san francisco collaborative partnering steering committee · web viewsan francisco collaborative...
TRANSCRIPT
SAN FRANCISCO COLLABORATIVE PARTNERING STEERING COMMITTEEEducation & Training Meeting #8 ReportMarch 2, 2018
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency3rd Floor Civic Center Conference Room1 South Van Ness AveSan Francisco, CA
SFCPSC Education & Training Meeting #8 Report
San Francisco Collaborative Partnering Steering CommitteeEducation & Training Subcommittee Meeting #8
March 2, 2018
As recorded on the flip charts
ACTION PLAN AND FOLLOW-UP ITEMS
1.1 The subcommittee will review the updated PEP 1.1.1 Partnering Training and provide feedback/questions to Rob and Jen by April 20th.
2.1 We will create a draft spreadsheet for potential City department and contractor staff who need to participate in the Partnering Field Guide Training. Rob will reach out to key department contacts and Associations to create the draft list.Who: Rob with Uday, Iris, Bijan, Toks, Mark and Alex Burns (Public Works) for City and Claire (AGC)
and Emily (UCON) for contractor reps
3.1 We will send Rob photos with project names for potential inclusion in the San Francisco Partnering Field Guide by April 16th.
EDUCATION AND TRAINING SUBCOMMITTEE FOLLOW-UP MEETINGSApril 30, 2018 9:00am – 10:30am 3rd Floor North Beach Conference Room #3072
March 2018 Page 2 of 7
SFCPSC Education & Training Meeting #8 Report
UPDATED PARTNERING ENHANCEMENT PROPOSALSThe subcommittee discussed PEP 1.1.1 Partnering Training, which will be focused on the new San Francisco Partnering Field Guide.
PEP 1.1.1 Partnering Training – draft for review
Success Factor 1.0: Education and TrainingIssue 1.1.1 Partnering TrainingProblem Statement and Current PracticeCurrently, the project managers (PMs), construction managers (CMs) and resident engineers (REs) delivering projects for City departments and the contractors they work with often do not have a mutual understanding of how to implement and maximize the partnering process.
Key challenges include: City staff are sometimes resistant to changing how they do things City staff and industry may not be aware of the benefits of structured Collaborative Partnering City PMs are often tasked with an adversarial role to prevent contractors and subcontractors from
“taking advantage of them” City PMs may not fully understand how contractors do business and how the trades are coordinated Teams may not know which issues should be brought to partnering
The result is that the application of partnering is inconsistent, and not all departments see the return on investment they can reap from fully implementing the partnering process.
How do we educate City and industry staff on the benefits of partnering? How can the City’s PMs encourage and enable contractors to deliver construction projects faster and
more efficiently? How do we educate our PMs, so they better understand how to maintain project requirements, while
allowing the contractor to earn a fair profit? How do we train our department and industry executives to support the culture we are trying to
develop?
Proposal 1.1.1 Partnering TrainingWe agree that a training program based on the new Partnering Field Guide should be developed. The training needs to be in-person, immersive and involve both City and industry staff. The training needs to be focused on the practical implementation of the new San Francisco Partnering Field Guide.
Discussion on 3/2/18:The E&T Subcommittee discussed the Partnering Training Content, Roll-out, Marketing, developing a Requirement/Certification and Potential Funding Sources
Training Content We need SFCPSC leadership to “sponsor” and help kick-off each partnering training meeting We need the training to be integrated with contractors and owner representatives The content should include role plays, perhaps one specific to each department so it is relevanto We need to include perspectives on negotiating a solutiono We need opportunities to review both the owner’s and the contractor/builder’s perspective
March 2018 Page 3 of 7
SFCPSC Education & Training Meeting #8 Report
o Idea: Perhaps we can tie partnering into Design/Build training? The content needs to include an open discussion about the contractor’s risks and the owner’s risks We need an opportunity to discuss the roll of City staff as “the custodians of public funds” – it is
important for any agreement to be fair and stand up to regulatory scrutiny, but the stance that staff are protecting the interests of the City can feel adversarial to contractors.
