Why Many Construction Delivery Decisions Fail

Some project owners approach construction delivery selection completely backwards.

They start with the methodology. Traditional versus  Design-build or . Design-bid-build versus Design-assist. They want to know which one is "best."

But here's what we've learned after years of guiding owners through these decisions: the delivery method isn't the real question.

The real question is understanding what moves the needle for your specific business and project.

Business First, Methodology Second

Before we ever discuss delivery methods, we want to understand the ins and outs of your business. What's important to you? What are your expectations? What are your needs? Often- owners won’t know exactly what they need. You don’t know what you don’t know. 

Take a distribution warehouse project. Many owners think they're building a simple box. But we need to know what types of products they're storing, what racking requirements they  have, how many deliveries per day they're expecting, whether they're dealing with box trucks or semis.

These operational details completely change the project approach.

Once we understand these warehouse specifics, the delivery method choice becomes obvious. If you need that facility operational by a specific date to meet business commitments, we're almost always going to recommend design-build.

Here's why: We can complete the design while simultaneously releasing long-lead items like steel, HVAC, and electrical switchgear.

The numbers support this approach. Design-build projects deliver 12% faster construction speed and 6% lower cost growth than traditional projects.

But speed isn't just about efficiency. It's about survival in today's supply chain reality.

The Long-Lead Item Reality

Most owners don't realize how dramatically supply chains have changed. Lead times for steel products now run 6-9 months. In extreme cases, contractors wait more than a year for items like emergency generators.

Traditional design-bid-build follows a sequential timeline. Design, then bid, then build. By the time you're ready to order steel, your competition has already secured the materials they need.

We get the jump on these long-lead items. We have them on site when we need them, not prolonging the schedule while waiting on shop drawings.

This advantage alone often determines project success or failure.

When Traditional Still Wins

We said "almost always" design-build for a reason.

If time isn't critical and you don't want to operate under one contract entity, design-bid-build or “plan and spec”  might serve you better.

Some owners, particularly experienced ones, have had bad experiences with “design-build.” The terminology can mean very different things depending on who you ask, and many people falsely believe it always means having internal design capabilities with a true turnkey approach. This may be true but not always the case. 

Owners who’ve had those misconceptions have sometimes been burned by contractors who inappropriately used the methodology to hide poor performance or inflate pricing.

This comes down to trust.

Many people think you're not getting the best price if multiple general contractors aren't competing. They worry about accountability when everything sits under one contract.

We understand these concerns. That's why we employ an open-book, transparent strategy where we review the quotes and bids with our clients/partners and make decisions together.  There is no shell game and trying to hide money in different areas. 

The Transparency Solution

We share quotations from every trade and vendor, including architects and engineers. We require a minimum of four quotations for each construction division and their subsequent breakouts.  We also try to get a mix of large to small subcontractors to ensure we're getting true market representation.  If we only solicited our most common or well-known subs, we wouldn’t be getting competitive numbers. 

But here's the key: we don't automatically plug in the lowest number.

If we feel there's significant risk involved or we don't have familiarity with a particular company, we'll recommend a higher bid. We explain this to owners upfront.

Research confirms this approach works. Open book pricing promotes trust and transparency, leading to enhanced cost certainty and more efficient project delivery.

We're quarterbacking the project. We get all the smart people around the table and make decisions together so no one operates in a vacuum.

Blending Methodologies

Here's something most people don't understand: we often use design-build and design-assist in unison.

As we don't have in-house architects. We rely on industry partners with proven relationships.

This allows us to go to the market for the most competitive price. We treat our design partners as extensions of our team, but they compete for the work just like our subcontractor partners.

We don't put all our eggs in one basket. We only partner with design professionals who are experts in each vertical we operate in. We wouldn't use an industrial architect on a daycare project.

If an owner wants to use their architect of choice, that's perfectly fine. Hence the design-assist approach.

The key advantage of design-build remains: the owner's ability to operate under one contract. The architect is responsible to us, but that doesn't mean there's no input from the owner. We're working as a team.

Managing the Relationship Dynamic

Weekly OAC meetings keep everyone on the same page. Owners can be as involved as they want or step back completely. Either way, multiple voices are heard.

This addresses a fundamental truth about construction: architects typically aren't very good at pricing jobs.

We have full-time pre-construction teams constantly pulling cost information together. We have a better idea of true project costs because that's our daily reality.

During those weekly meetings, we guide designers toward the most budget-conscious solutions. Many architects rely on general estimating guidelines that don't reflect current market conditions.

When the pandemic created severe supply chain shortages, printed data became unreliable. Using design-build methodology, we got creative in soliciting and procuring hard-to-get items like roofing materials when much of the industry faced force majeure situations.

The Decision Framework

Here's how to think about delivery method selection:

Choose design-build when: - Timeline is critical to business operations - You want single-point accountability - Long-lead items are significant project components - You value speed and coordination over separated responsibilities

Choose traditional when: - Time pressure is reduced - You prefer separated contractor and design relationships - You want maximum control over individual team selection - Budget is the primary driver over schedule

Choose design-assist when: - You have preferred design professionals - You want construction input during design - You need flexibility in team structure - You want some integration benefits without full design-build commitment

The methodology doesn't determine success. Understanding what moves the needle for your specific project does.

We start every conversation by understanding your business, your timeline, your risk tolerance, and your operational requirements. Only then do we recommend the delivery approach that serves your goals.

Because at the end of the day, the best delivery method is the one that gets your project completed as scheduled, within budget, and ready to serve your business needs.

Everything else is just methodology.