Overview and Message to the CII Community

Thank you to everyone who submitted research ideas for CII’s 2026 research cycle. We appreciate the time, thought, and industry perspective that individuals, committees, CBAs, and other groups contributed to this process.

This year, we received 36 ideas from 15 different organizations and CII groups, covering a broad range of topics across project delivery, safety, workforce, technology, supply chain, benchmarking, and other areas.

As part of our initial review, we also identified a small number of ideas that addressed essentially the same research opportunity. We have therefore consolidated two ideas related to planning and readiness for commissioning and startup into a single concept, as well as two closely related ideas on Advanced Project Delivery (APD). The intent of these consolidations is not to eliminate ideas, but to avoid evaluating substantially overlapping concepts separately and to develop a stronger, clearer research question for consideration.

What happens next

An Evaluation Task Force, with leaders from CII’s Standing Committees and Executive Committee, will review the submitted ideas and develop a shortlist for further consideration.

As part of that process, some ideas may be recommended with changes or refinements. This could include sharpening the central research question, adjusting the scope, combining related ideas, or recommending a different type of research or development effort.

We will follow up with the submitting individuals and groups as appropriate. For ideas that are shortlisted, we may also request additional clarification or refinement so that the concept can be presented as clearly as possible to the CII Board of Advisors.

The shortlisted ideas will then be presented at an upcoming Board of Advisors meeting. We will ask Board members for their perspective and level of support for the ideas. That input will help inform CII’s research funding priorities and decisions about which ideas move forward.

Because ideas may evolve as they move through the evaluation process, the version presented to the Board may not look exactly like the original submission. When that happens, we intend to keep the submitting individuals or groups informed and involved in the refinement.

Thank you again for contributing ideas and helping shape CII’s future research agenda. The quality of the research program depends on members bringing forward the challenges, questions, and opportunities that matter most to the capital projects industry.

Safety, Hazard Recognition & Human Factors

Idea 1: “Strong Watch” Crew Cohesion & Readiness Training Stronger Crews, Safer Projects, Lasting Success.

Opportunity / problem statement: Give an Hour, a national nonprofit, has been closing gaps in mental health care since 2005 by blending clinical support, peer connection, and tailored education. Our evidence-informed programs have reduced stigma and built resilience in some of the most high-pressure environments, including U.S. military and veteran communities. We propose partnering with Technip Energies to launch Strong Watch: Crew Cohesion & Readiness, a groundbreaking initiative tailored for construction and capital projects - an industry marked by high suicide rates, workforce turnover, and demanding conditions. While technical and safety protocols are well established, the human side of readiness is often overlooked. Strong Watch equips crews and supervisors with practical tools to recognize distress early, foster dialogue, and sustain steady performance under pressure. Together, we can embed vital mental health readiness into daily practice—driving safety, trust, and resilience across project teams worldwide.

Central question: What evidence-informed approaches can Technip Energies adopt to systematically build crew readiness and cohesion, ensuring safer operations, stronger workforce resilience, and sustained project success?

Goal and objectives: To develop a practical, scalable, and evidence-informed model that equips crews to feel supported, connected, and ready to perform at their best thereby enhancing safety, deepening trust, and driving lasting success for both workers and projects across Technip Energies’ global footprint.

Expected deliverables:

• Best practice framework for embedding scalable readiness and cohesion strategies across capital projects.

• Leadership toolkit for supervisors to strengthen team trust and sustain performance under pressure.

• Practical crew-level tools (quick reference, easy to practice and integrate)

• Data-driven analysis of intervention impact on safety, performance, and workforce outcomes based on participant pre/post changes and intention.

• Implementation recommendations for scaling across diverse project environments.
  
  

Idea 2: Hazard Management Process: Closing the Gap Between Planning and Reality in Field Hazard Management

Opportunity / problem statement: Existing safety tools are often used independently rather than as part of a connected process, leaving users to rely on their own experience to piece together the full hazard picture.
At the same time, we assume the person completing a safety form has looked at the entire job and understands all the hazards before, during, and after the task—but that’s not always the case.
Most tools depend on the user to connect everything on their own, which leads to a focus on the most obvious hazard instead of recognizing that multiple hazards exist and change throughout the job.
So the issue isn’t a lack of tools—it’s that the process relies too heavily on assumptions about the user, instead of guiding them to consistently identify and manage the full hazard picture across all phases of the work.

