When to use the design-build delivery method?
You should use the design-build delivery method when you want a single point of responsibility for both the design and construction phases of a project, or when operating under a tight schedule.
The design-build delivery method is a project delivery system where the project owner contracts with a single entity (often a design-build firm, which can be a contractor with in-house design capabilities, a joint venture between a designer and a contractor, or a designer with in-house construction management) for both the design and construction phases of a project.
According to the reference, a Design-Build contract is ideal when the project owner wants one entity to be responsible for both design and construction. This consolidation offers significant advantages by fostering collaboration and streamlining the project lifecycle.
Furthermore, the reference states that Design-Build is usually the preferred contracting method under a tight schedule. This is because overlapping design and construction phases and integrated teams can accelerate the project timeline compared to traditional methods like design-bid-build.
Key Scenarios for Using Design-Build
Here are the primary situations and benefits that make design-build a suitable choice:
- Single Point of Responsibility: The owner prefers to contract with just one entity for the entire project (design and construction). This simplifies communication, administration, and accountability. If issues arise, there's no finger-pointing between designer and contractor.
- Tight Project Schedules: When speed is a critical factor, design-build allows design and construction activities to happen concurrently. For example, foundation work can begin before the detailed architectural plans are finalized.
- Cost Predictability: While initial design might be less complete at the start of construction, design-build often provides better cost control and predictability through early contractor involvement and value engineering.
- Complex Projects: Projects with high complexity or unique requirements can benefit from the integrated expertise of the design-build team working together from the outset to find innovative solutions.
- Owner Experience Level: Owners who may lack extensive experience managing separate design and construction contracts can find design-build less burdensome due to the consolidated responsibility.
Comparing Design-Build with Other Methods
Understanding when not to use design-build is also important. Traditional design-bid-build, for instance, is often preferred when the owner wants maximum control over the design details and budget certainty through a competitive bidding process after design is complete. Construction management at-risk (CMAR) provides early contractor input but maintains separate design and construction contracts.
Here's a simplified look at suitability:
| Scenario | Best Fit Delivery Method | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Single Responsibility Desired | Design-Build | Simplifies owner oversight. |
| Tight Deadline | Design-Build | Allows overlapping phases. |
| High Owner Control Over Design | Design-Bid-Build | Owner approves design before bidding. |
| Lowest Construction Price Key | Design-Bid-Build | Competitive bid on complete design. |
| Early Contractor Input (Design) | Design-Build, CMAR | Leverage construction expertise early. |
| Risk Mitigation | Design-Build | Risks shared/managed by integrated team. |
Practical Considerations
Choosing design-build isn't just about speed or responsibility; it's also about the owner's willingness to engage collaboratively with the design-build team early on. Success often relies on selecting a qualified and trustworthy design-build partner.
In summary, the design-build method is particularly advantageous when the owner values having a single contractual relationship for both design and construction, or when the project must be completed quickly.
