News

Written by Sue Dyer, Founder, IPI   

In 2025, construction professionals face a clear but pressing threat: the soaring cost of claims and disputes. From skyrocketing insurance premiums to multi-million-dollar legal verdicts, the financial fallout from conflict is growing at an alarming pace. According to the latest industry data, the average value of a construction dispute in North America has surged past $42 million, and it's still climbing. 

Behind these numbers are real consequences: project delays, exhausted teams, reputational damage, and budgets blown apart. Claims related to defects, delays, and contract disputes are hitting more frequently, driven by supply chain disruptions, labor shortages, economic shifts, and a growing legal phenomenon called "social inflation," where jury awards have become increasingly generous. 

If you're a project leader, you may be thinking: "We don't plan for conflict, so why does it keep derailing us?" The truth is, conflict can start anytime and anywhere. It starts in the field, in the ways we form teams, manage problems, and communicate under stress. 

The Root of the Problem: Adversarial Culture 

Many projects still operate under an "us vs. them" mentality. Designers are pitted against contractors, contractors against owners, field against office. These power imbalances and siloed perspectives create tension long before formal disputes arise. In this environment, the moment something goes wrong, everyone starts protecting their own turf. Trust erodes. Collaboration stalls. And the seeds of costly conflict are sown. I saw it just today in a project that is under suspension, and yet because of miscommunication the contractor started working on the job without the owner knowing it. Trust immediately eroded. Everyone is now ready for a fight. It can happen that fast.  

The irony? Every stakeholder on a project typically shares the same fundamental interests: stay on budget, stay on schedule, deliver quality, and keep the site safe. But when fear and blame drive the culture, those shared goals are overshadowed by misalignment and mistrust. 

A Better Way: Collaborative Partnering 

There is a proven antidote to this culture of conflict: Collaborative Partnering (CP). Used successfully on thousands of projects, CP brings all parties together to define shared goals, align expectations, and establish accountability mechanisms before tensions boil over. It includes: 

• Partnering workshops and kickoff sessions 

• Dispute prevention and resolution frameworks 

• Regular facilitated check-ins to stay aligned 

• A performance scorecard to monitor progress 

Projects that implement CP have shown significantly higher success rates—with fewer claims, smoother delivery, and greater profitability for all parties involved. 

Take Action: Ten Ways to Prevent Conflict from Turning Into Claims 

Here is a practical checklist your team can use to prevent costly disputes: 

1. Implement Collaborative Partnering early in project formation. 
2. Train your project leaders through the IPI Project Leader Certification program to establish high-trust norms and resolve issues proactively. 
3. Neutralize power imbalances by setting shared ground rules and ensuring all voices are heard. 
4. Use a structured kickoff session to align goals and identify potential hot spots. 
5. Develop a shared problem-solving approach so all parties co-create solutions, rather than competing for control. 
6. Track project health through real-time trust check-ins and performance scorecards. 
7. Create a learning environment where teams share lessons and continuously improve.
8. Establish clear dispute prevention protocols and revisit them regularly. 
9. Design contracts that support collaboration, not just risk transfer. 
10. Celebrate collaborative wins to reinforce trust and accountability. 

Your Call to Action 

We can't control tariffs, labor shortages, or extreme weather, but we can control how we work together. If you want to protect your projects, your people, and your profits, it starts with culture. 

Collaborative Partnering and the IPI Project Leader Certification give you the tools to build that culture. Don’t wait for a sticky claim (or potential claim) to teach your team a painful lesson. Get ahead of conflict, and set your project up for success. 

Want to equip your team with the tools to prevent claims before they start? 

Explore Collaborative Partnering and register your team for the IPI Project Leader Certification Training today. 

Written by Sue Dyer, Founder, IPI  

When a crane operator spots a potential safety issue or an engineer questions a design detail, we stop everything until we get answers. Yet when it comes to the human side of construction, those heated discussions about schedule delays, cost overruns, or design changes, we often charge ahead without the same careful preparation. 

Jeff Wetzler, in his recent Harvard Business Review article "The Right Way to Prepare for a High-Stakes Conversation," argues that business leaders too often enter critical conversations "armed with rehearsed arguments and rebuttals" while missing breakthrough insights that could transform conflicts into collaborative solutions. For construction leaders operating in the partnering environment, this insight couldn't be more relevant. 

The Hidden Cost of Certainty in Construction 

Picture this: Your electrical subcontractor is three months behind schedule, and you're convinced they're just making excuses. You've prepared your talking points about liquidated damages and calling their bond company. Or consider when the owner rejects your change order for unforeseen site conditions, you're certain they're being unreasonable and you're ready to defend every line item. 

Sound familiar? This is what Wetzler calls operating in the "Zones of Certainty," where confirmation bias kicks in. We seek information that confirms what we already believe while filtering out anything that might challenge our assumptions. This mindset kills the collaborative spirit that makes projects successful. On construction projects, our interests are interdependent, and this makes this approach a lose/lose every time.  