Central question: How do we ensure the work always matches the plan by identifying hazards, selecting and confirming controls, and reassessing when conditions change throughout the entire task lifecycle?
The HMP is built around making sure hazards are understood before exposure, controls are in place and working, and the job is stopped and reassessed any time the work no longer matches the plan. It also addresses a growing challenge in the industry—varying levels of experience, training, and consistency across the workforce. As skilled labor becomes harder to find, project teams often rely on a wider mix of crews with different backgrounds and ways of performing work. This increases the risk that not all hazards are recognized or managed the same way. The HMP provides a structured approach that does not depend on assumptions about individual knowledge, but instead guides users to consistently identify, connect, and manage hazards across all phases of the work.

Goal and objectives: Goal
Develop and validate a practical process that guides workers to identify and manage all hazards throughout the full lifecycle of a task—from planning through execution and closeout.

Expected deliverables:

• Idea/concept to drive future practice and R&D

• A tool to support an existing process/task

• Improvement or expansion of an existing practice

• A new practice/process for project delivery
  
  

Idea 3: Design-Based Safety

Opportunity / problem statement: Safety is sometimes forgotten about during the pre-design phase of projects. This RT would be to incorporate Hazard Recognition during the pre-construction phase of the project and to integrate safety considerations and capacity earlier in the project life cycle.

Central question: Can we reduce the SIF potential prior to workers arriving on the job site? Can we identify hazards and implement controls during the pre-construction and design phase of projects? Would doing so help the transition of the newer workers/site supervisor workforce in the industry understand and appreciate hazards more when they are identified before work?

Goal and objectives: Have high risk/high injury potentials identified prior to construction activities during the design phase in order to help reduce the number of SIFS we see as an industry. This project could be an upgrade/enhancement off of RT-293 and RT-321 as well as a continuation of the Safety Excellence Techniques.

Expected deliverables:

• A tool to support an existing process/task

• Improvement or expansion of an existing practice

• A new practice/process for project delivery

Idea 4: Integration of AI & Advanced Technology w/Human Factors in High-Risk Work Environments.

Opportunity / problem statement: Construction SIF rates have stagnated, and utilities face massive infrastructure investments with a shortage of talent. This research could drive measurable gains in a high-hazard, high risk work environments and help educate the newer generation of trade works and continue to drive the SIF numbers down.

Central question: How does AI best augment (not replace) human decision making in the construction industry? What are effective controls for tech-induced risk (e.g., over-reliance data overload)? How to manage contractor interfaces and work place hazard changes in these settings?

Goal and objectives: Practical tools like updated energy-control frameworks, tech implementation guides (like from RT-382), risk dashboards as we strengthen our journey in the reduction of SIFs.

Expected deliverables:

• Idea/concept to drive future practice and R&D

• A tool to support an existing process/task

• Improvement or expansion of an existing practice

• A new practice/process for project delivery

• Educational resources (e.g., online courses, education programs)

Idea 5: Advanced Hazard Recognition (Non-AI) beyond the Energy Wheel

Opportunity / problem statement: Build upon current research to develop and test practical, non-ai dependent interventions to improve workers’ ability to recognize and communicate high energy hazards in real-time, high consequence settings. This would build off of CII's SETS and hazard recognition tools, as well as CSRA EBS/HECA studies, without reinventing them.

Persistent under-recognition leads to near misses escalating to SIFs. Research shows declines in situational awareness (perception/comprehension/projection) vary by hazard type.

Central question:

• What cognitive/psychological barriers most affect recognition of hazards?
  How do interventions like enhanced visual cues, training, or structured field protocols improve performance and hazard recognition skills?

• What organizational factors best support sustained hazard recognition?

• Are current hazard recognition tools like the Energy Wheel, Precursors to Serious Injuries (CII RT-321) and HECA (from CSRA) really for the work force, or for management and upper management? are these practical tools for field workers and something that they are using? Has past research help and make the job easier for management/safety managers or are they for the field workers? Does current research lead to "Safetyism" - the concept of too much safety and overload of information to the field workers?

Goal and objectives:

• Validated tools/protocols (e.g, updated HIT-Boards, recognition of hazards, etc.).

• Hazard recognition for under-recognized categories - Focus on "invisible" or low-frequency hazards that workers miss most.

• Develop targeted interventions and tie into SETs

• Integration of contractor workforces with hazard recognition skills.

• Integration with preconstruction and design phase hazard recognition. Research how early involvement of field crews improves downstream recognition and reduces "surprises" from last minute changes(rt-382)

Integrated Delivery, APD & Practice Integration

Idea 6a (6 and 8 merged): Beyond Best Practices: Establishing Advanced Project Delivery as the Industry’s Next Execution Framework

Opportunity / problem statement: Organizations continue to implement AWP, PPM, and Lean as independent initiatives, resulting in disconnects between work structuring, production flow, and execution. This leads to excess WIP, poor sequencing, constraint-driven delays, and low commitment reliability.

