/
CII Spring 2026 BOA Ideation Workshop Results

CII Spring 2026 BOA Ideation Workshop Results

 

 

Introduction

This page summarizes the key research themes, questions, and topics identified during the CII R&D Ideation session at the 2026 Spring BOA meeting.

It is intended to support the identification of research topics aligned with member needs and strategic priorities, guide the prioritization of high-impact questions within each theme, and inform the development of research topics.

The following questions and ideas were created in the 2026 Spring Board of Advisors meeting. Seven themes were proposed and seven breakout groups (one per theme) elicited ideas, voted on the top ideas and developed questions that were presented to the board group.

Each theme below includes a set of prioritized questions derived from member discussions and voting, along with related topics that provide additional context. CII Committees and CBAs, as well as individual members at large, are encouraged to use these questions as a starting point for their ideas. Numbered questions indicate the ones prioritized by each working group at the BOA while the “Other Topics Discussed” were brought up in the session but not prioritized within each group.

Theme 1 – Digital Continuity, Data Standards & AI-driven Processes

  1. Data governance & standards: Participants emphasized that inconsistent data practices, where "everyone does what they want,” create incompatible datasets that undermine AI capabilities. A shared data dictionary and governance model is viewed as essential for AI-driven engineering to succeed.

Question: How can we define and implement a common data standard and governance framework so that all parties (owners, EPCs, vendors, software providers) use consistent data definitions and structures?

Note from CII Staff: The CII Technology Committee is positioned to look into these questions and connect them to their own goals and relate to past research and initiatives outside CII. Is this something other organizations are doing?

  1. Data as a process / flow through the organization: Organizations rarely see or manage the full data lifecycle. Project organization may benefit from FEP-like best practices for data: defined handoffs, ownership, and quality checks at each stage from estimating through operations.

Question: What should the end-to-end "data process" look like—from initial definition and estimating, through procurement, construction, and operations—and what best practices should govern how data flows across that lifecycle?

  1. Enabling AI-driven engineering: Without clean, connected, governed data, AI tools cannot deliver value. This topic directly links digital continuity to AI readiness.

Question: What minimum data foundations and practices are required for AI-driven engineering to work reliably in capital projects?

Other Topics Discussed

  • Documenting standard processes to establish common language across the industry

  • Collaborating with PIP to develop industry data standards

  • Extending RT-415 (International Data Standards Landscape and Guideline for Capital Projects Industry)

  • Data governance research specific to Advanced Work Packaging (AWP)

Related CII Research Teams and Resources

Theme 2 – Demographics, Competency Transition & Knowledge Capture

  1. Skills, training methods, and outcomes: The group combined concerns about both craft and professional staff, seeking research that links specific training approaches to measurable outcomes in productivity, safety, and retention.

Question: What are the critical skills and associated training methods for the construction workforce that lead to increased productivity, improved safety, and higher retention?

Note from CII Staff: From a craft perspective, this is a question that can be more efficiently answered by organizations like NCCER. CII can investigate ways to collaborate with them maybe not necessarily as an RT.

  1. Retention and work environment: Participants are concerned about people leaving the industry and want to understand both "why people leave" and "why people stay." Mental health and job conditions were explicitly highlighted as critical factors.

Question: What are the best practices for work environments in the field that increase retention and reduce mental health-related issues?

Note from CII Staff: We will receive great insights into retention from the cases to be presented by RT-436 at the CII annual conference.

  1. Training effectiveness over time: Participants indicated the need to understand how training translates into sustained competency and whether different approaches are needed for short-term application versus long-term skill retention.

Question: What training method supports applied competency at various intervals (3 months, 12 months, 5 years)?

Note from CII Staff: Another question that can be a collaboration opportunity with NCCER from a craft perspective. From a management professionals’ perspective, PMI or CMMA could be an organization to look into this.

  1. Accelerating knowledge transfer: With experienced workers retiring and workforce shortages, participants emphasized the urgency of capturing experiential and technical knowledge and transferring it efficiently to the next generation.

Question: How can we accelerate training and knowledge transfer?

Other Topics Discussed

  • Capturing and transferring experiential knowledge to young adults (capture in question 4 above)

  • Effective and efficient methods for capturing technical knowledge

  • Marketing strategies to encourage the next generation to enter industry

  • Immigration policy gaps regarding the legality of Latino workforce

  • Understanding what has changed: Why would someone choose to enter or not enter the trades?

  • Exciting young people to build the future and removing barriers to entry

  • Streamlining training and development across all roles to accelerate workforce readiness

  • Addressing mental health issues in the construction industry (Note from CII Staff: see CII-CSRA  project RT-401 and CSRA subsequent studies)

  • Key considerations for training a versatile workforce in fast-paced environments to prepare the next generation for trade and professional positions

Related CII Research Teams and Resources

Theme 3 – Industrialization, Modularization & Catalog-Based Delivery

  1. Owner alignment and KPIs for standardization: Discussion focused on getting owners to agree on "how" (process, governance, KPIs) rather than just "what" the standard is. Leadership and governance at the owner level were seen as critical to driving standardization and modularization across the project delivery chain.

