A best-of-breed approach in labor and delivery: choosing the right IT system
Choosing the Right Project-Delivery Method
-
Upload
sarathirv6 -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
1
Transcript of Choosing the Right Project-Delivery Method
-
7/27/2019 Choosing the Right Project-Delivery Method
1/10
22 p o p u l a r g o v e r n m e n t
The author is a 2003 graduate of theMPA Program. She is currently pursuinga Ph.D. in architecture at the GeorgiaInstitute of Technology, specializing inconstruction-project delivery systems.Contact her at [email protected].
Any construction project thatmisses its deadline and is millionsof dollars over budget receives
unwanted attention. It receives even moreattention if it is funded by taxpayersmoney. Public owners (state agencies,counties and towns, universities andcommunity colleges, and hospitals)often seek new ways to make construc-
tion projects adhere to both deadlinesand budgets. Many experts believe thatthe key to the success of a constructionproject is the process by which it is or-ganized and managed, or the projectdelivery method. Recently the choicesamong methods have expanded. Pro-ponents of each method claim that theirsis the best choice to save money, reducetime, improve quality, and decreaseadministrative burden.
Historically, North Carolinas lawsrestricted public owners to using a projectdelivery method called design-bid-buildusing separate-prime bidding (explainedlater).1 In 2001 the North Carolina Gen-eral Assembly added two options forproject delivery: design-bid-build usingsingle-prime bidding and constructionmanager at risk.2 The North Carolinastatutes also include a special provisionthat allows the State Building Commis-sion to approve alternative contractingtechniques.3 The most commonly ap-proved method is design-build. Now,
with four methods available and variousopinions bombarding the industry, pub-lic owners are wondering which onebest suits their projects.
Public Construction Contracting:Choosing the Right Project-Delivery Method
Valerie Rose Riecke
F R O M T H E M P A P R O G R A MF R O M T H E M P A P R O G R A M
-
7/27/2019 Choosing the Right Project-Delivery Method
2/10
f a l l 2 0 0 4 23
This article offers guidance to publicofficials in assessing the different projectdelivery methods. Construction industryprofessionals interested in public-sectorwork also will find the article of interest.The study reported in the article is not aquantitative study that determines which
method is the most cost-effective andleast expensive. Many quantitativestudies claim to have determined the
most effective approach, but a precise,comparative analysis is impossible.4 Myanalysis moves the industry one stepcloser to understanding the implicationsof each method.
Research Design and Methodology
Opinions on the relative merits and risksof each method vary. To account forthe differing opinions, I sought inputfrom experts representing all construc-
tion industry disciplines. I first studied
the published literature on the fourproject delivery methods, identifyingthe advantages and the disadvantagesof each using four construction-contracting industry goals as evaluationcriteria: (1) controlling project costs,(2) meeting or accelerating the schedule,
(3) ensuring a quality product, and(4) decreasing the administrativeburden.5
To apply the findings of the literaturereview, I distributed a questionnaire toconstruction industry experts. They in-cluded academicians, architects, engineers,construction managers, general contrac-tors, legislators, local and state officialsin North Carolina, and prime contrac-tors. I chose them using referral sam-pling: I surveyed experts who wereinitially interested and available to par-ticipate, and they referred me to addi-tional experts. In total, I incorporated
fifteen responses into the study.6
Definitions of Project
Delivery Methods
Many variations of project deliverymethods exist in the construction in-dustry. Because of this, there are nostandard definitions.7 Therefore it isimportant to understand how thesemethods are being applied in North
Carolina. The descriptions that followuse the North Carolina General Statuesas a basis and add information from theliterature review and experts comments.(For graphic representations of themethods, see Figures 14.) Words thatappear in boldface are defined in theglossary (see page 26).
Design-bid-build using separate- (or
multiple-) prime bidding. This projectdelivery method has four sequentialphases: selection, design, bid, and con-struction. The selection phase entails
hiring the designers, who are chosen onthe basis of qualifications.8
Once the designers are selected, de-sign begins. It has three phases: (a) sche-matic design, during which the basicappearance and the plan are developed;(b) design development, during whichthe functional and aesthetic aspects ofthe project and the building systems thatsatisfy them are defined; and (c) con-struction documents, during which thedetails of assembly and construction
technology are finalized.