This fragmentation limits improvements in predictability, productivity, cost, schedule, safety, quality, supply chain certainty and value delivery. The opportunity is to define Advanced Project Delivery (APD) as a coherent framework that integrates these practices into one scalable operating model, positioning AWP as the work-structuring backbone, PPM as the production-flow control layer, and Lean as the execution discipline, supported by governance, capability, digital systems and aligned commercial models.

Central question: How can Advanced Work Packaging (AWP), Project Production Management (PPM), and Lean principles be integrated into a unified operating model to improve production system performance and execution reliability in complex industrial projects?

Goal and objectives: Design, and potentially pilot an integrated operating model that aligns AWP (work structuring), PPM (production system design and control), and Lean (execution discipline)
into a single, coherent production system.

Expected deliverables:

• Integrated AWP–PPM–Lean Playbook; KPI framework (PPC, takt adherence, WIP, cycle
  time); ROI model and scale-up roadmap, and a definition of APD.

• Other secondary deliverables may include:

  1. An APD maturity model,

  2. Value case for APD through case study evidence

  3. benchmarking,

  4. industry workshops and stakeholder evaluation

  5. Project data supported validation
     
     
     

Idea 6: Beyond Best Practices: Establishing Advanced Project Delivery as the Industry’s Next Execution Framework

Opportunity / problem statement: The capital projects industry has developed strong best practices, including Advanced Work Packaging, WorkFace Planning, Project Production Management, Lean Construction, Integrated Materials Management, digital enablement and industrialised delivery. However, these are often implemented as separate initiatives rather than as an integrated execution system. This fragmentation limits improvements in predictability, productivity, cost, schedule, safety, quality, supply chain certainty and value delivery. The opportunity is to define Advanced Project Delivery (APD) as a coherent framework that integrates these practices into one scalable operating model, positioning AWP as the work-structuring backbone, PPM as the production-flow control layer, and Lean as the execution discipline, supported by governance, capability, digital systems and aligned commercial models.

Central question: How can Advanced Project Delivery be defined, measured, benchmarked and implemented as a practical industry execution framework that integrates leading project delivery practices into a coherent operating model for capital projects?

Goal and objectives: Develop a clear, evidence-based and industry-validated Advanced Project Delivery framework that helps industry move from fragmented best-practice adoption to an integrated project execution system that improves work readiness, production flow, predictability, productivity and value delivery.
1. Define APD, establishing a common definition, principles, terminology and taxonomy for Advanced Project Delivery.
2. Assess current adoption, understanding how APD and APD-like practices are currently being applied across industry.
3. Develop an APD maturity model, assess progression from inconsistent and fragmented practice adoption to an enterprise-standard integrated execution framework.
4. Integrate core practices including AWP, WorkFace Planning, PPM, Lean Construction, etc. into one operating model.
5. Define APD performance measures covering work readiness, planning reliability, flow, constraints, materials readiness, productivity, quality, schedule, cost, safety and digital maturity.
6. Identify barriers and enablers to adoption, including organizational, contractual, governance, capability, data and technology-related factors.
7. Build the value case for APD through case study evidence, benchmarking, industry workshops and stakeholder validation.
8. Produce an implementation pathway that allows CII members and wider industry participants to adopt APD at project and enterprise level.

Expected deliverables:

• APD definition and principles

• APD taxonomy and knowledge map

• APD maturity model and assessment tool

• APD operating model

• APD KPI and data framework

• Case study and benchmarking summary

• Implementation roadmap

Idea 7: Improving Project Performance through Integrated CII Execution Methodologies

Opportunity / problem statement: The Energy Buildout theme centers on delivering power infrastructure at an unprecedented pace and scale to meet accelerating demand driven by data centers, electrification, and broader energy transition initiatives. Industry dialogue consistently highlights the need to compress time to market through integrated project delivery approaches, streamlined governance, and stronger cross-functional alignment among Owners, EPCs, Suppliers, and Operations.
Meeting this level of demand requires more than simply executing individual projects faster. It necessitates a fundamental shift from traditional, one-off project delivery toward programmatic, repeatable, and standardized execution models. The ability to industrialize capital delivery through modular and repeatable designs, aligned commercial frameworks, and integrated workflows will be essential to overcoming resource constraints, reducing cycle times, and sustaining performance in a rapidly evolving environment.

Central question: How do we effectively integrate the CII execution methodologies (IPD, AWP, digital twins, etc.) to support better project performance (faster, better qualities, etc.)?

