5 Design and Construct Myths Uncovered.
- It’s a single method
2. Owner loses all control
3. More expensive than traditional methods
4. Only appropriate for certain entities
5. Good for speed, bad for quality.
Commercial design and construction building have experienced exponential growth in popularity over the last ten years and so are the myths about project delivery.
Let’s set the record straight. We’ve covered the top five misunderstandings about the design-build project delivery method.
Myth 1: Design and build is a single method.
There is more than one way to design-build. However, over the years, the term “design-build” has become a catch-all for many different alternative project delivery methods.
Alternative methods include:
- Developer Manager
- Engineer led design and build
- Design, build, operate and maintain (DBOM)
- CM at risk (also called CM/GC or CMAR)
- Public-private partnership (P3)
- Integrated project delivery (IPD)
Each has its own appropriate application, contracting formats exist to accommodate these numerous delivery methods.
Myth 2: The owner loses all control of the project
This is a very common misconception and it’s not true. Depending on the type of delivery arrangement, the owner can be as hands on or off as they want to be.With an engineer led design and build project, for example, the owner is involved at the beginning of the project, during the timeline creation. Their input and original intent is carried through all the design and construction phases by the design engineer, who assists the project from start to finish.
Other arrangements are what is called “open book.” The owner receives regular progress presentations, giving them continual opportunities to provide feedback. All can be addressed contractually.
Myth 3: Design and build is more expensive than traditional options
Design and build options are more cost-efficient than traditional project delivery in most situations. Because project budget is identified early in the planning process and frequently maintained through a highly collaborative process.
Under design and build methods, the designer and builder can work shoulder-to-shoulder in real time. Speaking face-to-face, they are able to avoid the many miscommunications that can occur within a set of construction documents. This saves time, money and minimises costly disputes.
Myth 4: Design and build is only for certain entities
Design and build are often associated with private sector construction projects. However, it is not limited to them. Design and build are a viable option for many local government projects. Many federal and state organisations are placing an emphasis on the design and build project delivery method.
Expansions XXXXXX in XXXX, XXXXX, were planned, engineered and constructed using the design and build project delivery model. In fact, so was the renovation of the XXXXXX, where design-build proved to be so effective that it has influenced implementation of design-build project delivery techniques on other federal projects.
Myth 5: Good for speed, bad for quality
Many believe that swiftness in a design and build projects is accomplished by cutting corners or compromising quality. Also, completely false. Quality is a cornerstone of top design and build project delivery providers.Project timeframe is compressed because of concurrent activities, not carelessness. Building while designing, designing while procuring, more efficient sequencing — this is how top projects are delivered quickly, efficiently and while maintaining high quality.
Design and build project delivery are susceptible and vulnerable to misinformation. When we dig into the facts, we unearth many opportunities to build better projects.
Coverite Projects – Discover. Design. Deliver.
Specialising in the design and construction of inspiring environments for education.
#agewell #learningactivated #workinginharmony #designandbuild #ideastorealisaton #reinventingforthefuture #discoverdesigndeliver