Public Owner
Designer:Architects, Engineers,
and Consultants
Heating, Ventilating,and Air Conditioning
Prime Contractor
PlumbingPrime Contractor
ElectricalPrime Contractor
General ConstructionPrime Contractor
Selection Design Bid Construction
Figure 1. Design-Bid-Build Using
Separate-Prime Bidding
As UNC was about to embark upon a massive capital program in excess of$4.2 billion,it was clear that a greater number of construction delivery
options were necessary for success.The North Carolina General Assemblys
approval late in 2001 to add construction manager at risk and single-prime
bidding to the long-used multiple-prime bidding was a watershed event.
Kevin MacNaughton, special assistant for capital projects, UNC at Chapel Hill
-
7/27/2019 Choosing the Right Project-Delivery Method
3/10
24 p o p u l a r g o v e r n m e n t
Public Owner
Designer:Architects, Engineers,
and Consultants
Heating, Ventilating,and Air Conditioning
Subcontractor
PlumbingSubcontractor
ElectricalSubcontractor
General ConstructionSubcontractor(s)
Selection Design Bid Construction
General Contractor
Figure 2. Design-Bid-Build Using
Single-Prime Bidding
Public Owner
Designer:Architects, Engineers,
and Consultants
Heating, Ventilating,and Air Conditioning
Prime Contractor
PlumbingPrime Contractor
ElectricalPrime Contractor
General ConstructionPrime Contractor
Selection Design
Construction
Construction Manager
Bid-Selection
Figure 3. Construction Manager at Risk
During design the public ownercreates the project requirements, alsoknown as the project program. Also, thedesigners develop the design documentson the basis of those requirements.
Next, the designers createbid pack-ages for the following trades: heating,ventilating, and air conditioning; plumb-ing; electrical work; and general con-
struction (any work not includedin the other three categories). Thenbidding begins on the constructionproject. Bids are received from pro-spective prime contractors and awardedto the lowest, most responsible bidders.At the end of the bid phase, contractsare executed with each of the primecontractors.
In the final phase, construction takesplace. Under this method, it occurs afterthe design documents are complete, andthe pubic owner contracts separately withthe designers and the prime contractors.
Design-bid-build using single-prime
bidding. This project delivery methodalso has four sequential phases: selection,design, bid, and construction. Activities
-
7/27/2019 Choosing the Right Project-Delivery Method
4/10
f a l l 2 0 0 4 25
prospective construction managers.11
The construction manager is selected onthe basis of qualifications.
Once the construction manager isselected, the contract has two phases ofexecution. In the preconstruction phase,the construction manager works with
the public owner and the designers untilthe design documents are about 80percent complete. Then the contract isrenegotiated to include a guaranteedmaximum price for the construction.12
After the guaranteed maximum pricehas been set, the construction manager
may begin construction, even though thedesign documents are not complete. Ifconstruction begins early, the constructionmanager creates multiple bid packagesfrom the incomplete design documentsand opens bidding.13 Contracts areawarded to the lowest, most responsiblebidders, and construction takes place.
Under this method, constructionbegins before the design documents arecomplete. Also, the public owner con-
tracts with the designers and the con-struction manager, and the constructionmanager contracts with the primecontractors and the subcontractors.
Design-build. Unlike the design-bid-build and construction-manager-at-riskmethods, this method has only three
phases: bid-selection, design, and con-struction. The public owner first pre-pares a detailed project program andthen requests proposals to attract adesign-builder. The design-builder iseither a single company or a partnershipof two or more companies. Several
companies are selected on the basis oftheir qualifications.
The design-builders then developdetailed proposals, which include designdocuments and a cost for construction.A proposal is selected on the basis of thelowest, most responsible bid.14 As withthe construction-manager-at-riskmethod, the design-builder may beginconstruction after being hired. Underthis method, construction begins before
Public Owner
Heating, Ventilating,and Air Conditioning
Subcontractor
PlumbingSubcontractor
ElectricalSubcontractor
General ConstructionSubcontractor(s)
Bid-Selection
Design
Construction
Design-Builder
Figure 4. Design-Build
in the selection and design phases arelargely the same as in separate-primebidding. The exception is that the de-signers create one bid package from thedesign documents, as opposed to mul-tiple packages.
After one bid package is developed,construction bidding begins. Bids arereceived from general contractors and
awarded to the lowest, most responsiblebidder. At the end of the bid phase, onecontract is executed.
Construction is the projects finalstage. It takes place after the design doc-uments are complete. The public ownercontracts separately with the designersand the general contractor, and thegeneral contractor holds contracts withsubcontractors.