The Construction Curiosity Check 

Wetzler's solution is surprisingly simple: a five-minute "Curiosity Check" before any high-stakes conversation. Here's how it works for construction scenarios: 

Step 1: Check in on Your Mindset - Ask yourself honestly: "If I encounter pushback in this conversation, will I jump to 'they're just covering their mistakes' or am I genuinely open to learning something new?" Most of us, when we're honest, start in what Wetzler calls "Confident Dismissal" or "Skeptical Tolerance." 

Step 2: Set a Curiosity Intention - Commit to moving one or two steps toward genuine openness. If you're starting from "They're clearly trying to hide something," aim for "Maybe there's something I don't know about their situation." 

Step 3: Spark Your Own Curiosity - Before entering that difficult conversation, consider these targeted questions: 

• What site conditions or technical challenges might they be facing that I'm unaware of? 

• What legitimate concerns about safety, quality, or schedule might be driving their position? 

• How might my previous decisions or communications be impacting their ability to perform? 

• What expertise or insights might they have about this issue that I haven't considered? 

• What collaborative solutions might emerge if we focus on the project's success rather than assigning blame? 

Real-World Results 

Consider Sarah, a project manager preparing to terminate a "underperforming" mechanical contractor. Using the Curiosity Check, she shifted from "They're clearly not managing their crew properly" to asking, "What might they be struggling with that I don't see?" 

The conversation revealed that the mechanical contractor had been dealing with critical equipment failures from a key supplier, information that hadn't made it up the chain. Instead of termination, they developed a joint action plan with alternative suppliers and adjusted sequencing. The project finished on time, and the partnership grew stronger. 

The Competitive Advantage of Curiosity 

In an industry where relationships often span decades and reputations matter enormously, curiosity isn't just nice to have, it's a competitive advantage. As Wetzler notes, "In a world where information is abundant but insight remains scarce, curiosity may be the ultimate competitive advantage." 

The next time you're heading into a difficult conversation about a delay, dispute, or design issue, take five minutes for your own mental preflight check. The question isn't whether you'll face disagreement, it's whether you'll be mentally prepared to transform that disagreement into collaborative problem-solving that strengthens your project and partnerships. 

Based on concepts from Jeff Wetzler's "The Right Way to Prepare for a High-Stakes Conversation," Harvard Business Review, July 2, 2025. 

Written by Sue Dyer, Founder, IPI     

There’s a truth that every experienced construction leader knows, even if they haven’t named it: teams reflect their leaders. How you show up, on good days and bad, ripples through your crew, your project team, and even across your organization. This isn’t just about leadership style. It’s rooted in neuroscience. 

It’s called the Law of Replication, and it’s driven by something extraordinary: your team’s mirror neurons. 

The Leadership Contagion Effect 

In a Yale study on emotional contagion, 50% of employees exposed to a visibly stressed leader began showing measurable stress responses within 30 minutes, even if the leader never spoke about their stress. 

Source: Yale Center for Emotional Intelligence, 2020 

What Are Mirror Neurons and Why Should Construction Leaders Care? 

Mirror neurons are specialized brain cells that fire both when we perform an action and when we see someone else perform it. These neurons help explain why yawns spread in meetings, or why tension, urgency, or calm can cascade across a jobsite. 

When leaders demonstrate frustration, disorganization, or blame, teams absorb that energy. When leaders model presence, poise, and accountability, those spread too. 

The Mirror You Create Becomes the Culture You Build 

In construction, especially under pressure, teams follow what leaders do, not what they say. That’s why this “mirror effect” is so powerful, and dangerous if left unchecked. 

Ask yourself: 

• Do I model the mindset I want replicated on my project? 

• Do I approach tough conversations the way I want my team to? 

• Do I recover from mistakes in a way that invites others to take responsibility? 

Leadership is the culture's reflection, and project culture drives everything, from risk management to retention. 

Four Ways to Build a Mirror Worth Reflecting 

1. Start with You 
Reset before site visits or high-stakes meetings. Teams take their emotional cues from you. Center yourself to center them. 

2. Demonstrate, Don’t Just Direct 
Model what respect, preparation, and solution-orientation look like, especially when things go sideways. 

3. Live the Values 
Posting values in the trailer isn’t enough. Consistently embodying values like “trust” and “collaboration” is what creates real change. 

4. Use Partnering Tools to Guide the Reflection 
Structured Collaborative Partnering (SCP) gives leaders clear, repeatable ways to model collaboration, ownership, and high performance. The tools are mirrors themselves, reinforcing the leadership example through practice. 

Make Replication Work for You 

Whether you're leading a crew of five or coordinating a billion-dollar program, the law of replication is already at work. The only question is whether you’re leading it intentionally or letting it lead you. 

As a leader goes, so goes the team. And as the team goes, so goes the project. Choose the mirror you want reflected. 

Ready to Level Up Your Leadership Mirror? 

The IPI Project Leader Certification Training equips construction leaders to master the behaviors, tools, and presence needed to set the right tone, day in and day out. 

Lead with intention. Replicate excellence. 
Learn more and register at partneringinstitute.org 

Written by Sue Dyer, Founder, IPI  

In construction, we measure success in concrete deliverables: schedule adherence, budget performance, and quality metrics. Yet the most powerful tool for achieving these outcomes costs nothing and requires no special equipment—the ability to ask good questions. According to the Construction Industry Institute, poor communication contributes to 57% of project failures, while effective partnering can reduce change orders by up to 40%. The difference often lies not in having the right answers, but in asking the right questions.