Question: How can owners align around long-term benefits of standardization and modularization, including defining KPIs that cascade from owners to EPCs and vendors?

Note from CII Staff: The Modularization CBA is the key CII group that can leverage these questions and have supported a number of projects on modularization (see related project at the end of this section).

  1. Barriers to catalog‑based design and modular adoption: Barriers mentioned include engineering culture (habit of customizing), lack of common nomenclature, uncertainty about how to define catalog boundaries, and difficulty quantifying value. Participants suggested guidelines to assess where catalog solutions are most relevant.

Question: What are the key barriers to adopting catalog-based design and modularization, and what solutions or guidelines can help overcome them?

  1. Quantifying value and changing engineering behavior: The group cited examples of organizations that have successfully driven standardization from the top down. They want evidence and frameworks that can be replicated to shift engineering culture from customization to reuse.

Question: How can we quantify the value of standardization/modularization so that engineers are incentivized to reuse rather than customize, and what leadership/governance mechanisms support this shift?

Other Topics Discussed

  • Identifying "productization" (unitization) opportunities on industrial capital projects

  • Evaluating the optimal level of modularization versus time to market for industrial projects

  • Improving quality, productivity, and other parameters in FES/module yards and quantifying these benefits

  • Deciding between optimization and standardization on a per-product basis

  • Combining modularization and standardization for fleet-scale deployment

Related CII Research Projects

Theme 4 – Predictive Planning, Project Controls & Operations Science

  1. Using historical data for predictive planning: Participants noted that many owners still rely on old rules of thumb and outdated metrics. They want a research effort to refresh and validate these baselines so historical data can reliably inform modern planning and estimating.

Question: How can we collect, clean, and structure historical project data (cost, schedule, productivity, etc.) so it can be used as a reliable basis for predictive planning and conceptual estimating today?

  1. Trustworthy data and risk analytics: A major concern was "what data can we trust?" Participants indicated the need of processes for data validation and “bucketization” (e.g., Six Sigma style categorization) before applying AI to ensure analytics produce reliable risk predictions.

Question: What methods can be used to validate historical and current project data so that AI/advanced analytics can produce trustworthy risk predictions?

  1. AI for risk management vs. human judgment: The group debated whether AI could "do all our risk register" and how to manage human skepticism or over-reliance. They discussed using AI outputs to guide contingency reserves while keeping humans in the loop.

Question: How should organizations balance AI-generated risk insights with human judgment in managing risk registers and contingency (e.g., when AI predicts a high probability of failure)?

  1. Updating legacy metrics and benchmarks: Many existing benchmarks may be decades old. The team wants a structured refresh that supports modern AI-enabled planning and reflects current project realities.

Question: How can we systematically review and update legacy owner metrics (e.g., cost per unit, duration norms) to reflect current realities and feed into predictive planning tools?

Other Topics Discussed

  • Updating historical data (core vs. industry-specific), including density curves

  • Building a future-standard framework for improved predictive analysis models

Related CII Research Projects and Resources

Theme 5 – Construction Productivity, Field Automation & Robotics

  1. ROI and evaluation of automation use cases: A real example was shared: a repetitive demolition project where specialized robotics paid off across multiple projects. The group wants methodologies and KPIs so owners can justify or reject similar investments based on labor, safety, quality, and schedule impacts.

Question: How should member companies evaluate and quantify the ROI of automation and robotics use cases, including labor, safety, quality, and schedule impacts?

  1. AI for on-site progress tracking and forecasting: The group believes this is close to current reality and wants CII to help define processes and recommendations for implementation, not just technology. Focus is on real-time dashboards and methods to capture data (labor adjustments, crew mix, material allocation, etc.).

Question: How can member companies use AI to track on-site progress and improve forecasting, including real-time dashboards and methods to capture data (labor adjustments, crew mix, material allocation, etc.)?

  1. Integrating existing productivity tracking with AI: Some tracking already exists; the gap is turning it into actionable, AI-supported insights that save money and time without overburdening field staff.

Question: How can existing productivity tracking (percent complete, field reports, etc.) be integrated with AI tools to improve decision making without overburdening field staff?

Other Topics Discussed

  • Automation and robotics investment for long-term gains must outweigh current business practices

  • Quantifying automation benefits: What are the real KPIs to measure success?