Construction manager at risk (con-
struction management).9 As with thedesign-bid-build methods, there are four
phases of project delivery: selection (of adesigner), design, bid-selection (of a con-struction manager), and construction.First, the public owner develops the pro-ject program and then requests proposalsfrom prospective designers.10 As withother methods, the public owner awardsthe contract on the basis of qualifications.
The designer then develops designdocuments. During this process thepublic owner requests proposals from
Employing single-prime bidding on less complex projects has ensured a
single source of responsibility. Many institutions have found that the pre-
qualification of these hard-bid contractors is worth the effort on most jobs.Kevin MacNaughton
-
7/27/2019 Choosing the Right Project-Delivery Method
5/10
26 p o p u l a r g o v e r n m e n t
the design documents are complete.The public owner contracts only witha design-builder.
Findings
The study found that opinions varygreatly on the relative merits and risksof each method. The findings are pre-sented in the following sections accord-
ing to the evaluation criteria identifiedearlier.
Controlling Project Costs
Although many studies claim to have de-termined the most cost-effective or theleast-expensive project delivery method,as noted earlier, the task is impossible.So, for each method the questionnaireasked ifproject costs were always metand usually reduced, typically met and
rarely reduced, or rarely met and neverreduced. I deemed the most effectivemethod to be the one cited by the highestpercentage as always meeting andusually reducing project costs.
Overwhelmingly, experts indicatedthat the construction-manager-at-riskmethod is the most effective. (For agraphic presentation of the results, seeFigure 5.)
Seventy-three percent of the expertsresponded that costs are always met andusually reduced because the construc-tion manager assumes the financial riskassociated with any profit or loss.15 Ifthe budget is exceeded, the constructionmanager must work without charge toarrive at the guaranteed maximum price.
Experts also ranked this methodhigh because the construction manageris involved in all project phases. There
are more opportunities for valueengineering and cost estimating.
Even though this method rankedhighest, experts said that public ownersmay have difficulty enforcing the con-tract. The guaranteed maximum price isbased on incomplete design documentsand is a defined price for an undefinedproduct.
The design-build method also is
effective in controlling project costs,although not as effective as theconstruction-manager-at-risk method.Forty-seven percent of experts respondedthat costs are always met and usually re-duced. Additionally, 53 percent respondedthat costs typically are met. Expertsranked this method high because thereare not as many change orders or asmany claims stemming from errors andomissions in the design documents. The
GlossaryBid package: A group of documents
issued to contractors who are
bidding on a construction project.
The documents include information
on the bidding process and the
design documents (see below); also
called bidding documentsorinvitation to bid (ITB) package.
Change order: A revision in the con-
tract documents after the execu-
tion of the contract. A change
order is an order to change the
work to be performed under a
contract. It is usually given by the
public owner to a general or prime
contractor (see column 3) or by a
general or prime contractor to a
subcontractor.
Cost estimating: Calculation of the
approximate direct and indirect
costs of the project.
Design documents: The construction
documents and the project specifi-
cations. The construction documents
are drawings that describe the
construction requirements. The
project specifications are detailed
written instructions, which explain
each phase of work to be done.
For example, the drawings will
show the size and the location of
a duct, and the specifications willdefine the manufacturer of the
duct and the construction tech-
nique to install it.
Designer: Architects; landscape archi-
tects; civil, structural, mechanical,
plumbing, and electrical engineers;
technical consultants; and specifica-
tions writers.
Guaranteed maximum price: An
amount stipulated in a construction
contract as the maximum sum pay-
able by the public owner to the
construction manager for the work
specified.
Long lead time: The extended period
required to manufacture certain
materials. Long lead times may
create scheduling delays if the
items involved are needed before
they are manufactured.
Phased construction: Overlapping
of design and construction, also
called fast tracking. The con-
struction schedule is compressed by
overlapping some activities that
otherwise would be performed
sequentially. Phased construction
increases project delivery speed
because construction can start
before the design documents are
complete. An example is to start
site work and construction of the
foundation before the interior iscompletely designed.
Prime contractor: A company respon-
sible for all facets of construction
or renovation of a building, in its
particular trade: (a) heating,
ventilating, and air conditioning;
(b) plumbing; (c) electrical work;
or (d) general construction (anywork not included in the other
three categories). The prime con-
tractor employs a subcontractor
or subcontractors to perform some
or all of the work associated with
its specialization.
