Introduction

Takt planning and Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) have become increasingly common topics in regard to Lean Construction. The purpose of this article is to explore and evaluate how IPD enhances and facilitates the implementation of Takt Planning, using testimonies from stakeholders involved in the Mission Bernal Care Complex (MBCC) Project in San Francisco, California. This project is contracted as an IPD and has championed the use of Takt Planning to inform and drive project schedule. For the past year, I have been involved in this project as a Production Engineer with Boldt (General Contractor), primarily in charge of coordinating the project schedule. As a Production Engineer, I've been closely involved in the planning required to build a schedule, from the first pull-planning sessions to developing the takt plan using tools such as work density analysis. Throughout this process, I've observed the dynamic among all parties involved in creating the plan, which led to the purpose of this article.

First, it is relevant to briefly define a few key terms in this article:

According to Juan Restrepo (Boldt's Project Executive at the Mission Bernal Care Complex), the whole goal of an IPD "is really to align on a common understanding or a true indicator for the project. Some people call this condition of satisfaction. This condition of satisfaction is where you really get the collaboration and the buy-in IPD." This condition of satisfaction means alignment between those parties involved in the IPD and sharing risks-rewards among them. Takt planning, as we will see, requires making compromises for the overall strategic good of the project, something that essentially needs those involved to operate from this perspective of common understanding.

This is the main reason I believe Takt planning needs an IPD structure for it to be successful. But let's break this down further apart.

What is Takt Planning?

As Schroeder and Eston (2022) mentioned in their article "What is Takt Planning?", in a practical way of speaking, Takt Planning is a scheduling method that is highly visual, zone-based, shows flow and is scheduled with rhythm, continuity, and consistency, that has buffers, and has a reasonable project duration.

In general, Takt Planning provides a visual representation of the project schedule where flow can be easily followed and the ties between activities are clearly visible, as illustrated in Figure 1. The work of different trades can be traced as it progresses through the different parts of the project, or takt zones. Furthermore, the sequence of work in a specific zone is graphically easy to be located in time.

Takt Planning, when correctly exercised, has many benefits, including predictability in the plan, reduction of waste and better coordination between all parties involved. The way the takt planning schedules maximize the available work in each zone, distributes the work evenly by zone, which facilitates the flow in between the trades. In other words, according to Vatne and Dreveland (2016), by optimizing work packages and team sizes to match the takt rhythm, Takt Planning reduces non-value-adding time, maximizing crew output and minimizing idle time, this means an improvement in productivity and reduction in waste.

Advantages of Takt Planning and Impact on Project Schedule

Takt Planning has many advantages over traditional CPM methods. From my perspective, the main ones are that Takt planning is displayed in a way that is super clear to see the flow, this allows us to create an efficient schedule by trade stacking when it's possible while keeping a continuous flow. Another advantage of having a friendly visual is that it's easier for everyone to understand the plan.

Jerry also notes that Takt Planning naturally leads to safer and more efficient execution. By limiting how many trades work in the same zone at the same time, Takt reduces trade stacking, which is a major cause of safety risks, clashes, and workflow disruptions Furthermore, he continues, with Takt, you can adjust zones, trade stacking, and sequencing options in a way that feels realistic. It provides a better starting point for improving the schedule proactively, rather than forcing changes into a traditional CPM schedule.

For Juan Restrepo, the main advantage of Takt Planning is that it helps us understand predictability. For him, predictability is the right track to be successful in a construction project. Understanding what needs to be done is essential. Just because there are different construction components in a project, with different qualities, its not like there cannot be predictability. As long as it's clear what needs to be done, what is the plan, then predictability can be built and that's something people struggle to understand.

It is clear that the IPD team sees the value of using Takt Planning over traditional scheduling methods. Both the GC and the trades involved agree on the approach, which helps translate that alignment into a successful plan.

How IPD Supports Takt Planning

There are multiple papers and articles referencing Takt Planning, its definition and how it works. My main question in this article is:

How does IPD support Takt Planning? What role does it play? And why is it relevant?

After participating in many Takt Planning sessions at Boldt, one thing became clear to me: Takt Planning requires such a detailed level of planning which would be impossible without the trade's input from the very beginning.

For instance, the takt time depends on many factors such as zoning, which in each project is different depending on the specific designs and layouts. Additionally, Takt Planning is not fully achieved right away, it requires many sessions to get the optimal plan and to reach the optimal takt. It is crucial that trades can think and collaborate as one big team and not individual clusters, as this methodology many times requires someone to give something away for the team's benefit. IPD fosters this kind of thinking, since all key partners share the risks and rewards, they are all aligned towards one common goal.

Jerry's perspective reinforces this idea:

Furthermore, reliability is key for a Takt plan to work successfully. Handoffs between the work wagons need to be smooth and on time, otherwise the train carts will be broken and flow disrupted, and, as we've mentioned before, Takt planning is all about the flow. This is where the correct trade partner's involvement is fundamental, as they need to be accountable for their output; true production rates are needed from them to get a real, predictable, and constructable plan.