Beyond the Defensive Response

Too often, project conversations become exercises in position defense rather than problem-solving. When a contractor asks, "Why didn't you catch this in design?" or an owner demands, "How could costs increase this much?" the natural response is defensive. These questions, while understandable, create adversarial dynamics that shut down collaboration before it begins.

The challenge isn't that team members don't communicate—it's that they talk at each other rather than with each other. Each party advocates for their position without truly understanding the constraints, pressures, and perspectives driving other stakeholders' decisions. This leads to what partnering experts at the International Partnering Institute call "listening to reply" instead of "listening to understand."

The Anatomy of a Good Question

Effective questions in construction partnering share three characteristics: they seek understanding rather than assignment of blame, they explore the "why" behind positions, and they open pathways to collaborative solutions.

Consider the difference between "Why is this late?" and "What challenges are you facing that we might help address?" The first question implies fault and triggers defensiveness. The second acknowledges complexity and invites partnership. Both seek information, but only one builds the foundation for co-creation.

Good questions also demonstrate curiosity about constraints and motivations. Instead of "Can't you just expedite delivery?" try "What would it take to accelerate this timeline, and what trade-offs would we need to consider?" This approach recognizes that every stakeholder operates within real limitations—budget constraints, resource availability, regulatory requirements, or organizational policies.

Questions That Build Bridges

The most powerful partnering questions help stakeholders step into each other's shoes. Project managers should regularly ask: "From your perspective, what does success look like on this project?" or "What concerns keep you up at night about this phase?" These questions reveal underlying priorities and fears that rarely surface in status meetings.

When conflicts arise, resist the urge to immediately solve. Instead, ask: "Help me understand how this impacts your ability to deliver" or "What options have you considered, and what makes those challenging?" These inquiries transform adversaries into advisors, creating space for team members to share not just their positions, but their underlying interests.

From Understanding to Co-Creation

True partnering occurs when teams move beyond understanding different perspectives to jointly crafting solutions that work for everyone. This requires questions that explore possibilities: "What if we approached this differently?" or "How might we redesign this process to address everyone's concerns?"

The construction industry loses approximately $177 billion annually to poor project performance, much of it attributable to communication breakdowns and adversarial relationships. Yet research consistently shows that projects using “formal partnering” approaches achieve better outcomes across all performance metrics.

Implementing the Question Advantage

Start small. In your next project meeting, replace one accusatory question with a curious one. Instead of asking who's responsible for a problem, ask what factors contributed to it. Rather than demanding explanations for delays, explore what support might accelerate progress.

The goal isn't to avoid difficult conversations—construction projects will always face challenges. The goal is to approach those challenges as partners rather than adversaries, using questions as tools for understanding rather than weapons for blame.

When project teams master the art of asking good questions, they transform conflicts into collaborations and problems into opportunities for innovation. In an industry built on relationships and trust, this may be the most valuable skill a project manager can develop.

Ready to strengthen partnering skills across your organization? Join the International Partnering Institute to access proven frameworks, best practices, and a community committed to collaborative project delivery. You can join IPI here.

Written by Sue Dyer, Founder, IPI 

Collaborative Partnering has become essential for construction project success, yet many teams struggle to move beyond basic conflict resolution. Understanding where your project team sits on the partnering spectrum—and how to advance to higher stages—can transform not just project outcomes, but profitability for all stakeholders.

What Is Collaborative Partnering?

Collaborative Partnering is a structured approach where contractors, owners, subcontractors, designers, and construction managers commit to working together as allies rather than adversaries. It involves establishing shared goals, open communication protocols, and joint problem-solving processes that benefit the entire project rather than individual parties.

The Four-Stage Journey

Not every partnering session is the same. It should not be the same, because your objective for the session varies depending on how the team is operating. Every project team exists somewhere along one of four-stages. Each stage has a distinct objective, based on what is going on within the team and what needs to occur to achieve the objective. Let’s look at the four stages.

Stage I: Controlled When chaos has erupted or conflict looms, and some teams bring old baggage from past projects. Stage I partnering focuses on getting control. The primary goal is reducing conflict by getting agreements on how we are going to work together. Small agreements lead to alignment and defuse the need to protect your interests. Team members agree on basic working protocols to prevent conflict from escalating. A team at Stage 1 needs to focus on negotiating ways of working together and resolving past issues.

Stage II: Cooperative Here, team members begin knowing each other as people and are less adversarial. Focusing on trust-building allows the team to increase their level of cooperation. Focusing on measurable goals and consistent follow-through helps. Exhibiting trustworthiness by achieving promised deliverables creates the foundation for genuine cooperation.

Stage III: Collaborative The breakthrough stage occurs when the project team develops a successful working history together. The lines between different parties blur as everyone joins the same side of the table to examine project challenges collectively. The project itself becomes the focus rather than protecting individual interests. Trust runs high and communication flows freely across all team members.

Stage IV: Creative This pinnacle stage transforms teams into innovation engines. Creativity drives decision-making, with goals focused on achieving what others might consider impossible. Teams move fluidly to meet new challenges, making obstacles work for the project rather than against it. Here, true quality improvement and breakthrough solutions emerge.