Goal and objectives: The convergence of advanced delivery models and systems, including Industrial Integrated Project Delivery, production-driven execution methodologies such as PPI and AWP, digital twins, and standardized processes. Together, these elements form a cohesive, scalable delivery system capable of consistently executing complex capital programs with greater speed, predictability, and efficiency.

Expected deliverables:

• A framework for implementing various CII execution methodologies.

• Could include: Prove how the old contracting strategies / models are more expensive compared to new strategies. What to include in our contracts to support better project outcomes? What aspects produce the best value.

Idea 8: Integrated AWP–PPM–Lean Operating Model

Opportunity / problem statement: Organizations continue to implement AWP, PPM, and Lean as independent initiatives, resulting in disconnects between work structuring, production flow, and execution. This leads to excess WIP, poor sequencing, constraint-driven delays, and low commitment reliability.

Central question: How can Advanced Work Packaging (AWP), Project Production Management (PPM), and Lean principles be integrated into a unified operating model to improve production system performance and execution reliability in complex industrial projects?

Goal and objectives: Design, validate, and deploy an integrated operating model that aligns AWP (work
structuring), PPM (production system design and control), and Lean (execution discipline)
into a single, coherent production system.

Expected deliverables:

• Integrated AWP–PPM–Lean Playbook; KPI framework (PPC, takt adherence, WIP, cycle
  time); ROI model and scale-up roadmap

Idea 9: APD Organizational and Workforce Capability Model

Opportunity / problem statement: Organizations that invest in an APD approach, including new methods and tools, must define the specific roles, skills, and competencies needed to execute APD successfully and capture its expected value. Without a clear competency model, companies struggle to hire, train, and promote staff into APD roles. Turnover and inconsistent training leave APD implementation dependent on a small group of experienced practitioners rather than a repeatable capability.

Central question: What roles, skills, and competencies does an organization need to build and sustain to execute APD across a capital project portfolio?

Goal and objectives: • Define core APD capabilities and roles across owner and contractor organizations, including strategic integration leads, project and production managers, supply chain integrators, and work execution leads.
• Build a competency framework tied to each role, with defined skill levels from novice to expert.
• Identify training pathways and certification options that develop these competencies.
• Link organizational and workforce capability metrics to project performance outcomes.
• Produce an organizational and workforce development roadmap organizations can use to plan hiring and training investment.

Expected deliverables:

• Define core APD capabilities and roles across owner and supply chain partner organizations, including strategic integration leads, project and production managers, supply chain integrators, and work execution leads.

• Define training / oversight / assurance requirements to support adoption strategies

Idea 10: Digital Enablement of APD Execution

Opportunity / problem statement: Owners and contractors run multiple systems for planning, cost, schedule, and field execution, but these systems rarely connect in a way that supports APD's integrated approach. Data sits in silos, and decisions get made on outdated or incomplete information. Organizations need guidance on which digital capabilities matter most and how systems should connect to support APD principles in practice.

Central question: What digital capabilities and data integration practices does an organization need to support APD execution, and how do these differ from traditional project controls systems?

Goal and objectives: • Identify the core data flows required to connect planning, engineering, procurement, and field execution under an APD model.
• Define minimum system requirements for supporting constraint management, work package release, and production tracking in real time.
• Define how digital systems should support relational-based and hybrid delivery approaches across a project's life cycle.
• Evaluate common points of failure where poor system integration undermines APD performance.
• Develop a reference architecture for digital enablement of APD, independent of specific software vendors.
• Provide guidance for organizations on sequencing digital investment to support APD maturity.

Expected deliverables:

• Define core APD digitization requirements, capabilities, and gaps across owner and supply chain partner organizations, including system & data integration requirements, analytics and metrics for decision modeling, leveraging technology as a capability, high value project and production management tools, supply chain digital integration requirements, and interactive visualization tools.
  
  

Idea 11: Supply Chain Integration within APD

Opportunity / problem statement: APD research and practice focus heavily on planning, execution, and productivity, but supply chain and procurement functions often operate outside the APD system. Material delays and fabrication misalignment remain frequent causes of schedule and cost overruns. Little research addresses how supply chain functions should integrate with APD production planning and work package sequencing.

Central question: How does an organization effectively integrate supply chain and procurement functions into an APD production system to reduce material-driven schedule and cost risk?

