Scribd
Upload
125 views

Project Delivery Method Comparison Guide: Description Advantages Disadvantages

This document provides an overview and comparison of several project delivery methods: 1) Traditional Design-Bid-Build involves hiring an architect/engineer to fully design the project before separate prime contractors bid and are awarded contracts to build it. Advantages are a familiar process and fully defined scope, while disadvantages include a longer schedule and limited contractor input. 2) Multiple Prime is similar but hires an owner's agent during design to provide estimates and coordinate prime contractors during construction. 3) Construction Manager as Agent also involves hiring a CM during design to provide estimates and coordinate prime contractors during construction on behalf of the owner. 4) General Contracting uses a single prime contractor selected through competitive bidding who is responsible

Uploaded by

M Zubair Ahmad
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
125 views

Project Delivery Method Comparison Guide: Description Advantages Disadvantages

This document provides an overview and comparison of several project delivery methods: 1) Traditional Design-Bid-Build involves hiring an architect/engineer to fully design the project before separate prime contractors bid and are awarded contracts to build it. Advantages are a familiar process and fully defined scope, while disadvantages include a longer schedule and limited contractor input. 2) Multiple Prime is similar but hires an owner's agent during design to provide estimates and coordinate prime contractors during construction. 3) Construction Manager as Agent also involves hiring a CM during design to provide estimates and coordinate prime contractors during construction on behalf of the owner. 4) General Contracting uses a single prime contractor selected through competitive bidding who is responsible

Uploaded by

M Zubair Ahmad
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Project Delivery Method Comparison Guide

Description Traditional approach in which the owner hires an A/E to fully document the project criteria and design prior to bidding. Multiple packages are separately bid and awarded to the lowest responsive and responsible prime contractors. The owner holds all prime contracts and is responsible for coordination during construction. Advantages Familiar delivery method Fully defined project scope Both designer and contractor accountable to owner Creates most prime bidding opportunities (lowest bonding) Lowest initial price Good for simple projects that are not schedule-driven and not subject to change Fully defined project scope Supplements owner's staff Independent professional services & expertise for owner Creates most prime bidding opportunities (lowest bonding) Disadvantages Linear process means longer schedule Limited control over contractor and subcontractor selection No design or cost input from contractor Lack of flexibility for change Can be adversarial in nature Not good for complex projects that are schedule-driven Adds level of bureaucracy Limited control over contractor and subcontractor selection Owner still holds contracts for construction Not suited for small projects Drawbacks common to the design-bid-build process

MULTIPLE PRIME

An owner's agent is hired through a qualifications based selection process during the design phase. The owner's criteria and full design is documented by a separate A/E. The CMA provides estimates during design, assists with bidding and coordinates prime contractors during construction. The owner bids and holds all contracts for construction.

CM as AGENT

GENERAL CONTRACTING

A linear design-bid-build process in which the owner selects an A/E to fully document the project criteria and design prior to bidding. The lowest responsive and responsible GC (single prime) is awarded the contract. The owner holds a single contract with the GC.

Familiar delivery method Fully defined project scope Both designer and contractor accountable to owner Simple procurement method Single contractor to manage Good for simple to moderately complex projects that are not schedule-driven

Sequential process means longer schedule Limited control over contractor and subcontractor selection No design or cost input from contractor Can be adversarial in nature Not good for complex projects that are schedule-driven Bonding requirements Relationship changes during design to construction phase Increased contingency for assumption of risk Difficult to determine if best price has been achieved Bonding requirements Disputes if GMP scope not clear

A contractor is hired through a best value selection process during the design phase. The owner's criteria and full design is documented by a separate A/E. The CMR provides a guaranteed maximum price prior to bidding. The CMR bids to prequalified subcontractors and holds all subcontracts for construction.

Contractor input on design Selection of contractor based qualifications and price Open-book GMP Faster project delivery than traditional design-bid-build Provides flexibility to handle changes during design phase Good for large or complex schedule-driven projects More control selecting subs Single point of responsibility for design and construction Contractor selection based on qualifications and price Fastest project delivery Open-book GMP No changes orders for design errors and omissions Good for new construction
that is time sensitive and not subject to change Good for less complex projects More control selecting sub's

CM at RISK

Ohio Construction Reform

DESIGN-BUILD

A single entity is hired through a best value selection process to deliver a complete project. The owner's criteria and design intent is documented by a separate criteria architect. The design is completed by the DB entity and a guaranteed maximum price is provided prior to bidding. The DB entity bids to prequalified subcontractors and holds all subcontracts for construction.

Owner has less control over selecting designer Owner has less input in details Over emphasis on price may compromise quality Difficult to determine if best price has been achieved Owner required to make quick decisions Changes difficult & expensive Bonding requirements Disputes if criteria not clear

Rev. 04.23.12

Project Delivery Method Selection Diagram

Small

PROJECT SIZE

Large

SCHEDULE IMPORTANCE High

MP

GC

Low

Low

PROJECT COMPLEXITY

High

Ohio Construction Reform

Low OWNER DECISIVENESS


Rev. 04.23.12

DB

CMR

High

You might also like