The Reality of Progression

Understanding these stages reveals a crucial truth: real quality improvement happens in Stages III and IV, where creativity and innovation drive the team. Stages I and II, while sometimes necessary, focus primarily on preventing or resolving conflicts – sometimes unavoidable, but not the end goal.

Teams don't always progress linearly. Projects can regress to earlier stages when new challenges arise, team members change, or external pressures mount. The key is recognizing these shifts and making sure that your partnering focus is appropriate for the stage the team is experiencing.

Moving Forward

Progression through partnering stages isn't automatic—it requires intentional effort and regular reinforcement. Teams must honestly assess their current stage and identify specific actions to advance. This might involve establishing measurable trust-building goals in Stage II, or implementing joint problem-solving protocols to reach Stage III.

The investment pays dividends. Moving through partnering stages isn't just fulfilling—it's highly profitable for all parties involved. Projects that reach Stages III and IV consistently deliver superior outcomes: better quality, reduced conflicts, improved schedules, and enhanced innovation.

Your Next Step

Successful Collaborative Partnering requires ongoing commitment and the right frameworks. The International Partnering Institute provides resources, training, and community connections to help construction professionals master collaborative partnering at every stage.

Ready to advance your project team's partnering capabilities? Why not have your team become IPI Certified by taking the three IPI Project Leader Certification Trainings together!!

Take time this week to evaluate which stage your current project team occupies. Then identify one concrete action to begin moving toward the next level of partnering excellence.

Written by Sue Dyer, Founder, IPI     

Real Story: The owner says to his GC, “We need to resolve these issues. We’ve been unable to over the past several months, and now the dispute plays out everyday on the project”.  

Every construction project leader faces a harsh reality in 2025: claims are increasing both in frequency and dollar value. Despite innovative delivery methods designed to boost collaboration and reduce disputes, the construction industry continues to grapple with conflicts that can derail project momentum and damage critical working relationships. What should be collaborative problem-solving often becomes adversarial positioning that benefits no one. 

Facilitated Dispute Resolution (FDR) offers a powerful alternative that's transforming how the construction industry handles disputes. Used successfully on billions of dollars of construction projects across diverse sectors, from transportation and utilities to commercial and institutional work, this process has proven its effectiveness with facility owners nationwide who now routinely include FDR provisions in their contracts. 

The Problem: When Issues Fester During Construction 

The construction industry has long struggled with a fundamental challenge: how to resolve disputes while projects are still active. Traditional approaches often let issues simmer unresolved, creating mounting tension that can derail project momentum. By the time formal dispute resolution kicks in, problems have often escalated beyond simple disagreements into entrenched positions that damage working relationships. 

When disputes remain unresolved during active construction, the consequences multiply rapidly. Project teams spend valuable time documenting positions rather than focusing on completion. Decision-making slows as parties second-guess every choice through the lens of pending disputes. Trust erodes between team members who need to collaborate daily. Most critically, unresolved issues create uncertainty that can impact project schedules, budgets, and quality. 

A Different Approach: Teams Resolving Their Own Disputes 

Unlike dispute review boards (DRBs) or arbitration, FDR doesn't hand decision-making authority to outside parties. Instead, it creates a structured environment where the actual project stakeholders, those who lived through the issues, can work together to find solutions. This approach produces more durable agreements because the people who must live with the results are the ones crafting them. 

The process maintains collaborative relationships while providing the framework needed to tackle complex disputes. Because project teams retain control over outcomes, they can craft solutions that work for everyone involved. Most importantly, the team collectively understands what constitutes a "fair" resolution given the specific circumstances and project realities they've experienced together. 

FDR functions as an extension of the issue resolution ladder established during project partnering sessions. When disputes escalate to the highest levels, the senior executive for owners or the principal for contractors, FDR provides these decision makers with a neutral forum for working through difficult issues based on facts and merit rather than adversarial positioning. 

The FDR Process: Structure That Works 

At its core, FDR brings all stakeholders together with a trained, neutral facilitator in an informal setting. Each side presents their story, supporting facts, and documentation. The facilitator helps break complex issues into manageable sub-issues, allowing parties to resolve disputes piece by piece rather than getting overwhelmed by the entire scope of disagreement. 

The process works because it creates specific roles for each participant. Presenters, typically field team members from both sides, prepare and present the facts for each issue. They know the project best and can tell the real story of what happened. Experts provide technical analysis when needed. Decision Influencers offer oversight perspective without making final calls. Most importantly, Decision Makers, those with actual authority to commit their organizations, focus on understanding issues and crafting fair resolutions. 

Preparation proves critical to success. Each issue requires identification of the core problem, chronological development of events from all perspectives, relevant specifications and documentation, and clear explanation of how work was actually performed. Presentations should match the quality and completeness of formal dispute proceedings, complete with visual aids, highlighted documents, and supporting exhibits. 

Real-World Application: What to Expect 

FDR sessions typically run full days, though complex issues may require multiple sessions. The first meeting often focuses on discovering what the real disagreements are, something that's not always obvious when disputes have festered for months or years. Facilitators assign "homework" between sessions, allowing teams to gather additional information or perform specific analyses. 

