I was genuinely surprised to find that Technology in this issue of MM&T does not have us thinking so much about devices, or even the dizzying rate of technological advancement, as about communication and organizational standards.

The Internet Communications Tsunami—It's Not Coming, It's Here:  An Executive Primer on the Inevitability of Growth in Internet Communications
By J. Ledlie Klosky, Ph.D., P.E., M.ASCE and Matthew Klosky, M.A.

If you don’t know what IP Communications are, you are already behind and better start running fast. In the fast-paced, highly team-oriented business of design and construction, nimble, multi-platform communication capabilities will provide a key competitive advantage by providing mobile, high-speed fully collaborative environments in which ideas and information flow freely. The spread of wireless Internet connectivity combined with enhanced communications capabilities (video, file transmission, collaborative environments, etc.) makes the continued growth of Internet-based communications tools inevitable. This is especially true as the offshoring of design combines with the increased availability of bandwidth overseas in a confluence of need and availability. Lastly, the cost of many of the available applications is negligible to zero (AIM, Skype, MSN Messenger, Jabber, etc.), making them an attractive alternative to high-cost phone systems.

Interoperability:  Problem or Panacea?
By Gerald Gardtvits

Take this pop quiz: How many lug nuts are on a standard automobile wheel?

The answer is not as important as the underlying implications regarding the standardization of interfaces between components—in this case the axle and the wheel. The notion that the car wheel should have some common characteristics so that various tire manufactures can mount their tires to most wheel rims and that the rim can fit on most cars may seem obvious. This simple example touches on many elements of interoperability. Consumers are well served by numerous producers offering competing products that meet minimum performance thresholds. They take for granted the effort that goes into interoperability standards, until the lack of these standards becomes glaringly obvious.

Online Collaboration:  Why Aren't We Using Our Tools?
By Mark Ilich, Burcin Becerik and Bert Aultman

Project collaboration is an industry buzzword that you may have read about in the Engineering News Record or seen marketed at one of the numerous Architecture Engineering and Construction (AEC) tradeshows in the past 5 to 6 years. Or perhaps your firm has made the leap of faith and has adopted one of these tools to keep your company ahead of the competition. Regardless of your company’s familiarity with project collaboration, there is a chance that you may not realize the extent to which these tools are underutilized in our industry. The purpose of this paper is to shed some light on why adoption has been slower than would seem reasonable and what should be done for successful collaboration through technology.

Do PM practitioners speak different languages? Oh, yes! There are many meanings associated with terms commonly used in Project Management (PM). The state of today’s project management lexicon bears notable resemblance to the Tower of Babel, that biblical emblem of communication failure that resulted from a profusion of languages. How did this happen? Who created and misused our terminology?

In March 2006, the Port Authority completed installation of an InfraTek ® Radiant Deicing System at John F Kennedy International Airport (JFKIA).  The system will provide airlines the ability to deice up to a 747- 300 size aircraft more quickly and for dramatically less cost than traditional glycol deicing technology.  While there are two smaller versions in the United States and one in Oslo, by volume, the new facility at JFKIA is approximately 2.5 times larger.  The narrative below provides a description of the environmental benefits to be realized, and technical and financial information on the infrared deicing system designed and constructed using the design-build-operate-maintain (DBOM) project delivery method.

Facility Development Process
Information, Technology and Structural Assessments By Adam Hapij, P.E.

Before the days of digital computing power, professionals resorted to simpler tools when conducting structural assessments. Analyses were often conducted on paper; therefore, the complexities of a structural system had to be simplified, so as to fit existing analytical solutions. Although complicated structural systems were assessed using simpler methods, their resulting design was perhaps more conservative—but by no means inferior.

The architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry is an information intensive industry. Each construction project involves a unique building or other type of constructed system, a unique site, and a unique combination of designers and constructors. Achieving project goals requires tight coordination among a large number of specialized but interdependent organizations and individuals. Current information technologies offer the potential for transforming all functional departments and operational processes within construction firms (Chinowsky and Meredith, 2000). This is true even for functional areas, such as safety, that are not always obviously intertwined with other firms. Information technology (IT) has made it significantly easier and more cost effective for AEC managers to manage the safety of their employees.

As our dependence on computer and information technology grows, so does the complexity of the commercial world in which we use such technology. Competing interests in protecting valuable patents and copyrights, and mass-marketing and producing software and technology have led to an explosion in the use of “shrinkwrap” and “clickwrap” contracts to protect the software developers’ intellectual property rights against consumers. In recent years, software developers have used these types of contracts to limit their own liabilities for defects and breaches of warranty.