Things have changed. A few years ago, almost all of our projects were so-called traditional delivery: design-bid-build. Now there are choices on how to bring a project to completion, and each one has its own advantages. We have experience in alternative delivery, and we can help you decide which one will bring you what you need at the right cost—and in the right amount of time.
Design-Bid-Build
On the typical design-bid-build project, the designer produces construction documents, puts them out for bid, and then helps the owner select a contractor based primarily on price. The owner/designer contract and owner/builder contract are separate. The advantage is that with separate major phases there is more control since each phase is completed before the next phase begins. It is also commonly assumed that this method results in the lowest price. Major disadvantages: It takes longer since there are three separate phases that must be completed sequentially. Also, choosing a contractor based on the lowest bid means you get the cheapest contractor, not necessarily the one best-suited for the project. Lastly, the method can lead to change orders and claims, meaning unforeseen additional costs.
Design-Build
On a design-build project, the owner contracts with a single entity: the design/build team, joint-venture, or firm. The owner deals with a single point of responsibility. The DB team is usually chosen through a qualifications-based process and then early in the project, costs are negotiated and committed to. The biggest advantage is speed. Construction can begin on the building site as soon as the footprint is established in the design process. The single point of responsibility also minimizes the owner’s risk and reduces change orders. A disadvantage is that it requires a well-oiled team since much happens concurrently and there are few opportunities to stop and evaluate.
Other Methods
One of several variations to these two types of delivery can often be the ideal arrangement. The Construction Management approach is where the designer and a construction manager are hired at the beginning, and the CM works with the designer and owner from startup through contractor selection and construction. This method means the addition of a fourth entity, but it also shares some of the advantages of both design-build and design-bid-build methods.
Qualifications-Based Selection
BWSC believes that owners are served best when they adopt a Qualifications-Based Selection(QBS) process. A non-QBS system, a system that seeks the lowest bidder, is prone to producing lower-quality projects for several reasons. The project is compromised by encouraging less-experienced personnel, discouraging evaluation of alternatives, and fostering more change orders during construction. In contrast, a QBS approach (which is now the law in most states) brings forth the most-qualified candidate for the type of project being proposed. QBS does not mean that costs escalate; fair and reasonable compensation is negotiated before the contract is signed. The owner is free to move to the second-place firm if an agreeable fee structure or cost cannot be mutually agreed upon. For more information, see the QBS discussions on the ACEC website (http://www.acec.org/advocacy/committees/pdf/policy_stmnt_qbs_draft06.pdf) or on the AIA website (http://www.aia.org/siteobjects/files/qbsib.pdf).