Project costs: The direct and indirect
costs associated with the execution
of a project.
Project program, project require-
ments: A general project descrip-
tion, including project objectives,functional uses, occupancy require-
ments, and budget and time
considerations and limitations.
Proposal: The document submitted by
a bidder to a public owner for
design and/or construction of a
project; also called bid.
Underbid: To submit a bid that is less
than the cost to perform the work.
Value engineering: The process of
analyzing the direct cost versus the
value of alternative materials,equipment, and systems.
-
7/27/2019 Choosing the Right Project-Delivery Method
6/10
f a l l 2 0 0 4 27
owner can make changes in the projectprogram at a moderate cost during thedesign phase because construction hasnot begun.
Overall, however, the design-bid-build methods together ranked low andthe separate-prime bidding methodranked last, with 60 percent of experts
responding that costs are rarely met. Oneexpert attributed the low rankings to thecontract-selection process. Because thecontract is awarded to the lowest, mostresponsible bidder, contractors tend tounderbid when they know that the projecthas problems. The problems will createchange orders later. Also, because thechance for change orders increases in pro-portion to the number of contracts madeon a project, public owners potentially
could have four change orders from adesign error when they are using separate-prime bidding, as opposed to one whenthey are using single-prime bidding.
Meeting the Project Schedule
The questionnaire asked, for eachmethod, whether the project scheduleis always met and usually accelerated,
typically met but rarely accelerated,or rarely met and never accelerated.According to the experts, the design-build method is the most effective inmeeting or accelerating the projectschedule. Sixty-four percent of expertsresponded that schedules are alwaysmet and usually accelerated, and 36percent reported that schedules aretypically met. (For a graphic presenta-tion of the results, see Figure 6.)
designers and the constructors (thegeneral contractors or the prime con-tractors) are under one contract. Further,as with the construction-manager-at-riskmethod, a project using this approachbenefits from increased value engineer-ing and cost estimating during design.
Nevertheless, public owners shouldbe aware of the increased financial risks
of using this method. Because the fixedprice is based on the design documentsdeveloped during the bid phase, changesin the project program are likely to oc-cur. Any such changes can be costly onceconstruction is under way.
Although not as effective as the others,the two design-bid-build methods alsowere effective in controlling projectcosts. Thirteen percent of experts re-
ported that costs are always met andusually reduced using either design-bid-build method. Also, 67 percent respondedthat costs typically are met when using
the single-prime bidding method, and27 percent responded that they typicallyare met when using the separate-primebidding method.
With these methods the public ownerbenefits from the designers expertise andadvice. It also benefits from separatingthe designers from the contractor(s).The separation creates a system ofchecks and balances. Unlike the casewith the other two methods, the public
We have used construction manager at risk with great success.We built our
new Justice Center under this method,and we just awarded bids for several
large water department projects under a construction-manager-at-risk
contract.In both instances the bids came in under projection.The Justice
Center project came in on time and on budgetunheard of in government
construction projectsand we saved over half a million dollars on the water
department bids.So the finance officer,David Clawson,and I are big fans of
this contracting method.
Norma Mills, attorney, Dare County, North Carolina
HARRYLYNCH/NEWS&OBSERVER
-
7/27/2019 Choosing the Right Project-Delivery Method
7/10
28 p o p u l a r g o v e r n m e n t
Experts responded favorably to thismethod because phased construction canoccur. Using this approach, the design-builder can avoid scheduling delays byidentifying long lead times early.
Even though this method rankedhighest in the study, one expert remarkedthat public owners with committeesmay encounter problems. In some cases,
committees with multiple stakeholdersmay prolong the decision making.Phased construction relies on speedydecisions from the public owner.
The construction-manager-at-riskmethod also is effective in meeting oraccelerating the schedule. Fifty-threepercent of experts responded that theschedule is always met and usuallyaccelerated, and 47 percent respondedthat the schedule is typically met.
As with the design-build method,phased construction explains the high
ranking. However, design-build reapsthe benefits of phased constructionearlier in the process than constructionmanager at risk. Also as with design-build, public owners must gain inputfrom the stakeholders more quickly andearlier in the design process to reap thetime savings of the phased construction.
The two design-bid-build methodsalso were effective in meeting and ac-celerating the schedule, although less sothan the other methods. Sixty percent of
experts responded that the scheduletypically is met using the single-primebidding method, and 33 percent of ex-perts responded the same for the separate-prime bidding method.
