Comparative Analysis of AWP and IPD Methods: Strengths, Challenges, and Opportunities

Despite continued efforts to improve the construction industry’s performance in terms of productivity, budget adherence, and schedule reliability, the sector remains a laggard compared to others. Among the innovative project management approaches aimed at addressing these issues are Advanced Work Packaging (AWP) and Integrated Project Delivery (IPD). This study conducts a comparative literature-based analysis of AWP and IPD, focusing on their performance outcomes and implementation challenges. Through a systematic review of 47 publications and key institutional reports, this study evaluates both methods across criteria such as adaptability, risk sharing, collaboration, workflow granularity, and cost-effectiveness. The results indicate that AWP excels in workflow standardization, package-level planning, and field execution, particularly in industrial and modular projects, while IPD demonstrates superior adaptability, stakeholder integration, and collaborative risk management in complex building projects. However, both methods face barriers including legal constraints, change resistance, and high integration costs. This study proposes context-specific recommendations and highlights potential synergies between AWP and IPD. While the analysis is constrained by limited empirical studies—especially regarding AWP—it lays a foundation for future research and offers actionable insights for project managers selecting between or integrating the two methods.