Interim Project Alliance Agreement

The alliance as a model for project implementation has come a long way since its inception in the North Sea oil and gas industry and then in Australia in the mid-1990s. Today, almost 20 years after the Wandoo Alliance, Australia`s first alliance project, alliancing has created a place in the model of project delivery to most professionals of major companies, both public and (to a lesser extent) private. Between 2004 and 2009, the total value of alliance projects in the roads, railways and water sectors in New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia was $32 billion. [1] This represented 29% of total infrastructure spending of $110 billion in the same sectors in Australia. [2] 19 the damage suffered was particularly unique in that nowhere else in the world had liquefaction been repeatedly spread in such a large area as in Christchurch. The total cost of damage is estimated at about 10% of New Zealand`s Gross Domestic Product, and the Christchurch earthquake is considered one of the most costly natural disasters in New Zealand since 1950. The Stronger Christchurch Infrastructure Rebuild Team (SCIRT) is an organization specially built to rebuild horizontal infrastructure in public property . . . Damaged by the Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011. (SCIRT 2014) Just after the September 2010 earthquake, a public works program managed by the local municipality was put in place to repair broken infrastructure. This program has been called the Infrastructure Rebuild Man-agement Office (IRMO). Indeed, the city was divided into four geographical areas called pods, each attached to a serious construction company which, in turn, instructed a planning consultant to provide the necessary professional services. The companies worked on a model for reimbursement of emergency costs and reacted immediately to what might now be called a modest amount of seismic damage.

The extent of the damage that followed the February 2011 earthquake was much greater than that observed four months earlier, which meant that another supply model needed to be implemented to maximize productivity through the exchange of knowledge and resources. The new model had to include not only a significant portion of the IRMO projects in construction or have developed them in the design, but also the high risk associated with the unknown volume of work of disaster rescue projects, pressure on schedule, coordination of resources and the need to facilitate early contractor participation (CCI) during the detailed design phase in order to reduce partners. This is an unrestricted amount. Cost overruns are the same distribution; However, this situation is limited to The Limb 2 level and carried out in such a way that the contractor does not lose money if the project fails. $2 million was made available as a bonus pool to pay performance bonuses based on the KPI (Key Performance Indicator) system for the project. At the beginning of the project, the NZTA obtained key sequences (KRAs) results based on the organization`s triple bottom line, as demonstrated here: “The economy (20%), the social (40%) environment (20%). Key performance indicators: KPIs were developed by contractors during the tendering phase to satisfy CCS. These were amended during contract negotiations and have been agreed with NZTA and are presented in Table 8.

A percentage and a dollar value were assigned to each of these KPIs to facilitate the sharing of the performance bonus pool. The Alliance was responsible for scoring points against the KPIs. This score then went monthly to the board of directors of the project alliance for review.

Comments are closed.