The main benefit to the public owneris the systematic checks and balancescreated by separating the designer andthe contractor(s). The designers scru-tinize construction operations, while thecontractors carefully review construc-tion administration by the designers.
Even though several experts favored
these methods, they ranked low overall.Twenty-seven percent of experts respondedthat the schedule is rarely met using single-prime bidding, and 60 percent respondedthesame for separate-prime bidding.
Experts suggested that public ownersbe aware that stakeholders take theinitial decision deadlines less seriouslybecause changes can be made later.Another challenge with these methodsis that checks and balances can create a
Figure 5. Controlling Project Costs
Note: The method in bold type is the most effective in meeting the project schedule.
Figure 6. Meeting the Project Schedule
Note: The method in bold type is the most effective in controlling project costs.
Separate-PrimeBidding
Single-PrimeBidding
Construction
Manager at Risk
Design-Build
13%
27%
60%
13%
67%
20%
73%
47%
20%
7%
53%
0%
Project costs are always met and usually reduced.
Project costs are typically met and rarely reduced.
Project costs are rarely met and never reduced.
7%
13%
33%
60% 60%
27%
53%
47%
0%
64%
36%
0%
The project schedule is always met and usually accelerated.
The project schedule is typically met and rarely accelerated.
The project schedule is rarely met and never accelerated.
Separate-PrimeBidding
Single-PrimeBidding
ConstructionManager at Risk
Design-Build
-
7/27/2019 Choosing the Right Project-Delivery Method
8/10
strained relationship and hinder co-ordination. This is especially importantin separate-prime bidding becausethe designer may work with four primecontractors.
Ensuring a Quality Project
The definition of what makes a qualityproject varies in the construction indus-try. Because of this, the questionnaireasked whether the functional and
aesthetic goals of a project are met,rather than asking if the methods ensurea quality project.
There was little distinction amongthe methods. Forty percent of expertsresponded that functional and aestheticgoals are always met using single-primebidding, construction manager at risk,or design-build. Twenty-seven percentthought that using separate-prime biddingis best. (For a graphic presentation of theresults, see Figure 7.) Overall, experts
indicated that public owners have thegreatest chance for a quality projectusing construction manager at risk.
Under construction manager at risk,public owners benefit from having inputfrom construction personnel duringdesign. This also is a characteristic ofdesign-build. However, a conflict ofinterest can occur under design-build.Unlike the case with constructionmanager at risk, with design-build, thedesigner is no longer an independentadviser. When using this method, public
owners should be aware that the design-builder is likely to cut corners because itboth interprets design needs and mayseek the lowest cost alternative.
Like the case with construction man-ager at risk, under the design-bid-buildmethods, the designer is an independentadviser. (That is, under these methods theowner holds separate contracts with thedesigner and the construction manager,so they are not contractually responsible
to the prime or general contractors.)Because of this and the expanded designphase, several experts indicated that aquality product is more common whenusing these methods. The designers are
not under a deadline to produce high-quality design documents. All expertsagree that having good design documentsensures a quality product.
When asked about the risks of
these methods, experts again cited thecontract-selection process. One ex-plained that even well-qualified firmsmay be forced to shortchange the publicowner on quality of supervisory staff inorder to submit a bid low enough towin. Public owners should be aware ofthis risk and the probability that short-
changing will multiply as more con-tractors become involved.
Reducing the Administrative Burden
Experts were asked whether the publicowner is less involved, moderately in-
volved, or highly involved in the design,bidding, and construction phases.Responses indicated that design-buildcalled for the least involvement, thusproviding the greatest reduction ofadministrative burden. It was followedby construction manager at risk.Design-bid-build using single-primebidding ranked a close third, and
separate-prime bidding ranked last.In general, the results indicate that
the administrative burden increases withthe number of contracts. The design-build method benefits the public ownerby involving only one contract. There isonly one line of communication for theowner. With construction manager atrisk and single-prime bidding, the publicowner holds two contracts, and withseparate-prime bidding, five. Each con-tract involves developing a biddingpackage, issuing it, receiving proposals,
evaluating them, negotiating the contract,and overseeing its implementation.