Goal and objectives: • Map the interfaces between supply chain, procurement, and APD production planning across a project lifecycle.
• Identify practices that align supplier and fabricator schedules with optimized work execution plans, control requirements, and release dates.
• Examine how early supplier involvement affects constraint management and performance reliability, to achieve better, more predictable outcomes.
• Develop metrics that connect supply chain performance to APD schedule, cost, and performance outcomes.
• Produce a framework for supply chain and APD alignment, including contracting, fabrication, logistics and delivery, and communication practices between owner, contractor, and supplier.

Expected deliverables:

• Idea/concept to drive future practice and R&D

• Improvement or expansion of an existing practice

• A new practice/process for project delivery

• Additional information: (text field)

• • Define core APD supply chain integration requirements including collaborative / relational contracting.
  • Define success requirements across people, process, and technology factors
  • Provide key APD organizational, project, and project team performance and behavior requirements
  • Provide success driven supply chain partner oversight / assurance requirements

Idea 12: Contractual Enablers for Production Systems (AWP–PPM–Lean)

Opportunity / problem statement: While IPD and I2PD improve collaboration and alignment, and traditional contracts constrain delivery, there is no clear definition of what contracts must enable to support flow-based production systems (AWP–PPM–Lean). This gap limits performance even in collaborative environments.

Central question: What contractual enablers are required for AWP–PPM–Lean-based production systems to operate effectively, and how do these enablers influence production system reliability in complex industrial projects?

Goal and objectives: Define the Production System Requirements that contracts must enable to support effective implementation of AWP, PPM, and Lean—focusing on flow, sequencing, constraint
management, and commitment reliability without redefining contract forms.

Expected deliverables:

• A tool to support an existing process/task

• Additional information: (text field)

• Contractual Requirements Framework linking production needs to contract capabilities;
  Guidelines for applying requirements across Traditional, IPD, and Hybrid contracts; Gap
  assessment tool (contract vs flow readiness)

Idea 13: AWP Deployment in Brownfield & Complex Environments

Opportunity / problem statement: Brownfield and complex projects face incomplete data, congestion, and high variability, limiting effective AWP implementation and resulting in constraint-driven execution and
unstable workflows

Central question: What adaptations to AWP, supported by PPM-based buffering strategies and Lean constraint management, are required to achieve reliable workflow and production performance in brownfield and complex project environments?

Goal and objectives: Extend AWP practices by integrating PPM-based buffering strategies and Lean constraint
management to enable stable, flow-driven execution in brownfield and high-uncertainty
environments.

Expected deliverables:

• A tool to support an existing process/task

• Improvement or expansion of an existing practice

• Additional information: (text field)

• Brownfield AWP implementation guide; Integrated constraint and buffering strategies (PPM
  + Lean); Risk mitigation playbook; Case studies and performance benchmarks

AWP

Idea 14: Integrated Project Execution Swimlanes Framework

Opportunity / problem statement: The existing AWP swimlanes embedded within RT-364 are outdated, inconsistently applied,
and not fully reflective of current project delivery practices. Their current format—nested
within broader documents—limits accessibility, clarity, and usability for project teams.
As a result, organizations lack a standardized, visual representation of roles,
responsibilities, interfaces, and information flows across the project lifecycle. This leads to
misalignment between stakeholders, unclear handoffs, inefficiencies in execution
sequencing, and reduced commitment reliability.

Central question:

• How can existing project execution swimlane knowledge be extracted, standardized, and transformed into an independent reference resource that improves role clarity, interface management, and execution alignment across the project lifecycle?

• Opportunity for a one-year research initiative or focused development team:

• This topic is a strong candidate for a one-year research effort or focused development team, leveraging existing swimlane knowledge currently embedded, fragmented, and buried across multiple CII resources. The effort would focus on extracting, consolidating, modernizing, and validating this knowledge into a standalone reference framework, in support of Performance Advancement Targets (PATs).

Goal and objectives: Rapidly extract, review, and update the AWP swimlanes from RT-364, aligning them with
current best practices and integrating AWP with production-oriented execution concepts.
Package and publish them as a standalone, standardized CII reference framework that
enables clear visualization of project execution workflows, roles, and interfaces across all
phases.

Expected deliverables:

• A tool to support an existing process/task

• Additional information: (text field)

• ERABLES:
  • Updated and standardized Project Execution Swimlane Framework
  • Standalone CII reference document (extracted and modernized from RT-364)
  • High-quality visual swimlane diagrams (digital and presentation-ready formats)
  • Quick adoption guide for project teams (focus on rapid deployment)

FEP

Idea 15: Improving Project Transitions to Support Better Project Outcomes

Opportunity / problem statement: Projects often experience notable design changes, scope growth, and subsequently poor estimates when projects are transitioned from the Planning Team to the Execution Team.

