Procurement Methods For Construction Projects: Advantages And Disadvantages Of Design-Bid-Build And Design Build Methods

Procurement Methods for Construction Projects

This report aims to discuss the positive and negative aspects of the three procurement methods for construction projects. The advantages and the disadvantages of the design-bid-build method is clearly discussed in this report. The advantages and the disadvantages of the design build method is stated in this report. The advantages and the disadvantages of the construction methods is clearly stated in this report. Lastly, this report concludes with an appropriate conclusion of this report.

The methods that are utilised by the procuring entity for acquiring goods, services and works is known as procurement methods. The methods of procurement can be both competitive and non-competitive (Arney et al. 2014).

This delivery method is a conventional method of construction. This process includes the selection by the owner and then hiring of professionals of design for producing construction or/and design documents that are to be utilised in the Request for proposals of the qualified builders (Bergman and Lundberg 2013). In the above mentioned situation, the drawing of contracts is dissimilar for the contractor and the designer and there is a minimum involvement of the builder in the phase of designing of the project.

• The owner plays a higher role in the process of designing
• The extra willing participants of bidding such as contractors are increasingly familiar with the approach
• Possesses increased flexibility for the changes in design
• The approach is a standard contracting method  (Brook 2016)
• The linear process of the design-bid-build is easier for the owners to understand and manage
• The scheduling is straightforward as the phases of designing and construction are sequential and not overlapping.
• The process of design-bid-build benefits from the professional responsibility of the architect for designing a building of quality and act on the owner’s behalf
• As soon as the contractor makes a cost commitment, it is reliable as it is based on the nearly completed documents of design.
• The roles of construction and the design are different and very knowledgeable, which makes the liability and the responsibility is relatively flawless
• The owners possesses the chance of reviewing the competitive bids for the costs of construction (De and Goswami 2014)
• In this approach, the contractors are increasingly familiar with the process and the work.
• The activeness of the architects in the administration of the construction is higher than other methods so that the intentions of design are carried through the construction

• The overall method is slower
• The collaboration between the design team and the builder is limited
• The orders of change is more similar with the help of this method (DeCorla-Souza et al. 2013)
• The disputes are increasingly more common and these disputes can lead to more delays
• The cost of construction is not firmly established till the stage of design is completed
• There can be a delay in the projects and the cost of the projects can rise if the bids increases over the budget, and this can also lead to increased cost of redesign, value engineering and the rebidding processes
• No benefit is obtained by the architect from the advice of the contractor in the aspect of constructability and the costs during the phase of designing
• The availability of the knowledge of any kind of advanced technology of construction that is offered by the subcontractors and the common contractors is relatively low in this approach
• As the competition among the contractors is carried out on the basis of the lowest bids, any kind of gaps or modifications in the documents of design can lead to several openings for the contractors to delay construction and/or alter the orders
• The acceptance of the long processes of this approach can be unacceptable for the owners (Díaz-Yáñez et al. 2013
• As this process is linear, some kind of delay in the phases can set back the complete schedule
• The delays in the construction can lead to the increase in the costs for the owners and the architects

The process of design build is a delivery system of construction project that employs a sole member, the full responsibility for the designing and building a project of construction is referred as design build method. This method is deployed in both the construction of new home and the renovation of home as the alternative of the conventional method of design-bid-build.

The construction process of design to build is the method of project delivery that starts with the contracting of the owners with any general contractor for being completely responsible for both the designing and the construction of the home project (Dumea et al. 2013)

The advantages of the design build method are:

Responsibility of a single source: the accountability of a single source, which is the general contractor, is the major aspect in the definition of the design build. The owner and the common contractor involves into a contract of design build that necessitates the general contractor to enable the project design of the home. The duty of the general contractor is to turn the designs and build according to the architecture, lifestyle and the criteria of finance that is provided to the owner.  The process of build design efficiently transfers the risk of the owners that is related with the conventional method of design-bid-build to the common contractor.

