As South Africa ramps up infrastructure investment and increases private sector participation, projects are becoming more complex, multi-stakeholder dependent and time sensitive. Despite this momentum, outcomes are too often undermined by fragmented processes, misaligned incentives and persistent delays.
In this context, integrated project delivery (IPD) is an attractive alternative, offering a collaborative approach that aligns stakeholders from the outset, strengthens coordination, mitigates risk and enables more efficient, predictable execution.
Carl Pretorius, Managing Director of multi-disciplinary engineering and construction partnership, Khewija GIBB Alliance (KGA), says the greatest delivery challenges holding projects back today are delays in the release of funding, a lack of technical competence and procedural hold points.
“In South Africa, the release of government project funding is often significantly delayed, in some cases taking several years. Legally, industry participants cannot enter the market without secured funding, as capital must be available to execute projects.”
Pretorius links the country’s brain drain to a decline in technical expertise, particularly on complex, multi-stakeholder projects that require experienced input and timely decision-making. “This is a significant issue: many professionals with five or more years of experience are emigrating or taking up expatriate roles, leaving behind a workforce with more limited exposure. As a result, projects are affected, as the shortage of the required expertise slows down decision-making and can create further delays across key project stages.”
Failing to agree on procedural hold points – key moments for review or decision-making – can also delay progress. The private sector addresses this through the RACI matrix (responsible, accountable, consulted and informed), which clarifies responsibility and accountability. Without this clarity from the outset, confusion can arise and projects may stall.
Pretorius says delays and cost overruns are frequently the result of inadequate upfront planning and clinging to outdated practices that don’t create value. “Investing sufficient time in thorough, realistic preparation ensures alignment among stakeholders, making execution more efficient and streamlined.”
Stakeholder fragmentation is another major barrier to successful infrastructure project delivery as different parties often pursue their own agendas and interests rather than a shared objective. In many cases, stakeholders, ranging from government bodies and private investors to local communities, hold conflicting views about priorities, such as profit generation, job creation or long-term affordability.
In the South African context, where infrastructure projects are expected to address broad societal needs such as employment and equitable access, misalignment can become especially marked. For example, local businesses involved in a project may prioritise financial returns, while community members may emphasise immediate job opportunities and social benefits. Without a clear, unified vision that brings these competing interests together, decision-making becomes slow and contested, leading to delays, inefficiencies and, in some cases, project failure.
By contrast, countries like Singapore under the leadership of Lee Kuan Yew demonstrate how aligning stakeholders around a common national agenda can significantly enhance project success.
So, what is IPD, and how does it differ from traditional delivery models in the South African context?
IPD in the South African infrastructure context represents a shift away from the traditional, fragmented model toward a collaborative, shared-risk approach. Under the conventional delivery model, a client appoints a principal agent, often an architect, who develops the design, after which various engineers and contractors are engaged sequentially, with procurement and responsibilities divided across distinct project phases.
By contrast, IPD brings all key stakeholders, including the client, designers, engineers and contractors, together from concept stage, with a view to promoting joint decision-making, aligned incentives and shared accountability. Here, the success or failure of the project is collectively owned rather than distributed across isolated parties.
Pretorius says IPD lends itself to understanding the risks for each partner, making decisions more transparent and affording a full understanding of the knock-on effects of delays throughout the process.
“It creates a full appreciation of the entire supply chain, protecting the critical path of the project. The business case and pathway to getting the “product” to the end user will be fully understood by all, no matter the scope of the job. This will help materially improve timelines and result in greater cost certainty.”
He argues that broader adoption of IDP in South Africa depends on upskilling both individuals and organisations to better understand how it works. “Equally important is securing early buy-in from all stakeholders on the execution methodology at the outset of a project. Finally, success at the execution level requires enlisting highly competent team members with a strong, results-driven mindset.
“Ultimately, an IDP approach drives clearer alignment among all stakeholders, significantly improving the likelihood that projects are completed efficiently, on time, and to standard, something South Africa urgently needs,” concludes Pretorius.