Even though the design-bid-buildmethods ranked low, experts stated thatthey are easy to understand and publicowners have worked with them forsome time. Many experts said that thereis confusion in the industry because the
construction-manager-at-risk and design-build methods are relatively new andare used differently. For example, withconstruction manager at risk, opinionsdiffer about when proposals should berequested for the construction manager.
f a l l 2 0 0 4 29
By all accounts the multiple-prime delivery system for this campus was a
total disaster,and we have absolutely no intention of using this system for
future construction projects.The majority of our future projects costing more
than $15,000,000 will be candidates for construction manager at risk. The
balance will in all likelihood be bid and awarded on the single-prime basis.Clyde D. Robbins, director of design and construction, Appalachian State University
Dare County found through experience that the single-prime process
provided only a guaranteed minimum price for our new Justice Center and
that the only incentive for maintaining a schedule was a punitive one in the
form of liquidated damages.After much research and discussion and since it
was before the passage of Senate Bill 914,the county obtained local legisla-
tion to allow alternative methods for the project.The county ultimately
decided upon a design plus construction-manager-at-risk approach. [The
county had the design done before it solicited for a construction manager.]
We were able to obtain a guaranteed maximum price for the project,to in-
clude incentives for schedule improvements and for savings of the budgeted
contingency,and to obtain a quality product knowing that both the architect
and the contractor were on the same team and had the same boss.David Clawson, CPA, finance director, Dare County
-
7/27/2019 Choosing the Right Project-Delivery Method
9/10
Some public owners request proposalsfor the designers and the constructionmanager at the same time, while othersrequest proposals for the constructionmanager after schematic design. Becausethese methods are relatively new, expertssuggested that public owners considerusing the design-bid-build methods untilmore experience is shared in the public
contracting industry.Regardless of method used, owners
involvement depends on how much timethey dedicate to a project. Experts thinkthat public owners should carefullyjudge their involvement and capacitylevel so that they do not lose control ofthe project.
Further Considerations
Overall, the study reveals that expertsthink the construction-manager-at-risk
and design-build methods controlproject costs, reduce time, improvequality, and decrease administrativeburden more than the design-bid-buildmethods. However, public ownersshould recognize that additional factorswill influence their decision in choosingthe best method: whether or not theyare developing a project program;whether or not they are working withmultiple stakeholders; and whether ornot they are using in-house design and
construction staff.First, experts agree that the key to asuccessful project is a comprehensiveproject program. Some project deliverymethods offer greater assistance thanothers during this process. Public ownersshould consider the design-bid-buildmethods if they do not develop a projectprogram because the design periodallows for more time. Because theconstruction-manager-at-risk anddesign-build methods have shorterdesign phases, public owners must
ensure that a program is developedearly using construction manager at riskand is well developed for design-build.For example, with design-build, develop-ment includes classifying detailedbuilding components early on.16
Next, stakeholder involvement mayforce public owners to choose one ofthe two design-bid-build methods. Thelonger design period of these approachesallows interest groups representing
30 p o p u l a r g o v e r n m e n t
Figure 8. Reducing the Administrative Burden
Note: The method in bold type is the most effective in reducing the administrative burden.
Figure 7. Ensuring a Quality Project
Note: The method in bold type is the most effective in meeting the functional and aesthetic goals
of a project.
27%
20%
53%
40%
47%
13%
40%
7%
53%
40% 40%
20%
Functional and aesthetic goals are always met.
Functional and aesthetic goals are usually met.
Functional and aesthetic goals are rarely met.
Separate-PrimeBidding
Single-PrimeBidding
Construction
Manager at Risk
Design-Build
16% 16%
31%
53%
62%
22% 22%
51%
27%
56%
22% 22%
The public owner is less involved in the design, procurement, and construction phases.A design and construction representative allocates minimal weekly hours to contract oversight.
The public owner is moderately involved in the design, procurement, and construction phases.A part-time design and construction representative manages the contract(s).
The public owner is highly involved in the design, bid, and procurement phases.A full-time design and construction representative manages the contract(s).
Separate-PrimeBidding
Single-PrimeBidding
ConstructionManager at Risk
Design-Build
-
7/27/2019 Choosing the Right Project-Delivery Method
10/10
several public agencies and the generalpublic more time to discuss options.The phased construction approach usedin the design-build and construction-manager-at-risk methods relies onspeedy decisions by the public owner.
Finally, public owners that have noin-house design and construction staffand whose staffs have heavy workloads
or no training with the construction-manager-at-risk or design-build methodsshould consider the design-bid-buildmethods until the public constructionindustry has more experience with theseapproaches.