A typical session follows a structured flow. After introductions and ground rules, each side presents their perspective on the first issue. Questions and clarifications follow. Decision makers may call individual caucuses to discuss their positions privately, then reconvene in joint sessions to work toward resolution. The process continues until agreement is reached or impasse declared. 

The informal setting proves crucial. Unlike formal hearings or litigation, FDR sessions encourage open dialogue. Decision makers can ask direct questions of field personnel who witnessed events firsthand. Technical experts can explain complex issues without formal rules of evidence getting in the way. Most importantly, parties can explore creative solutions that might not be available in more rigid dispute resolution forums. 

Strategic Implementation: Real-Time Resolution During Construction 

Today's most successful FDR applications occur during active construction rather than at project closeout. Smart project teams don't wait for issues to accumulate, they address brewing disputes immediately when they arise. At major milestones or when specific problems emerge, teams can quickly convene FDR sessions to resolve issues while everyone is still engaged on the project. 

This real-time approach offers tremendous advantages. Facts remain fresh in everyone's memory since events just occurred. Key personnel are still on-site and available to explain what happened. Project momentum continues because disputes don't fester and spread to other work activities. Most importantly, teams can implement solutions immediately, often preventing smaller issues from escalating into major problems. 

Consider a typical scenario: three months into a major infrastructure project, unexpected subsurface conditions create disagreement about changed work scope and compensation. Under traditional approaches, this issue might simmer while work continues, creating ongoing tension and uncertainty. With FDR, the team can convene a session within days, present the facts while they're fresh, and reach resolution that allows work to proceed smoothly. 

Of course, FDR can still prove valuable during project closeout when multiple unresolved issues remain. However, its greatest power lies in preventing that accumulation of disputes in the first place. 

Building Better Relationships 

Perhaps FDR's greatest benefit isn't just faster resolution, it's preserving working relationships. Traditional dispute resolution often creates winners and losers, burning bridges between parties who may need to collaborate again. FDR's collaborative approach allows all parties to save face while finding solutions that work for everyone. 

The process also provides valuable education for less experienced field personnel. Junior engineers and project managers get to see how seasoned decision makers work through complex issues. They learn what documentation matters, how to present technical information clearly, and how to separate personalities from problems. 

Making FDR Work: Critical Success Factors 

Success with FDR requires commitment from the top. Decision makers must actually participate, not delegate authority to subordinates. The neutral facilitator must be truly skilled in dispute resolution, this isn't a partnering session or team-building exercise. Preparation must be thorough and professional, with each side ready to support their positions with solid documentation and clear reasoning. 

Cost sharing between parties, typically split equally as part of the partnering process, ensures both sides have skin in the game. More importantly, it reinforces the collaborative nature of the process rather than making it feel like one party is imposing dispute resolution on the other. 

The Path Forward 

Twenty-five years after its development, FDR remains a powerful but underutilized tool in the construction industry's dispute resolution toolkit. Its success depends not on complex legal procedures or outside experts, but on bringing the right people together in the right environment with proper facilitation. 

For owners, including FDR provisions in project specifications signals commitment to collaborative problem-solving during construction. It demonstrates understanding that disputes are often inevitable in complex projects but that immediate, collaborative resolution is possible. For contractors, FDR offers the opportunity to present their case directly to decision makers without layers of bureaucracy, getting issues resolved quickly so work can proceed efficiently. 

For project leaders tired of disputes that disrupt construction progress, FDR offers a proven alternative that resolves issues in real-time. For owners seeking to improve project outcomes while maintaining positive contractor relationships, FDR deserves serious consideration in project specifications. For an industry that's built on collaboration and problem-solving, FDR provides a way to resolve disputes during construction that honors those values while keeping projects moving forward. 

Written by Sue Dyer, Founder, IPI    

At the heart of the International Partnering Institute’s (IPI) Collaborative Partnering Framework lies a powerful principle: aligning teams around a common purpose and shared goals within a high-trust environment, where communication, coordination, and innovation can thrive. Rather than relying on top-down directives or isolated expertise, the Framework recognizes that project success emerges when all participants, owners, architects, engineers, contractors, and suppliers, co-create both objectives and processes from Day 1. Over years of working with hundreds of A/E/C teams, IPI has distilled eight interlocking theories in six categories, into a unified system that consistently generates alignment, accountability, and breakthrough performance on construction projects. Below, we explore these foundational concepts and explain why IPI is the ideal environment for you to connect with peers, sharpen your partnering skills, and build projects that exceed expectations. 

1. Aligning Around Common Purpose and Goals 

A core tenet of Collaborative Partnering is that high-performing teams must begin by defining a shared vision. When stakeholders co-create success criteria, risk registers, quality metrics, target budgets, and schedules, everyone feels a sense of ownership that fuels commitment. This collective alignment isn’t merely about checking boxes; it establishes a high-trust environment where communication flows freely, coordination becomes seamless, and innovation naturally emerges. By jointly articulating “what winning looks like,” teams avoid hidden agendas and friction, focusing instead on a unified mission. 