Central question: What strategies will facilitate better integration been Planning Teams and Execution Teams to support better project outcomes? (intent is the internal transition)

Goal and objectives: Speed and efficiency are not achieved through isolated tools, but through the integration of aligned contracts, production-based execution systems, and standardized workflows that enable learning and reuse across projects.
Feasibility considerations
Has this already been researched? Do we need to develop a new methodology?
If it's already been researched, can we adjust the research question to find out how to make it easier to implement the existing solutions.

Expected deliverables:

• Strategies to better integrate planning and execution teams.

• How to minimize scope growth, design changes and estimate growth as a result of the Planning to Execution transition, as the current COMS and Value Engineering strategies are not working effectively.

Idea 16: Add the Excel PDRI Industrial MATRS module to both Excel PDRI Infrastructure & Excel PDRI Building tools

Opportunity / problem statement: Companies with large Infrastructure and building projects presently lack the opportunity to assess the maturity & accuracy rating system in the same PDRI Excel tools in a similar way as nowadays available at the Industrial PDRI projects Excel tool. This means that those kind of projects are not broadly assessed at FEED maturity like Industrial projects, and missing best-practices.

Central question: The central question guiding this request is: 1) having CII's MATRS best practices insights available in a ready-at-hand tool for both Infrastructure and Building projects at assessing the PDRI. 2) In this way -we as CII- provide our users with up-to-date easy to use tools during the early phase development and being able to use these best practices.

Goal and objectives: One Excel PDRI tool per type of project (Industrial Infrastructure, Buildings) containing all of CII's best practices during early phase development (FEL).

Expected deliverables:

• A tool to support an existing process/task

• Additional information: (text field)

• Adding MATRS to PDRI Infrastructure and Buildings is a relative simple/easy job which gives PDRI users great benefits

Commissioning & Startup

Idea 17a (17 and 18 merged)

Opportunity / problem statement: Preparing for commissioning and startup: The insights of CII 312-11 are not yet available in a ready-at-hand Excel tool for assessing this phase of the project’s realization process.

Central question: How can companies evaluate their readiness to start startup based on CII commissioning and startup research? Ultimately, a project manager should be able to answer the question: Are you ready to hand your project over to operations?

The central objective guiding this study are: 1) having CII's best practices insights with regard to Commissiong & Startup Readiness Assessment available in a ready-at-hand Excel. 2) In this way -we as CII- provide our users with up-to-date easy to use tools starting from early phase development till hand-over to operations and use these best practices during the complete life cycle of a project.

Expected deliverables: An Excel tool based on CII 312-11 for Commissiong & Startup Readiness Assessment containing CII's best practices and insights. This tool is similar to the CRA Excel tool but now for CSR Assessment is a relative simple/easy job which gives users great benefits

Idea 17: C&SU Readiness Assessment

Opportunity / problem statement: Preparing for commissioning and startup

Central question: Are you ready to hand your project over to operations.

Goal and objectives: Improve C&SU

Expected deliverables: A tool to support an existing process/task

Idea 18: Make a comparable Excel tool for Commissioning & Startup Readiness Assessment based on the insights of the CII 312-11 research as done in the past for Construction Readiness Assessment CRA (fr_dcc_02)

Opportunity / problem statement: The insights of CII 312-11 are not yet available in a ready-at-hand Excel tool for assessing this phase of the projects realization process.

Central question: The central question guiding this request is: 1) having CII's best practices insights with regard to Commissiong & Startup Readiness Assessment available in a ready-at-hand Excel. 2) In this way -we as CII- provide our users with up-to-date easy to use tools starting from early phase development till hand-over to operations and use these best practices during the complete life cycle of a project.

Goal and objectives: An Excel tool based on CII 312-11 for Commissiong & Startup Readiness Assessment containing CII's best practices and insights.

Expected deliverables:

• A tool to support an existing process/task

• Additional information: (text field)

• Making a tool similar to the CRA Excel tool but now for CSR Assessment is a relative simple/easy job which gives users great benefits

Standardization, Industrialization, Productization & Modularization

Idea 19: Dimensional Control in Modularization

Opportunity / problem statement: Often we encounter module level and alignment issues between fabricator and Construction Contractor. There is an opportunity to control the fabrication tolerances with in +/- 3 mm.

Central question: Pre aligned modules at shop will be laser scanned and the final dimensional data will be incorporated in the 3D Model and identified the gaps. The model will be updated accordingly and revised installation drawings/Isometrics will be issued to construction contractor.

