Design-build was once considered a novel and alternative delivery method but is now viewed as a mainstream approach to delivering new projects. At a recent conference, the Design-Build Institute of America revealed that nearly half of all construction spending in the U.S. nonresidential market now goes to design-build methods.
There are reasons for this. New research shows that design-build methods have several advantages over traditional construction methods. Specifically, they will deliver projects faster, more reliably, and more efficiently than the alternatives.
The idea that design-build methods are superior isn’t new. Twenty years ago, Penn State/CII research revealed that projects completed with design-build were consistently delivered more efficiently. Since that time, projects have continued to improve in providing value even as they have increased in complexity.
A new study was just released that was a collaboration by Bryan Franz, University of Florida Ph.D. Assistant Professor and Keith Molenaar, Ph.D., University of Colorado Boulder, Stanton Lewis Professor and Associate Dean, DBIA.
The study reviewed 212 projects, constituting a mix of Construction Manager at Risk (CMR), Design-Bid-Build (CBB), and Design-Build (DB) methods. 62% of the projects studies were publicly funded and the remaining privately funded. Every project in the study was completed between 2008 and 2013, and they represented various building types and uses, such as:
- Heavy industrial
- Light industrial
- Complex office
- Simple office
- High technology
- Multi-story dwelling
The study revealed that design-build had the best performance among the three in terms of construction speed, schedule growth, and delivery speed. Design-build projects were 36% faster than DBB projects and 13% faster than CMR projects during the construction phase. When it came to schedule growth, a design-build project saw 3.9% less growth than a CMR project and 1.7% less than a DBB project. For overall project delivery speed, design-build projects were an astounding 102% faster than DBB projects and 61% faster than CMR projects.
In addition to being more efficient with delivery time and schedules, this study also revealed some valuable cost savings. For example, design-build project in this study on average cost 1.9% less per square foot than a CMR project and 0.3% less than a DBB project. Design-build projects also had a 2.4% lower cost growth on average than a CMR project with comparable scope and 3.8% lower cost growth than a CMR project.
Choose K-Con, Inc. for Your Next Design Build Project
If you’re ready to get started with your next project or want to learn more about the design-build process, K-Con, Inc. can help. We are a member of the Design-Build Institute of America and apply our “Five D” (Discovery. Definition. Design. Development. Delivery) methodology to every project.
In our experience, these study results ring true in real-world situations. Design-build projects typically complete 33% faster and at a cost savings of up to 10% compared to traditional construction methods. This is also a method that promotes closer communication and collaboration with owners, which leads to more positive results.
K-Con specializes in pre-engineered metal buildings for government and commercial clients throughout the U.S. and its territories. Our GSA contract allows us to offer exceptional value to government entities. Contact us now to learn more about our process and be sure to ask about our quick turnaround for preliminary markups and pricing.