2. Harnessing Collective Intelligence 

The Delphi Method (Wikipedia) and The Wisdom of Crowds (Wikipedia) both demonstrate that a group’s aggregated judgments often outperform individual experts. Within IPI’s Framework, initial partnering workshops gather diverse voices, field superintendents, design leads, project owners, and specialty subcontractors, to brainstorm potential risks and ideas. This broad input yields more robust solutions than any single viewpoint. By soliciting input from every team member early on, IPI cultivates an environment where communication, coordination, and innovation can thrive. Teams learn to listen actively, value differing perspectives, and blend insights into a cohesive strategy. 

3. Building Consensus Through Cooperative Games 

Modern Negotiation Theory, as pioneered by Harvard’s Negotiation Project (Harvard PON), emphasizes that true leverage is found by uncovering mutual interests. In construction, interdependence is inevitable: an owner’s success depends on the contractor’s ability to perform, just as a contractor relies on timely design input. IPI’s Framework ingrains the mindset that “if one loses, all lose.” When teams shift from adversarial bargaining to a “team first”, collaborative problem-solving, they forge high-trust bonds, eliminating costly disputes and claims. 

Game Theory (Wikipedia) further reinforces this concept, proving that cooperative strategies yield greater collective benefit than zero-sum competition. In construction we have overlapping interests. The potential of a team is exponentially greater when the team works together versus protecting individual interests. This win-win approach accelerates schedules, reduces rework, and maximizes overall project value. 

4. Consensus Decision Making & Divergence/Convergence 

Consensus Decision Making (Wikipedia) highlights that even the most brilliant idea is futile unless the team commits to action. IPI embeds structured consensus processes into its Framework: issues ranging from constructability challenges to change-order resolutions pass through facilitated workshops where everyone voices concerns, questions assumptions, and proposes alternatives. The facilitator guides participants until they reach a solution everyone can support, building both alignment and trust. 

Complementing consensus, the Divergence and Convergence model (explained at ChangingMinds.org) helps teams “go broad” before “going narrow.” First, brainstorming captures all potential options; then, prioritization exercises focus energy on the top strategies. This ensures that no viable idea is discarded prematurely and that the eventual decision reflects collective buy-in. 

5. Optimizing Throughput by Uncovering Constraints 

Instead of analyzing isolated tasks, IPI’s method considers the entire project delivery process to identify and alleviate hidden bottlenecks. Theory of Constraints (Wikipedia) teaches that productivity is governed by the slowest link—be it permit approvals, design iterations, or material deliveries. In partnering workshops, facilitators use Socratic questioning to guide teams in uncovering root-cause constraints. Once identified, participants collaborate on remedies, adjusting workflows, reallocating resources, or creating parallel processes, to boost overall throughput. By fostering a high-trust environment, teams feel safe sharing vulnerabilities, leading to more rapid constraint identification and resolution. 

6. Cultivating Critical Thinking & Creative Problem-Solving 

Complex construction challenges demand more than technical know-how; they require imaginative, critical thinking. Drawing on Edward de Bono’s Six Thinking Hats (Wikipedia), IPI facilitators encourage participants to adopt different mental “lenses”, objective analysis, emotional perspective, caution, optimism, and so on, when tackling issues. By explicitly shifting between these modes, teams avoid groupthink, consider risks and opportunities from multiple angles, and devise robust, innovative solutions. This structured approach to creative problem-solving ensures that decisions are both visionary and practical. 

Written by Sue Dyer, Founder, IPI 

In an era marked by rapidly shifting dynamics, construction leaders must adapt to evolving collaboration practices or risk falling behind. As of 2025, five key trends underscore why intentional partnering and trust-building are more critical than ever and why joining the International Partnering Institute (IPI) is the strategic advantage to navigate these changes. 

1. Trust Erosion Intensifies: The Edelman Context 
Between 2022 and 2025, the Edelman Trust Barometer documented a deepening cycle of distrust that has profound implications for construction teams. In 2022, the report revealed a “vicious cycle of distrust” driven by diminishing faith in government and media, as misinformation and polarization took hold globally edelman.com. By 2025, Edelman highlighted a “crisis of grievance,” noting that six in ten respondents felt institutions, including government and business, served narrow interests at the expense of regular people. Globally, the overall Trust Index stagnated at 58, with government distrusted in 17 of 28 countries measured, an alarming sign for project leaders striving to unify stakeholders. In this environment, IPI’s Project Leader Certification equips practitioners with proven techniques to counteract skepticism, foster transparency, and cultivate a shared sense of purpose. 

2. Hybrid Work Models Demand Agile Coordination 
By mid-2025, over 60 percent of office-based construction staff operate under hybrid schedules, while field crews rely on mobile connectivity for real-time updates. Maintaining alignment across dispersed teams requires structured processes, virtual stand-ups, cloud-based document controls, and periodic on-site “touch points” to reinforce accountability. IPI’s partnering framework offers ready-to-use templates and best practices for integrating remote workflows with in-person collaboration, ensuring that dispersed teams converge around common goals. 

3. AI-Enabled Field Intelligence Fuels Proactive Partnering 
Artificial intelligence tools have matured from novel pilot programs to everyday decision-support systems. Real-time safety analytics, productivity dashboards, and materials-logistics forecasting are now accessible via smartphone apps and wearables. Yet data alone does not cement partnership, it’s how leaders interpret insights, communicate implications, and align all parties around corrective actions. IPI’s training includes guidance on leveraging emerging technologies to anticipate conflicts, galvanize stakeholders, and keep communication channels open, merging data-driven decision-making with human-centric partnering. 