Design-Bid-Build Method

Cost reduction: the process of design build reduces the cost of the complete project with the efficiency of the total process. It saves the expense with the help of streamlining of the complete home design, and hence reduces both, the timeline and the claims of the errors in design by the general contractors. The errors in planning and the omission shall normally be charged to the owner with the method of change orders by the common contractor. This method of delivery contributes to the cost savings by the intrinsic ability of the home designer and the general contractor to cooperate in the value engineering the design (ED Love et al. 2014).

Time savings: the contribution of the time savings from the method of the design build are majorly the result of the efficiencies of the process. The design budget pricing is provided by the general contractor during the process of complete design. As the product selection and the design of the home evolves, the accuracy of the construction budget also evolves. The efficiency occurs with the elimination of both the bid procurement and the time that is required for the redesigning for maintaining the goals of the budget.

Increased control of the project for the owner: The method of design build offers a higher control to the owner throughout the complete design and the cost of construction than the conventional method of design-bid-build. As the cost saving aspect  is higher in this method and the savings of time and the lower risk of the claims and the liability that is experienced by the owner is lower in this process, the owner achieves higher control over the project than the conventional design-bid-build method (Gong and Zhou 2015).

Reduction of the claims of exposure: The change of the orders are a common occurrence in the projects of construction by owners and the design. Some of the changes in the orders occurs due to the changing of the minds of the owners, while some changes occur due to the errors in design and the omissions. The method of design build diminishes these categories of cost exposure by transferring the projects to the general contractor. The contracting method of design build creates the general contractor solely responsible to the owner for these kinds of expenses of claims.

Value engineering: With the evolvement of the process of design, the owner can insist on the particular architectural features or the design elements while requiring to maintain the budget of construction. The general contractor is required during these times for value engineering the design for trying to reduce the cost of production or construction in several areas of the home design. The task of value engineering is majorly executed by the home designer and the master builder as the design evolves.

Design Build Method

Optimum efficiency of project: the method of design build is an increased efficient process than the conventional methods. This method is a process of collaboration between the members of home design, owner, and the general contractor. This effort in collaborating is generally referred as the team of design. The design team is led by the master builder for achieving the desired goals that are developed during the phase of conceptual design (Idiake et al. 2015).

The disadvantages of this method are as follows:

Lesser control of the owners over the design: This method can lead to the sacrificing of some control over the complete design as the owners experience trade-offs among the design and the budget. This is not unique characteristic to the process of design build. The owners faces the exact sacrifice of the decisions in the method of design-bid-build, even though the plans are completed before the discovery of the factors takes place.

Lack of competitive pricing: the lack in the competitive bidding that takes place by the process of design building makes the greatest flaw in the situation of serving the interest of the client. The design build inherently permits the master builder to ignore the bidding of the subcontractor that is competitive, which leads to the escalation of pricing (Masterman and Masterman 2013).

One of the variation of the method of design-bid-build is the securing of the services of a construction manager. The At-risk of the construction manager can be utilised rather than bidding on the project to the common contractors. The construction manager of an agency acts as the advisor to the client. The most popular method of construction management is CM At-risk, where the risk to the owner is reduced by an independent professional because the CMAR or the construction management at-risk clenches the agreements of subcontract (Porwal and Hewage 2013).

The advantages are as follows:

• The owner obtains several advices on the budget, schedule, and the constructability throughout the phase of design
• The CMAR can offer advice of value-engineering for saving the time and money of the client
• The CMAR is solely responsible for the scheduling and budgeting
• CMAR commonly offers a GMP (Guaranteed Maximum Price)
• The owner gains a knowledge about the profits of the customers on the projects and any kind of change in orders
• The initiation of the construction can be done without the completion of the design (Ruparathna and Hewage 2013)

The disadvantages are:

• The level of communication between the CMAR and the owner needs to be maintained at the highest level
• The cooperation of the architect is required for working out the details of designing prior the construction and throughout the construction
• The cost of the construction can rise up significantly if the flaws in the designs is not detected before the construction starts
• This method requires the involvement of the negotiation of two dissimilar contracts and it requires careful language of contract for establishing responsibilities of every party (Tokta?-Palut et al. 2014)