Conclusion
Changes always are taking place in theconstruction industry. New tools areavailable to manage projects, and newbuilding techniques are being used.Each new approach spawns claims thatit will save money, reduce time, improvequality, and decrease administrative bur-den. To protect themselves from mis-leading claims, public owners should stayabreast of new laws and information.
This study has shown that expertsconsider the construction-manager-at-risk and design-build methods to bethe best for controlling costs, reducingconstruction time, improving quality,and decreasing the administrativeburden. However, public owners maynot realize the benefits of thesemethods if their project program is notwell developed, many stakeholders areinvolved in decision making, and their
f a l l 2 0 0 4 31
staff is less experienced. Because ofthis, public owners may find that thedesign-bid-build methods, especially thesingle-prime bidding method, will con-tinue to be useful in many situations.
Notes
1. The federal government has separateprocedures for project delivery. The laws ofNorth Carolina do not apply to Army Corpsof Engineers projects, federal buildings, orfederal military bases in North Carolina.
2. N.C. GEN. STAT. art. 8, PublicContracts, 143-128 [hereinafter G.S.].
3. G.S. 143-135.26(9).
4. To make a comparison, one would haveto replicate a project exactly under eachproject delivery method. This would meanusing the same design, staff, site, and timeframe simultaneously.
5. The goals were developed during theliterature review.
6. Confidentiality was assured to theexperts during this research.
7. Representatives from the AmericanInstitute of Architects, the Associated Gen-eral Contractors of America, Design BuildInstitute of America, and Construction Man-agers Association of America are currentlycollaborating on developing industry-widedefinitions documenting the variations foreach method.
8. The public owner develops the selectioncriteria. They may include the public ownersprevious experience with the firms, and thefirms financial capability, staff qualifications,history of litigations and disputes, andreferences from past clients. Bids are solicitedusing a request for proposals (RFP) or arequest for qualifications (RFQ).
9. The term at risk refers to theconstruction managers assuming high risk,for example, for the performance and thefinancial stability of subcontractors andvendors, fluctuations in prices of materials,adherence to schedule, and weather changes.The high risk also is linked to a guaranteedmaximum price, which is explained later inthe article.
10. In some cases the public owner at-tempts to attract a company that has theability to perform both design and construc-tion management. If that happens, theninstead of requesting proposals for a secondtime, it renegotiates a guaranteed maximumprice with the company later in the designprocess.
11. Several experts noted that the selectionprocess takes place when the schematic-designphase of design is complete.
12. The public owner determines thepoint in the design phase when the guaranteedmaximum price is to be negotiated. Severalexperts indicated that the guaranteed maxi-mum price is negotiated toward or at the end
of the construction-documents phase.13. As with design-bid-build with separate-
prime bidding, bid packages may be preparedfor heating, ventilating, and air conditioning;plumbing; electrical work; and generalconstruction.
14. After the design-builders develop theproposals, the public owner critiques eachone. Then each design-builder respondswith design changes that make all theproposals technically equivalent, adjustingthe price accordingly. The public ownerevaluates the revised proposals and makesthe award on the basis of the lowest price.
A lowest-price award is made because thepublic owners critique created equivalentdesigns.
15. Experts revealed that savings producedduring the execution of the contract revertto the public owner. In some cases the publicowner and the construction manager sharethe savings. This is known as a sharedsavings program. When the direct projectcosts, including profit and overhead, areless than the guaranteed maximum price,the construction manager and the publicowner share the difference on the basis ofsome stipulated percentage. Experts saidthat the shared savings program providesan additional incentive to the constructionmanager to control project costs.
16. An example of such a component is abuildings air handling units. The term airhandling unit refers to equipment that isdesigned to move conditioned air. It containsfans, filters, and heating or cooling coils.Units can be classified as either a centralsystem or a unitary system. Unitary equip-ment can be classified as a rooftop unit, aunitary package unit, a unitary split system,or a compound room unit.
Appalachian State University has to date initiated three projects using the
construction-manager-at-risk delivery system:the Library and Information
Commons ($47,586,800),the Rankin Science Addition and Renovation
($11,157,000),and the Athletic Facilities Addition and Renovation($16,000,000).The library project is proceeding in excellent fashion
on budget and ahead of schedule.The construction-manager-at-risk
method for the Rankin project did not meet our expectations and was not
continued beyond the preconstruction phase.The project was subsequently
bid and awarded using the single-prime delivery system, which to date is
proceeding satisfactorily.Clyde D. Robbins