4. Climate Resilience and Supply Chain Transparency Accelerate Collaboration 
Extreme weather events, from late 2024 floods in the Southeast to early 2025 wildfires in the West, have underscored supply chain fragility and regulatory scrutiny. Successful partners now prioritize sustainable materials, transparent procurement, and joint risk assessments that share both accountability and reward. By adopting collaborative contract structures promoted by IPI, teams can innovate around climate-resilient design, preempt disruptions, and deliver projects that satisfy owners, regulators, and communities alike. 

5. Workforce Evolution: Diversity, Upskilling, and Well-Being 
The nationwide construction labor gap remains acute, with over 650,000 open roles reported in early 2025. However, more women, Gen Z professionals, and digital natives are entering the field. Employers who foster inclusive cultures, invest in upskilling, and embed mental health support experience higher retention rates. IPI’s community provides mentoring circles and leadership cohorts designed to help project leaders develop empathy, emotional intelligence, and strategies for harnessing diverse strengths, turning workforce challenges into competitive advantage. 

These five trends demonstrate that partnering in 2025 is no longer a “nice to have,” but a must-have discipline. IPI membership grants access to a robust network of peers, evidence-based methodologies, and certification pathways that empower you to transform distrust into delivery excellence. By becoming IPI-certified, you commit to elevating collaboration, building trust, and driving performance on every project. 

Written by Sue Dyer, Founder, IPI

In construction, adversarial relationships can quietly undermine even the most well-planned projects. When teams default to contract clauses and legal safeguards instead of open collaboration, costs rise and schedules slip. However, empirical research from the Construction Industry Institute (CII) and International Partnering Institute (IPI), clearly demonstrates that high levels of trust within a project team directly correlate to lower project costs. By focusing on building and maintaining trust, project leaders can unlock smoother workflows, faster issue resolution, and a more positive working environment. 

Why Trust Matters 

Trust isn’t mere “feel-good” rhetoric; it’s a measurable driver of project performance. CII’s RP24‐1 study shows a distinct cost/trust relationship: as trust increases, total project cost decreases. Conversely, low trust is a leading indicator of budget overruns and delays. In other words, teams that rely on fair dealings, transparent communication, and reliable follow-through generate more predictable outcomes and reduce the need for costly reword and dispute resolution. 

Be Unwaveringly Trustworthy 

Even if past events have eroded your confidence in certain teammates, you can always take responsibility for your own trustworthiness. Make “your word is your bond” a guiding principle. For example: if you commit to completing a submittal review by 7:00 a.m. on Wednesday, be there on time. Small, consistent deposits into your team members’ “trust accounts” build credibility faster than grand gestures ever could. Over time, those deposits create a reservoir that helps weather the occasional misunderstanding or schedule hiccup. 

Monitor Your Trust Account 

Trust isn’t static, every interaction either makes a deposit or a withdrawal. If you sense that your willingness to trust a colleague is waning, don’t let frustration fester. Have an open, respectful conversation.  Ask simple questions: “I noticed that this change order came in later than expected. Can you share what happened?” A brief dialogue can clear up misconceptions, prevent resentment, and get everyone back on the same page. 

Assessing Project Trust Levels 

To keep trust front and center, invite the team to evaluate where the project currently stands. Consider these three starter questions (integrated into a brief round-table exercise or a safety-style “toolbox talk”): 

1. How would you rate overall trust on this project? (1 = Distrust, 5 = Very Trusting) 
2. In which areas have you seen trust at its highest? Why? 
3. What practical steps can you take to improve trust—either personally or as a group? 

Encourage team members to share concrete examples (“I felt fully confident when the subcontractor delivered materials a day early”) as well as areas needing improvement (“We need better clarity around scope changes because last week’s shift caught us off guard”). 

Suggestions for Reinforcing Trust 

• Leader-Driven Modeling: Project leaders should openly demonstrate trust (e.g., delegating tasks, soliciting input, acknowledging mistakes). Visibility of this behavior encourages others to mirror it. 

• Regular Check-Ins: Schedule brief weekly “trust check” sessions, either in person or via video call, where each discipline reports one thing going well and one risk point requiring collaboration. 

• Document and Celebrate Successes: When trust-based approaches resolve issues faster or under budget, highlight those achievements at milestone meetings. This reinforces positive behavior. 

• Partnering Workshops: Host periodic Partnering workshops to foster effective communication, active listening, and conflict resolution to get the team aligned so momentum can grow and the more trust you build the faster you will go. 

For project leaders seeking to deepen their skills, the IPI Project Leader Certification Training teaches how to create and grow a culture of trust equipping leaders with proven frameworks, role-playing exercises, and real-world case studies to embed trust into every phase of a project. 

By elevating trust to a proactive focus, rather than waiting for disputes to arise, project teams can foster a collaborative culture that translates into tangible cost savings, schedule reliability, and a more engaged workforce. 