Conclusion

Hence, it can be concluded that the procurement methods are essential for the construction of projects. The methods that are utilised by the procuring entity for acquiring goods, services and works is known as procurement methods. The design-bid-build delivery method is a conventional method of construction. This process includes the selection by the owner and then hiring of professionals of design for producing construction or/and design documents that are to be utilised in the Request for proposals of the qualified builders. There are several advantages of the design-bid-build method and it consists of some disadvantages. The process of design build is a delivery system of construction project that employs a sole member, the full responsibility for the designing and building a project of construction is referred as design build method. The advantages of this method are responsibility of a single source is generated, cost reduction, time savings, increased control of the project for the owner, reduction of the claims of exposure, value engineering, and increase in the optimum efficiency of project. The disadvantages of this method are lesser control of the owners over the design and the lack of competitive pricing. One of the variation of the method of design-bid-build is the securing of the services of a construction manager. The most popular method of construction management is CM At-risk.

References

Arney, L., Yadav, P., Miller, R. and Wilkerson, T., 2014. Strategic contracting practices to improve procurement of health commodities. Global Health: Science and Practice, 2(3), pp.295-306.

Bergman, M.A. and Lundberg, S., 2013. Tender evaluation and supplier selection methods in public procurement. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 19(2), pp.73-83.

Brook, M., 2016. Estimating and tendering for construction work. Routledge.

De, M. and Goswami, S.K., 2014. Optimal reactive power procurement with voltage stability consideration in deregulated power system. IEEE transactions on power systems, 29(5), pp.2078-2086.

DeCorla-Souza, P., Lee, D., Timothy, D. and Mayer, J., 2013. Comparing public-private partnerships with conventional procurement: incorporating considerations from benefit-cost analysis. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (2346), pp.32-39.

Díaz-Yáñez, O., Mola-Yudego, B., Anttila, P., Röser, D. and Asikainen, A., 2013. Forest chips for energy in Europe: current procurement methods and potentials. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 21, pp.562-571.

Dumea, R., Gavrilovici, C., Siriopol, D., Hogas, S., Blaj, M., Donciu, M.D. and Covic, A., 2013. Organ procurement methods: a comparative approach of ethical issues in different centers. Revista Român? de Bioetic?, 11(4), pp.101-121.

ED Love, P., O’Donoghue, D., R. Davis, P. and Smith, J., 2014. Procurement of public sector facilities: Views of early contractor involvement. facilities, 32(9/10), pp.460-471.

Gong, T. and Zhou, N., 2015. Corruption and marketization: Formal and informal rules in C hinese public procurement. Regulation & Governance, 9(1), pp.63-76.

Idiake, J.E., Shittu, A.A., Anunobi, A.I. and Akanmu, W.P., 2015. A comparative analysis of traditional and design & build methods of procurement in the Nigerian Construction Industry. International Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 4(1), pp.1-12.

Masterman, J. and Masterman, J.W., 2013. An introduction to building procurement systems. Routledge.

Mills, A.D. and Wiser, R.H., 2013. An evaluation of solar valuation methods used in utility planning and procurement processes (No. LBNL-6183E). Lawrence Berkeley National Lab.(LBNL), Berkeley, CA (United States).

Naoum, S. and Egbu, C., 2015. Critical review of procurement method research in construction journals. Procedia Economics and Finance, 21, pp.6-13.

Porwal, A. and Hewage, K.N., 2013. Building Information Modeling (BIM) partnering framework for public construction projects. Automation in Construction, 31, pp.204-214.

Ruparathna, R. and Hewage, K., 2013. Review of contemporary construction procurement practices. Journal of management in engineering, 31(3), p.04014038.

Tokta?-Palut, P., Baylav, E., Teoman, S. and Altunbey, M., 2014. The impact of barriers and benefits of e-procurement on its adoption decision: An empirical analysis. International Journal of Production Economics, 158, pp.77-90.