Tools to support the training:o We need to develop a one-pager with highlights for setting up and kicking off the partnering processo GSA lacks funding/ability to create “just-in-time” training, but we could set up simple “how to videos”
– the videos could be focused on frequently repeated elementso We need to create a linked web page based on the Field Guide with resources (www.sfpartnering.com)
Idea: Invite “Partnering Champions” to be co-trainers with Robo Currently, the Partnering Champions meet quarterly, discuss partnering and emerging challenges – co-
facilitating the Training would be a great forum for Partnering Champions to participate and help spread the word
o We can develop a nomination/volunteer process for other co-trainers (ideally people with construction experience, rather than exclusively partnering facilitators/professional trainers)
Training Roll-out Objective is to launch training in the fall of 2018 and train people through 2019 How many need Partnering Field Guide training?o Public Works – Infrastructure + Buildings group, ~80 totalo Port – ~14 totalo SFPUC – 40 Construction managers + 10 others, ~50 totalo SFMTA – ~30 totalo SFO – 60 PMs, CMs, REs and PEs + 30 PMSS, ~90 totalo Rec & Park – ~12 totalo City Staff - ~280 totalo Contractor staff ~ 120 - 200 total (we need at least one PM and one Exec to get trained)
CMAA and AIA both have ongoing education requirements and can do external outreach Public Works requires 10 hours of training per year (not all departments have this requirement) Contact people for potential contractor lists: Public Works (Alex Burns), Port (Uday), SFPUC (Iris),
SFO (TBD), SFMTA (Bijan), Rec & Park (Toks)
Marketing the Partnering Field Guide Training We need to explain the “why” in the lead up to launching the trainingo Marketing needs to sell the value of partnering as a culture-change process – we need to focus on
what’s in it for them (WIIFM)o We should set up a series of speeches, videos and written communication to promote the program
both internally and externally with industry – we can set up a “dog and pony show” with sample slides Associations can make the training part eligible for continuing education We need a marketing plan for each Departmento Public Works: Speak to each of the individual bureaus o Port: Speak to the internal general engineering group staff meeting o SFPUC: Present to the internal staff meetings and publish an article in the newsletter (“Currents”)o SFO: Monthly PM meeting o SFMTA: Regular PM meetingo Rec & Park: Present at the PM Meeting or do a brown bag
Partnering Training Requirement/Certification
March 2018 Page 4 of 7
SFCPSC Education & Training Meeting #8 Report
For contractors to participate, we need to establish a requirement/certification for the trainingo We need City project managers, construction managers, resident engineers and Deputies to attendo We need Contractor PMs and project sponsors/executives to attend
We can require that the team be trained/certified within 90 days of project NTP Ideas to incentivize training for contractors:o Potential bonus points for teams who have received training may be possible for Design-Build, CM/GC
and/or Best Value contracts – low bid is likely not possible to provide bonus points or tie to LBE goalso Perhaps trained contractors can receive a bonus towards the “good faith effort” for CMD?
We can offer both full training and shorter “Boot Camps” for those who only need the updateso We need to offer a full four-hour training for new staff and new CCSF contractorso Attendees of the Caltrans Fundamentals in Partnering Training attendees and/or the IPI Collaborative
Partnering Orientation Training can receive the shorter “booster class” and receive the certification
Funding the Training Training can be funded by two vehicles:o As-needed contracts – Shared by the Departments, these training events can be tied to contractor
Liaison meetings, the SF Partnering Awards Ceremony, etc.o Partnering allowance – The training could be tied to the partnering kick-off workshop for large projects
Status: Rob and Jen will update the PEP 1.1.1 Partnering Training based on the E&T subcommittee feedback Rob will start a draft roster of potential attendees to ensure the training is sufficiently funded Our goal is to Kick-off the new Partnering training beginning Fall 2018 and roll out over 2019
*Note – see updated PEP 1.1.1 and the attached draft Partnering Field Guide
WHAT’S STANDING OUT TO YOU? Great ongoing momentum - We have lots of work to do, but we are on a good path - Good roll-out strategy We are transitioning into implementation This is a major undertaking and it is important because new staff need the training Content really needs to be meaningful and we need to drive the WIIFM It would be great to get the Partnering Champions involved Staff are overcommitted, so we need to support them We need to get advice from ITT departments on how to bring some of this online We need a way to capture the updates to the Partnering Field Guide between meetings, so they can
be more easily identified
March 2018 Page 5 of 7
SFCPSC Education & Training Meeting #8 Report
ATTENDEES
March 2018 Page 6 of 7
SFCPSC Education & Training Meeting #8 Report
PARTNERING – A MEDIATIVE PROCESS
California Evidence Code
§ 1119. Mediation confidentiality
1119. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter:
(a) No evidence of anything said or any admission made for the purpose of, in the course of, or pursuant to, a mediation or a mediation consultation is admissible or subject to discovery, and disclosure of the evidence shall not be compelled, in any arbitration, administrative adjudication, civil action, or other noncriminal proceeding in which, pursuant to law, testimony can be compelled to be given.
(b) No writing, as defined in Section 250, that is prepared for the purpose of, in the course of, or pursuant to, a mediation or a mediation consultation, is admissible or subject to discovery, and disclosure of the writing shall not be compelled, in any arbitration, administrative adjudication, civil action, or other noncriminal proceeding in which, pursuant to law, testimony can be compelled to be given.
(c) All communications, negotiations, or settlement discussions by and between participants in the course of mediation or a mediation consultation shall remain confidential.
THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME BE OF SERVICE
ORGMETRICS LLC, celebrating its 30th year of service, works with construction teams who want to prevent or resolve disputes and with leaders who want to improve their organizations.
Advancing the Art and Science of Collaboration!
Please call if I can help in any way
Rob Reaugh
March 2018 Page 7 of 7
ORGMETRICS291 McLeod Street
Livermore, CA 94550Phone: (925) 449-8300
Email: [email protected]