Written by Sue Dyer, Founder, IPI

Laying the Foundation for Success: Eight Ground Rules That Fuel Collaborative Partnering 

Every high‐performing project team knows that success isn’t accidental, it’s engineered through intentional behaviors and shared expectations.  Advanced project controls, robust schedules, and clear scopes are essential, but none will reach their full potential without a culture of trust and open communication.  That’s where Partnering Ground Rules come in: setting clear behavioral norms from day one to unlock true collaborative partnering. 

1. Everyone Is Created Equal 

When hierarchies govern every conversation, field crews and subcontractors may hesitate to speak up.  Flattening perceived ranks, where every voice truly matters, builds trust and encourages early identification of risks.  For example, Charlie was frustrated because, in every owner’s meeting, one representative from the owner’s team monopolized conversation, often veering into ridicule. No one else felt safe to speak.  After Charlie introduced Partnering Ground Rules, people began to share perspectives again, alleviating stress and revitalizing project momentum. 

2. Foster Frank, Honest Discussion 

Silence around tough topics breeds reactive chaos later, budget overruns, schedule slips, and added claims. Ground Rule #2 establishes a “no repercussions” policy for surfacing uncomfortable issues.  In practice, that means: 

• Acknowledging concerns without interruption during meetings. 

• Asking clarifying questions (“Help me understand why you see it this way”) to ensure issues are fully understood before shifting to solutions. 

By validating concerns early, teams proactively address root causes rather than battling symptoms when it’s too late. 

3. Judgments Are Not Allowed 

As soon as someone silently labels another’s idea “impractical,” collaboration grinds to a halt.  Suspending judgment keeps minds open.  Teams can remind themselves at the start of each meeting to reframe “That won’t work” into “Help me understand why this might work.”  Over time, this “yes‐and” mindset replaces “yes‐but,” fostering a safer environment where creative solutions can surface without fear of ridicule. 

4. Concentrate on Issues, Not Personalities 

When conflict becomes personal, “You missed this detail” morale erodes and energy shifts from problem solving to blame assignment. Instead, ground rules redirect language toward the issue itself, such as “Let’s focus on the scope overlap.” If a discussion veers into personal critique, appoint someone as the “gate keeper” to keep the team on track.  They get the team to “pause” and steer the conversation back to facts. This objective stance accelerates resolution while preserving interpersonal goodwill. 

5. There Are No Dumb Ideas or Questions 

Some of the most transformative breakthroughs begin as “crazy” suggestions. By explicitly stating that no idea is off‐limits, teams encourage even the most unconventional proposals, prefabrication strategies, novel sequencing, or alternate supply chains, that might shave weeks off the schedule or drive down costs.  Recording these “curveball” ideas without immediate critique helps capture latent innovation that can be vetted later under calmer conditions. 

6. Focus on the Present, Don’t Rehash the Past 

Dwelling on yesterday’s mistakes creates resentment and stalls progress. Ground rules emphasize, “We can’t change what happened, how do we address this now? ” A “lessons learned” board can separate retrospective analysis from present‐day action planning.  By keeping conversations forward‐looking, teams sustain momentum and avoid reliving grudges that derail collaboration. 

7. You Must Participate 

Partnering is a team sport. When only a handful of individuals drive discussions, the project forfeits the collective wisdom of those closest to the work.  To ensure broad engagement, rotate facilitation roles among team members, and start each session with an icebreaker, “What have you seen on‐site that could be improved?”, so everyone has a stake.  As Charlie discovered, when every team member knows their input is mission‐critical, hidden risks and creative solutions emerge. 

8. It’s OK to Have Fun 

Construction is inherently stressful, weather delays, design revisions, supply‐chain disruptions all test morale.  Injecting a bit of humor or camaraderie (e.g., brief “team trivia” before meetings or monthly “Partnering Coffee Breaks”) helps reduce tension and reminds teams that they’re tackling challenges together.  Laughter and lighthearted interactions strengthen relationships that can be leaned on when deadlines loom. 

Why Ground Rules Matter 

Ground rules are more than meeting checkboxes, they are the connective tissue binding a team together.  When embraced, these principles: 

1. Build Trust Faster: When every voice is respected, assumptions vanish and collaboration deepens. 

1. Reduce Conflict Escalations: By focusing on issues—not personalities—small disagreements don’t spiral into formal claims. 

1. Ignite Innovation: An open forum where “no dumb ideas” exist fosters breakthrough solutions. 

1. Sustain Momentum: Keeping conversations present‐focused and inclusive prevents time wasted on blame and silos. 

Charlie’s story illustrates this perfectly: his owner’s meetings were drifting into hostility until he introduced ground rules.  Once everyone understood they had equal opportunity to speak, and that judgments were off the table, the dynamics shifted. Participants felt safer sharing honest insights, stress levels dropped, and collaboration returned.  In turn, the project regained its rhythm, and small issues were addressed before they ballooned into budget‐busting claims. 

Turning Ground Rules into Habits 

Incorporate a monthly “Ground Rules Review” into your meetings.  Ask each team member to share which rule they find easiest, and which they’ll commit to improving.  By regularly revisiting these principles, you reinforce that partnering is not a one‐and‐done at kickoff, but a continuous mindset driving every decision.