Goal and objectives: Ensure no alignment and leveling issues at site

Expected deliverables:

• Idea/concept to drive future practice and R&D

• A tool to support an existing process/task

• Improvement or expansion of an existing practice

• A new practice/process for project delivery

• Additional information: (text field)

• A procedure will be prepared

Idea 20: Developing a Framework for Industrialized Project Delivery

Opportunity / problem statement: Organizations across the capital projects industry are investing in standardization to improve project performance; however, implementation remains inconsistent across owners, contractors, suppliers, and even within the same organization. While FR-UMM-01 established a framework for facility standardization, there is an opportunity to expand and validate this framework to support broader industrialized project delivery practices. A common framework is needed to increase the consistent adoption of standardization, leading to greater predictability, repeatability, efficiency, and scalability across project portfolios.

Central question: How can the FR-UMM-01 framework be enhanced and expanded to support consistent implementation of industrialized project delivery across the capital projects industry?
What impact does implementation of an enhanced framework have on standardization, predictability, and repeatability across project portfolios?

Goal and objectives:

Goal: Develop and validate an industry framework for implementing standardization consistently across capital project portfolios to improve predictability, repeatability, and project performance.

Objectives:

-Identify the key elements of an effective standardization framework for industrialized project delivery.
-Evaluate and enhance the existing FR-UMM-01 framework to support broader industry application.
-Develop practical guidance for implementing the framework across owners, contractors, and suppliers.
-Validate the framework through industry case studies and pilot projects.
-Assess the impact of framework adoption on project predictability, repeatability, and standardization outcomes.

Expected deliverables:

• A tool to support an existing process/task

• Improvement or expansion of an existing practice

Idea 21: Developing a Decision Framework for Standardization of Components, Assemblies, and Projects

Opportunity / problem statement: Organizations recognize that standardization can improve project performance, but they often lack a structured approach for determining when and where standardization will deliver the greatest business value. Decisions are frequently based on experience or project-specific judgment rather than a consistent evaluation of costs, benefits, risks, and implementation barriers. A practical decision framework is needed to help organizations evaluate standardization opportunities, quantify expected value, and support more informed investment decisions across capital project portfolios.

Central question: How can organizations systematically evaluate the costs, benefits, risks, and value of standardization to support informed investment decisions for components, assemblies, and projects?
What decision criteria and evaluation methods should be included in a practical framework for assessing standardization opportunities?

Goal and objectives:

• Goal: Develop and validate a decision framework that enables organizations to evaluate the viability and business value of standardization opportunities.

• Objectives:

  • Identify the key factors that influence standardization decisions, including costs, benefits, barriers, and enablers.

  • Quantify the relationships between standardization variables and project outcomes.

  • Develop a multi-criteria decision framework for evaluating standardization opportunities.

  • Validate the framework using retrospective project data and industry case studies.

  • Produce implementation guidance to support consistent decision-making across capital projects.

Expected deliverables:

• A tool to support an existing process/task

• Improvement or expansion of an existing practice

• Additional information: (text field)

• Expansion to the UMM-01 Research - standardization decision making tool

Idea 22: Identifying High-Value Industrial Productization Opportunities for Capital Projects

Opportunity / problem statement: Many owners are developing portfolios of similar facilities and recognizing the strategic benefits of industrial productization, the application of modularization and standardization to transform custom solutions into repeatable, scalable products.

Despite its potential, organizations often lack a clear understanding of:

• Why industrial productization creates value.

• What systems, components, or units are the best candidates.

• When the business case justifies implementation.

• How to implement and sustain an effective productization strategy.

As a result, industrial productization decisions are often based on intuition or project-specific experience, leading to inconsistent implementation, missed opportunities, and lower returns on investment. Research is needed to develop a systematic framework for identifying, evaluating, and prioritizing the highest-value industrial productization opportunities.

Central question: How can owners systematically identify and prioritize productization opportunities that deliver the greatest value across portfolios of industrial plants?

Goal and objectives: Goal
Develop a practical framework that helps owners identify, evaluate, and prioritize industrial productization opportunities across industrial plant portfolios.
Objectives
•Identify the characteristics that make systems, components, or processes good candidates for productization.
•Develop a methodology to evaluate and prioritize productization opportunities.
•Quantify the potential impacts of productization on cost, schedule, engineering effort, and delivery certainty.
•Develop an implementation framework/guide/tool for industrial productization.
•Validate the framework using owner portfolios and repeatable facility case studies.

