The assignments for this class held a common theme with the exception of the first and second.
The first assignment consisted of the individual sections of the class working together to write a
short document that would outline the reasons why they wanted to select a particular research
topic for the rest of the semester. These topics consisted of communication, conflict resolution,
leadership styles, and personality types. This first assignment served two purposes: to obtain a
request for the topic that the particular section would like to research and to speed up the initial
team building process. In the end, this first assignment aided in quickly guiding the sections
through the Forming Stage of the traditional team development model.
The second assignment was designed to help the sections finish moving through the Forming
Stage by introducing them to all of the aspects of the project. They were asked to read and reflect
on everything that was done thus far on the project. With their reflection they were asked to give

14
any suggestions or new ideas that might help, along with what issues they believed might arise
throughout the semester.
The subsequent assignments were all designed to aid the sections with their research for their
final papers and presentations. Hopefully by doing assignments that dealt with conflict
resolution, communication, leadership and personality types, they should have been able to
understand the scope of their research.
The final assignment for the class was class participation. Participation was determined to be a
very effective method for pulling the students out of the Forming Stage and pushing them
through the Storming Stage. Through a great deal of motivated participation (grading), issues
and conflicts were quickly resolved so that the students could begin work on their final papers
earlier.
Final Project:
The final report and presentation emphasized a pre-selected obstacle’s significance in a multidisciplinary
environment. The group’s content was expected to be specific and verifiable. A
minimum of three books, journals and or articles were ask to be cited in the final report. The
groups were expected to research their topics as a team and share the information with each other
so that all of them would be able to answer questions about their topic during the final
presentation.
This final project was intended to be the activity that took advantage of all of the team
development performed throughout the fifteen weeks of class. With any luck, the students would
have been able to overcome their Storming and Norming Phases during class and complete their
final paper efficiently within the Performing Phase. The four sections each gave a presentation
and submitted a report on one of the four topics (conflict resolution, communication, leadership
and personality types).
These presentations and reports turned out to be quite impressive, given that the groups were
allowed the liberty to attack their topic however they chose. The reason for this unusually high
level of quality is believed to be because of the team’s ability to understand one another and
work together effectively as a result of the semester worth of work and development.
Lessons Learned:
A well planned schedule does not always goes as planned.
Early team development leads to better performance.
Proper planning and coordination by management can allow for separate teams to
complete the same tasks without integration.
Separate teams need to meet and socialize periodically in order to maintain connection
with the project.
A stressed out leader will create a stressed out team, thereby lowering productivity.
A lenient leader will create an overly relaxed team, also lowering productivity.
Large amounts of re-work will GREATLY affect team morale and productivity.
Patience is definitely a virtue.

15
All lessons from the fall were also confirmed.
Once the spring 2009 semester ended, the construction team continued to build the house. The
workers building the house over the summer were pulled from the students that built the house
during the school year and those who planned to go to DC in the fall. By using these students, we
had the most qualified and experienced students not only building the house, but also assembling
it on the Mall in DC.
Conclusion
Through the use of the information learned using the Iowa State Solar Decathlon as a case study,
the positive effects of the Integrated Delivery process have been made apparent. Although the
Iowa State team has not functioned perfectly by any means of the word, they have overcome a
huge obstacle on their path. The Iowa State team began knowing only how to function according
to the traditional methods of construction. The concept of Integrated Delivery was something
that they might have encountered for a few class periods and nothing beyond. For a young team
with practically no real-world experience in the building industry, they have been able to learn to
communicate in order to develop innovative designs according to strict sets of specifications.
They also have been able to build their team working skills in a way that most students never
encounter until after they reach industry. Integrated Delivery has truly been an amazing learning
experience for the Iowa State team, and has identified the need for an adjustment to the current
curriculum include the subject of Integrated Delivery.
Throughout the past two semesters the team has learned team leadership, scheduling and
coordination of large groups and tasks, procurement of materials and equipment, constructability
analysis, emergency field modifications, personality and leadership issues, and peer relationship
development. This group of students is lucky to have engaged in all of these activities while here
at Iowa State, and they will be more efficient and productive members of the building industry as
a result. This experience will stand these students in good stead as they prepare to confront a
service market demanding that buildings be not only sound and cost-effective, but also
“sustainable.”
Final Thought
Sustainable Construction has grown to be a major driving force in new development all around
the world. The reason for this is clearly due to the Globalization of beliefs and ideas related to
construction practices. As larger economies continue to develop sustainable concepts and
integrate them in to aspects of their societies other than construction, it is sure to continue to be a
major part of all construction in the future. Even though the definitions of what Sustainable
Construction is varies from one country to the next, the necessary communication and integration
processes for construction firms hoping to work in these countries is very similar, which is
something that all Project Managers need to be aware of when pursuing future business. Future
designs will be expected to be more energy efficient and reduce carbon emissions. Knowing that,
sustainable construction materials may be more variable in qualities and or quantities, therefore
subject to more change orders unless the design team has been sharing the broad experience of
the Integrated Delivery approach and are easily able to adapt designs and or predict problems.
This document has attempted to illustrate the great need in today’s world for teams of

professionals that not only understand what and why they are designing or constructing, but also
how to work together as a unified team of multidiscipline professionals. This team needs to have
the ability to push itself forward and excel beyond the norm, while at the same time holding each
other accountable for accomplishing the team’s goals. The focus in Integrated Delivery on
teamwork and understanding personalities will develop managers who reflect the social
responsibility expected for sustainable projects.
16

17
Works Cited
Bruntland Commission, Our Common Future (1987) (definition adopted by the World Business
Council on Sustainable Development)
Vanegas, J. A., DuBose, J. R., & Pearce, A. R. (1996). Sustainable Technologies for the
Building Construction Industry. Proceedings of the Symposium on Design for the Global
Environment, Atlanta, USA, November 2-4, 1996.
Cardinal-Pette, Clare. Personal interview. Nov. 2008.
Done, Robert S. Improving Construction Communication. Tech.No. 560. Arizona Department of
Transportation. 2004. 1-40.
Ibbs, William, Young H. Kwak, Tzeyu Ng, and A. M. Odabasi. "Project Delivery Systems and
Project Change: Quantitative Analysis." Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management 129 (2004): 382-87.
Lentz, Timothy. Personal interview. Nov. 2008.
Passe, Ulrike. Personal interview. Nov. 2008.
McLennan, J. F. (2004), The Philosophy of Sustainable Design
Pulaski, Michael, Teresa Pohlman, Michael Horman, and David Riley. Synergies between
Sustainable Design and Constructability at the Pentagon. Tech. 2003. Construction
Congress. Apr. 2009 .
"SUSTAINABLE DESIGN & CONSTRUCTABILITY." Whs Online. Department of Defense.
.
Bourdeau, Luc, Pekka Huovila, Kilber Charles, and Roel Lanting. Sustainable Development and
the Future of Construction. Rep. no. 225. May 1998. CIB working Commission W82.
"Globalization." Def. 1. Websters.