Along this line, Juan also mentions that in terms of structuring the project, you want to make sure that the voices that are heard are the voices that really move the needle. For example, at MBCC the tri-party model includes: the owner, the general contractor (GC), and the Architect On Record (AOR). The AOR has risk-reward design partners underneath them, and the GC has trade partners underneath them. These are the people who drive the needle for success across preconstruction, permitting, design, and construction.

In an IPD the Project Manager's role is crucial for the success of the larger team. As a Project Executive, Juan describes his role as the facilitator of not just his own team but the entire IPD team, whether that be culture, behavior, construction, design, permitting challenges, or ensuring that all parties have a voice at the table.

However, for Jerry, his role is all about giving his scope a "voice." He explains that being part of an IPD project gives PMs the chance to give input from the very beginning. In traditional projects, design decisions made early can cause constructability issues or negative impacts for trades, and these issues are not discovered until construction. These issues translate into delays. Having trades involved early prevents this, and IPD makes it possible.

Thinking Outside the Box

Another relevant quality I have observed during Takt Planning sessions is that takt encourages trades to find more creative solutions to perform the work. This might be a product of IPD aligning the interests of the broader team and giving individuals the necessary support to take more risks and go the extra mile for the good of the project.

Jerry agreed with this: both the IPD structure and the Takt approach pushed him to think more creatively about how to execute the work. He shared a specific example that illustrates this shift. "The team was struggling with a major constraint: the pressure-testing and city-inspection timeline was holding up wall close-up. Traditionally, you'd build your walls, run your plumbing, and then pressure test, but that sequence was creating dead time in the Takt plan and it wasn't going to support the schedule we needed."

Because the project is set up as IPD, Jerry felt comfortable proposing a completely non-traditional approach: finishing all the in-wall plumbing first, before the walls even exist, and then tying those lines into the overhead systems as overhead work gets installed. This isn't how projects are usually built, but in this environment, where Southland, PCI, and Boldt are working collaboratively and aligned under shared incentives, the idea could actually be explored seriously. The team talked it through, validated feasibility, and ultimately solved the constraint by rearranging the sequence to support takt flow.

He said the schedule now reflects this new sequencing strategy, and it's a direct result of the creative problem‑solving that the IPD structure enables.

For me, this is a clear example of how IPD doesn't just make takt planning possible, it makes it more powerful. It creates the trust and transparency needed to challenge assumptions, test ideas quickly, and adapt the plan in a way that protects the overall system, not just one trade's local efficiency.

Challenges in Implementing Takt Planning

Successfully implementing Takt Planning is not short of challenges. It requires all stakeholders to buy into the process and remain engaged from the very beginning all the way to the end. In my experience, takt planning is demanding because it forces the team to make decisions earlier, at a higher level of detail, and with more accountability to handoffs than many groups are traditionally used to.

From Juan's perspective, one of the first challenges is resistance to change: "The construction industry is used to traditional scheduling practices, and teams can struggle to adjust to new tools like takt planning. This is why it becomes essential to explain not only how takt works, but why it matters." To this I would add: what problem it is solving (flow, reliability, predictability), and what behaviors it requires from the team, to ensure, as Juan puts it: "a smoot transition". Closely tied to this is a steep learning curve. Juan continues: "Takt introduces a new vocabulary (zones, wagons, trains, buffers, etc.) and asks people to think differently about work sequencing."

Juan also highlighted how hard it is to balance zones and coordinate across trades. "Creating zones with consistent work density is difficult, especially in areas with architectural or mechanical complexity". And once zones are set, takt depends on reliability: trade-to-trade handoffs must happen on time for the flow to hold. This level of interdependence makes commitment and communication non-negotiable, and it requires trust that teams often have to build over time. Finally, variability in the field will always fight the takt plan: unforeseen conditions, late materials, and RFIs can disrupt the rhythm quickly. "This kind of system won't work unless the team ensures a strong facilitation and proactive constraint removal to protect the plan and keep the teams moving."

Jerry reinforced this from the trade partner side. One of the biggest challenges, in his view, is defining the takt itself. Specifically, figuring out the zones and areas. "No matter how the building gets sliced up, someone will have an issue with the zoning." Fire protection wants one sequence, HVAC wants another, drywall has its own preferences. In his words: "it felt like an unsolvable issue sometimes," simply because each trade's ideal workflow is different. Where IPD helps is that it brings the right people into the room early, exposes these conflicts sooner, and creates the environment to work through them collaboratively, before they turn into bigger issues in the field. But it doesn't eliminate the friction entirely; it just gives the team the transparency, alignment, and support needed to resolve it in a productive way.

Conclusion

This article highlights the positive impact of IPD on the implementation of Takt Planning. Testimonies from IPD team members using takt planning support the hypothesis that an IPD environment fosters teamwork and a creative problem-solving mindset, both critical to a successful takt plan. In our team, we refer to this alignment as a "condition of satisfaction." Additionally, IPD's early involvement of key participants makes it possible to build a takt plan that is actually constructable.

At the same time, IPD is not a magic wand. Challenges like zoning conflicts, trade-specific workflow preferences, and field variability will still exist. The difference is that it creates the best conditions to address those issues in a way that protects the overall system.