  • Evaluating the evolving landscape of automation and robotics solutions and developing cost/benefit analyses and business cases

  • How automation solutions address current and forecasted skilled labor shortages and methods to analyze impact

  • Identifying construction work processes most suitable for automation given the industry's dependence on human variability versus automation's need for consistency and repeatability; understanding human barriers to consistency

  • Adapting robotics and automation from manufacturing and controlled environments to construction sites (e.g., equipment operation, welding, firewatch/holewatch, rebar tying, concrete finishing)

  • AI-driven quality checks during installation to reduce punchlists

  • AI-driven progress measurement to improve tracking and forecasting

  • Real-time project dashboarding to support better decision-making (e.g., progress by foreman, onsite resources, crew mix, material allocation, RFI/change management, constraints)

Related CII Research Projects

Theme 6 – Governance, Owner Types and Delivery Models

  1. Governance friction vs. project performance: The group coined "governance friction" and wants to understand trade-offs between speed and control. Management still demands clear numbers for cost and duration, so they need a way to calibrate governance levels based on project characteristics.

Question: Can "governance friction" (e.g., number of approval layers, time to decisions, change order frequency) be quantified and correlated to project performance, and how can governance be tailored to project size/speed?

  1. Scaling governance with risk: The group indicated the need for guidance on how many approvals, what thresholds, and how to communicate the risk of "looser" governance (e.g., potential for cost/schedule blowouts) based on project size and risk profile.

Question: How can governance structures be scaled to different project sizes and risk profiles, and what are the explicit trade-offs (cost, schedule, risk) of looser versus tighter governance?

  1. Financing cost certainty via fixed-price premiums: The group discussed large projects (e.g., LNG, FPSOs) that require third-party financing. They want to understand trade-offs among banks (cost certainty), businesses (cost competitiveness), and project teams (scope certainty).

Question: What is the risk premium required to achieve financing cost certainty through fixed-price arrangements on large capital projects, and is that premium worth it for different stakeholders?

Other Topics Discussed

  • Balancing project progression with flexibility when business objectives aren't fully defined due to incomplete contract identification

  • Identifying appropriate phase gates for financial and scope decisions within packaging models for project delivery and change management approval

Related CII Research Projects

Theme 7 – The Energy Buildout: Capital Project Delivery for Surging Power Demand

  1. Accelerating time to market via integrated project delivery: The focus is on speed to market for power-related projects (e.g., to support data centers). Teams emphasized cross-functional integration, earlier alignment, and scalable execution models to break down silos between EPCs, operations, and other stakeholders.

Question: How can capital projects in the energy build-out be delivered faster through integrated project delivery models and simplified execution, while breaking down silos between EPCs, operations, and other stakeholders?

  1. Managing supply–demand imbalances and resource constraints: Many players are chasing the same labor and materials. The group wants strategies for collaboration rather than pure competition, and new contracting/commercial frameworks to share risk while enabling speed.

Question: How can organizations effectively manage resource constraints and supply–demand imbalances (labor, materials, expertise) through collaboration, workforce strategies, and evolving contracting approaches?

  1. Contracting, commercial frameworks, and governance for speed: This ties back to governance discussions addressing how to streamline governance and contracts without losing control, especially when demand and technology are changing quickly.

Question: What contracting and commercial frameworks, along with legal and governance considerations, best support rapid energy build-out while appropriately allocating risk among owners, contractors, and suppliers?

  1. Adapting to rapidly changing demand and technology: Participants stressed that what worked even a few weeks or months ago may already be outdated. They suggested shorter cycle efforts (task forces, sprints) instead of traditional multi-year research timelines.

Question: How should energy companies adapt project delivery approaches so that solutions remain valid in a market where needs and technologies may change within 3–6 months?

Note from CII Staff: In light of the time sensitivity surrounding this theme, CII plans to address near‑term opportunities through a Forum format (see forums referenced below).

Related CII Initiatives

Path Forward

The content in this report is intended to support continued idea generation across CII. Committees, Communities of Business Advancement (CBAs), and individual members are encouraged to review the themes and insights presented and use them as inputs for their own ideation discussions.

CII committees and working groups are encouraged to incorporate this material into upcoming meetings and dedicated idea‑generation sessions. Research ideas may be submitted at any time through the online submission form on the CII Ideation Wiki. Submissions are welcome from across the membership and are not limited to the focus areas outlined in this report. Additional information on the ideation process, evaluation criteria, and submission guidelines is available on the CII Ideation Wiki.

CII Ideation Wiki >>>

As the ideation cycle progresses, the Funded Studies Committee will convene a final workshop to review proposed research topics, with the objective of maximizing use of the insights in this report and providing input on prioritization and alignment with CII’s strategic objectives.

CII committees and CBAs are expected to submit their final research ideas by August 7, 2026 for consideration in the upcoming funding cycle.

Following submission, the Prioritization Task Force—composed of CII committee chairs and vice chairs—will convene to review ideas and maximize the inclusion of these insights into the final list for prioritization.

In September, the Prioritization Taskforce will meet to prioritize ideas in advance of the Fall Board of Advisors (BOA) meeting.