Expected deliverables:

• List of good candidates for industrial productization by sector/subsector

• Tool/model to evaluate and prioritize productization opportunities

• Implementation guide/tool/framework for industrial productization

References
CII. (2014). IR283-2 - Industrial Modularization: Five Solution Elements, Version 1.1 (Best Practice). Austin: CII. Retrieved from https://www.construction-institute.org/industrial-modularization-five-solution-elements-version-1-1
CII. (2019). FR-UMM-01 - Achieving Higher Levels of Facility Standardization in the UMM Commodity Market, Version 2.0 Austin: CII. Retrieved from https://www.construction-institute.org/achieving-higher-levels-of-facility-standardization-in-the-umm-commodity-market-version-2-0
CII. (2023). FR-396 - Business Case Analysis for Industrial Modularization. Austin: CII. Retrieved from https://www.construction-institute.org/business-case-analysis-for-industrial-modularization
Kluck, M., & Choi, J. O. (2023). Modularization: The Fine Art of Offsite Preassembly for Capital Projects. Wiley.

Idea 23: An Industry Benchmark for Industrial Modularization Performance

Opportunity / problem statement: The industry lacks a common approach for measuring modularization performance. Organizations use different metrics and definitions for productivity, schedule, cost, quality, safety, and engineering performance, making it difficult to compare projects, identify best practices, and demonstrate value. A standardized benchmarking framework is needed to consistently measure performance and drive continuous improvement.

Central question: How can the industry establish standardized metrics and benchmarking methods to consistently measure and improve modularization performance across capital projects?

Goal and objectives: Goal
Develop an industry standard framework for measuring and benchmarking modularization performance.
Objectives
•Define a standard set of modularization KPIs.
•Standardize performance measurement and reporting methods for industrial modularization.
•Develop a benchmarking framework for cross-project comparison.
•Validate the framework using industry project data.

Expected deliverables:

• New benchmarking guideline/framework for industrial modularization project delivery

• References
  CII. (2014). IR283-2 - Industrial Modularization: Five Solution Elements, Version 1.1 (Best Practice). Austin: CII. Retrieved from https://www.construction-institute.org/industrial-modularization-five-solution-elements-version-1-1
  CII. (2019). FR-UMM-01 - Achieving Higher Levels of Facility Standardization in the UMM Commodity Market, Version 2.0 Austin: CII. Retrieved from https://www.construction-institute.org/achieving-higher-levels-of-facility-standardization-in-the-umm-commodity-market-version-2-0
  CII. (2023). FR-396 - Business Case Analysis for Industrial Modularization. Austin: CII. Retrieved from https://www.construction-institute.org/business-case-analysis-for-industrial-modularization
  Kluck, M., & Choi, J. O. (2023). Modularization: The Fine Art of Offsite Preassembly for Capital Projects. Wiley.

Workforce & Frontline Supervision

Idea 24: Critical Skills and Training Methods for Frontline Supervision to Improve Productivity, Safety, & Retention

Opportunity / problem statement: Front-line supervision shortage
Skills gaps
Retirement cliff
Low retention
Safety items

Central question: What are the critical skills and associated training methods for frontline supervision that lead to increased productivity, improved safety, and higher retention?

Goal and objectives: Identify the critical skills (refer to RT-414)
Document the related training methods (refer to RT-414)
Compare training methods to identify which have most impact on productivity, safety, and retention
Develop evaluation plan

Idea 25: Field Work Environment Best Practices to Increase Retention of Frontline Supervisors and the Craft Workforce

Opportunity / problem statement:

1. High turnover of frontline supervisors
2. High turnover of craft workforce

Central question:

1. What are the work environment factors that impact retention of frontline supervisors?

2. What are the work environment factors that impact retention of the craft workforce?

Goal and objectives:
1. Recommendations for work environment factors
2. Correlation of work environment factors to increased retention of FLS and craft workforce

Technology, AI, Data & Automation

Idea 26: Beyond Drawings: Evaluating Immersive XR Building Assemblies as a New Communication Medium for Construction (XR= virtual reality, augmented reality)

Opportunity / problem statement: The construction industry continues to rely on drawings, specifications, BIM models, and meetings to communicate increasingly complex building systems. Despite advances in digital tools, misunderstandings of design intent, constructability challenges, training gaps, and fragmented communication remain major contributors to RFIs, rework, schedule delays, and quality issues.

While BIM has improved access to information, stakeholders must still translate 2D and 3D representations into real-world understanding, particularly when evaluating complex assemblies, coordination-sensitive conditions, and construction sequencing. Recent advances in affordable immersive XR technology create an opportunity to investigate whether human-scale, interactive visualization can improve understanding, accelerate decision-making, and reduce communication breakdowns across the project lifecycle.