USGBCA large number of construction students are passionate about the trend in sustainable construction a.k.a. green construction, LEED construction. Many of the students that I meet with at presentations, career fairs, interviews, and student competitions are deeply interested in my firm’s efforts in LEED construction.

The article, “40,000 LEED APs and Counting” provides a snapshot of how the construction and design industries are embracing the sustainable construction movement. I am proud to report that Skanska is represented at #13 on the list of “BD+C’s Top 50 Building Team LEED APs”. Skanska is one of the top ranked builders on the list, which includes several design firms — if everything goes well during the LEED V2.2 Exam next Wednesday (08AUG07), three of my team members will earn the designation of LEED Accredited Professional and Skanska will jump up to #12 on the list.

The current list is as follows:

BD+C’s Top 50 Building Team LEED APs

Ranking / Firm / # of LEED APs / # of Employees / % of LEED APs to All Employees

1. Perkins+Will 753 1,236 60.9
2. Gensler 575 2,480 23.2
3. HOK 456 2,153 21.2
4. Stantec 277 5,977 4.6
5. The Turner Corp. 260 — —
6. SmithGroup 243 817 29.7
7. HDR Architecture 192 1,111 17.3
8. DPR Construction 185 676 27.4
9. CUH2A 161 370 43.5
10. HKS 155 1,148 13.5
11. Mithun 137 197 69.5
12. LPA 126 213 59.2
13. Skanska USA Building 125 — —
14. Leo A Daly 123 1,081 11.4
15. DLR Group 120 556 21.6
16. Gilbane Building Co. 118 1,800 6.6
17. Cannon Design 115 749 15.4
18. JE Dunn Construction Group 110 3,369 3.3
18. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill 110 1,280 8.6
20. NBBJ 109 728 15.0
21. Arup 105 8,500 1.2
22. Swinerton Inc. 103 1,280 8.0
23. DMJM H&N 96 1,297 7.4
24. Bovis Lend Lease 94 2,937 3.2
25. Callison 92 638 14.4
26. Moseley Architects 87 227 38.3
26. Webcor Builders 87 — —
28. Zimmer Gunsul Frasca 85 439 19.4
29. Gould Evans Associates 83 205 40.5
30. Perkins Eastman 80 722 11.1
31. Hammel, Green and Abrahamson 79 508 15.6
32. KlingStubbins 75 540 13.9
32. RTKL Associates 75 1,051 7.1
34. M. A. Mortenson Co. 74 1,234 6.0
35. STV Group 70 1,455 4.8
35. Thompson, Ventulett, Stainback 70 300 23.3
37. Flack + Kurtz 69 383 18.0
37. URS Corp. 69 29,308 0.2
39. Jacobs Engineering Group 68 — —
40. CH2M HILL 66 4,704 1.4
41. Affiliated Engineers 65 508 12.8
42. Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern 63 650 9.7
43. RNL Design 62 185 33.5
44. Clark Group 61 2,945 2.1
44. HMC Architects 61 432 14.1
46. KPFF Consulting Engineers 60 853 7.0
47. Cooper Carry 58 287 20.2
48. Clark Nexsen 56 322 17.4
48. Holder Construction 56 377 14.9
50. Einhorn Yaffee Prescott 54 300 18.0
50. Shepley Bulfinch Richardson & Abbott 54 180 30.0

Source: 2007 Giants 300 survey
Note: This ranking is based on firms that made the Giants 300 list.

I came across an article entitled, “Continuing the Ranking Game: Using ASC Publication as One Criteria for the Ranking of C-schools” by two Texas A&M Professors, Kenneth C. Williamson III, Ph.D. and Richard A. Burt, MRICS, Ph.D.

The article offers a methodology to rank college construction programs based on the number of research publications produced by the program. Refer to the article to see how your construction program fared in rankings.

“Continuing the Ranking Game: Using ASC Publication as One Criteria for the Ranking of C-schools”

My initial ranking system (C-Schoolblog Rankings) was based on a simple ratio of the number of recruiters at a school (demand) versus the number of students that graduate from a program each year (supply). The ranking system in the article above uses a completely different ranking methodology, which may be a better indicator of the quality of professors and graduate students or at least their dedication to scholarly research to positively effect the construction industry.