IPEXIQ · LEARN
Benchmarking · CII deep dive

How CII collects benchmark data — and what they actually publish

The Construction Industry Institute (CII, University of Texas at Austin) runs the longest-standing capital-projects benchmarking program in the industry. This page summarises the 10-10 framework, the ~250-question submission, and how their scope compares to the duration benchmarks in the main chapter.

A note on what is shared here

Everything on this page is drawn from publicly available CII research summaries, conference papers, and academic work. The actual benchmark values are members-only and not reproduced here.

Who runs it

CII is a research consortium hosted at the Cockrell School of Engineering, University of Texas at Austin. ~130 member organisations fund research teams and the benchmarking program.

The current platform is the 10-10 Program (consolidation of the earlier BM&M program, refined under RT-252).

Why owners submit
  • Membership precondition — submission is part of being a member.
  • UT Austin as neutral custodian.
  • Aggregation only — percentile bands, never identifiable.
  • Reciprocity — submitters get back their project on the curve.
The 10-10 framework

10 input measures + 10 output measures

10 input measures (leading)
MeasureWhat is scored
Front End Planning (FEP)Use & maturity of FEL/FEED process; PDRI score at sanction.
AlignmentOwner / contractor / stakeholder alignment on objectives.
ConstructabilityConstructability program implementation index.
Materials ManagementEngineered & bulk materials planning, expediting, site control.
Planning for StartupUse of structured startup planning model (RT-121).
Change ManagementExistence and discipline of formal change control process.
Quality ManagementQA/QC program scope, audits, total field rework drivers.
SafetyZero Incident Techniques (ZIT) implementation.
Project Risk AssessmentRisk register maturity, quantitative risk analysis usage.
Team BuildingPartnering / integrated team practices and effectiveness.
10 output measures (lagging)
MetricDefinition
Cost Growth(Actual Cost − Initial Predicted) / Initial Predicted
Schedule Growth(Actual Duration − Initial Predicted) / Initial Predicted
Cost Predictability|Actual − Predicted| / Predicted (absolute)
Schedule Predictability|Actual − Predicted Duration| / Predicted (absolute)
Project Cost FactorTotal Cost / Design Capacity (sector-normalised $/unit)
Engineering ProductivityWorkhours / installed quantity, by discipline (RT-252)
Construction ProductivityDirect field workhours / installed quantity
Total Field Rework Factor (TFRF)Direct + Indirect Rework Cost / Construction Phase Cost
Recordable Incident Rate (TRIR)(Recordable cases × 200,000) / Hours Worked
Phase Cost & Schedule FactorsFEP / Detail Eng / Construction / Startup as % of TIC
Submission questionnaire

~250 questions

The exact question set is members-only and revised periodically. Question categories cover project identification & scope, cost & schedule outcomes, Front End Planning (PDRI inputs), practice use (the 10 inputs), productivity (RT-252 metrics), and safety.

  • Industry sector, project nature (Add-on, Modernisation, Grass roots), location.
  • Total Installed Cost (TIC) and design capacity.
  • Initial predicted vs actual cost and duration; cost & schedule by phase.
  • PDRI score at end of FEL-2 and end of FEL-3.
  • Constructability Implementation Index, change management, materials management.
  • Engineering workhours by discipline; installed quantities (concrete, steel, pipe, conduit).
  • Safety: recordable incidents, DART cases, exposure hours.
Scope comparison

CII metrics vs. the duration benchmarks in this chapter

TopicCII coverageThis chapter
Total cost growth (overall)Yes — flagship metric.Out of scope.
FEL / FEP cost as % of TICYes — phase cost factors by sector.Yes — published as broad ranges.
Engineering & construction productivityYes — RT-252 by discipline.Not covered.
Equipment delivery duration (PO → delivery)Limited / not a headline metric.Yes — explicit table by class.
Tender → award durationNot published.Yes — explicit table per package.
Mobilisation lag (PO → site)Not a published metric.Yes — most novel content here.
PDRI / FEL maturity scoreYes — a defining CII contribution.Referenced.
Total Field Rework FactorYes — flagship metric.Out of scope.
Honest summary

Where CII is strongest: cost growth, schedule growth, FEP maturity (PDRI), productivity (RT-252), total field rework.

Where CII is weakest: discrete procurement durations — equipment delivery by class, vendor-data turnaround, package-by-package tender cycles.

Access

What is public vs. members-only

ItemPublicMembers-only
Metric definitions (10-10 framework)Public
PDRI scoring sheetsPurchasableMembers get latest revisions
Annual benchmark distributionsNot publicMembers only
RT report executive summariesPublic abstractsFull PDFs members only
Online Benchmarking System portalNot publicMembers only
If you are not a CII member

You can still get most of the methodological value without paying:

  • Use the PDRI framework.
  • Adopt the 10 input / 10 output definitions internally.
  • Use RT-252 productivity definitions to standardise tracking.
  • Pair with the structural ratios and duration tables from the main chapter.