學門類別
哈佛
- General Management
- Marketing
- Entrepreneurship
- International Business
- Accounting
- Finance
- Operations Management
- Strategy
- Human Resource Management
- Social Enterprise
- Business Ethics
- Organizational Behavior
- Information Technology
- Negotiation
- Business & Government Relations
- Service Management
- Sales
- Economics
- Teaching & the Case Method
最新個案
- A practical guide to SEC ï¬nancial reporting and disclosures for successful regulatory crowdfunding
- Quality shareholders versus transient investors: The alarming case of product recalls
- The Health Equity Accelerator at Boston Medical Center
- Monosha Biotech: Growth Challenges of a Social Enterprise Brand
- Assessing the Value of Unifying and De-duplicating Customer Data, Spreadsheet Supplement
- Building an AI First Snack Company: A Hands-on Generative AI Exercise, Data Supplement
- Building an AI First Snack Company: A Hands-on Generative AI Exercise
- Board Director Dilemmas: The Tradeoffs of Board Selection
- Barbie: Reviving a Cultural Icon at Mattel (Abridged)
- Happiness Capital: A Hundred-Year-Old Family Business's Quest to Create Happiness
Integrated Project Delivery at Autodesk, Inc. (B)
內容大綱
Describes Autodesk's engagement in Integrated Project Delivery-a new model of risk management, inter-firm teamwork, and multi-objective (aesthetic, cost, and sustainability) optimization in building projects. In 2008, Autodesk, Inc. the world's largest design software company, decided to engage in Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) for the design and construction of its new Architecture, Engineering and Construction Solutions (AECS) Group headquarters, near Boston. Under IPD, the project's architect, builder, and client (Autodesk) entered a contractual agreement to share all project risks and profits. During the project, however, Autodesk was unsatisfied with the design progress, and asked the project team to introduce a three-story atrium in the headquarters' design. Logistically, it was not a good time to make changes as the team had already made significant design progress. The team was also working under a tight budget and delivery deadline. However, the aesthetics would appear to be greatly improved by changing the design. The project's architect and builder had to decide whether accommodating the atrium into the current schedule and work sequencing was an acceptable risk.