New Page
Construction projects often encounter unexpected challenges that can cause delays and cost overruns. However, expert analysis in project planning can help overcome these issues, resulting in significant time and cost savings.
Despite advances in technology and management techniques, over 80% of construction projects still suffer from cost overruns and schedule delays. This article explores why traditional methods fall short and what alternatives exist for better outcomes.
The Impact of Expert Analysis
Cost Savings
Research by the Construction Industry Institute (CII) found that investing just 5% of the project budget in expert analysis during planning can result in cost savings of up to 30% compared to projects without expert analysis.
These savings come from:
- Improved project planning
- Better resource utilization
- More efficient construction methods and materials
Time Savings
A study by the Project Management Institute (PMI) found that expert analysis in project planning and management can result in a 21% reduction in project duration compared to projects without expert analysis.
This time savings is achieved through:
- Improved project scheduling
- Better coordination of resources
- Use of more efficient construction methods
Why Project Failure is So Common—and What's the Solution?
Design-Bid-Build (DBB) remains the go-to construction delivery method for many projects, despite significant drawbacks. Studies show that over 80% of construction projects suffer from cost overruns and schedule delays, issues that traditional methods fail to address effectively.
So why is DBB still so widely used, and what alternatives exist for clients who want better outcomes?
Comparing Project Delivery Methods
Let's compare the traditional Design-Bid-Build (DBB) approach with Integrated Project Management (IPM) to understand the differences:
| Factor | Design-Bid-Build (DBB) | Integrated Project Management (IPM) |
|---|---|---|
| Familiarity | This traditional approach is well-understood, with clear, sequential phases (design, bidding, construction). Many clients find it straightforward, which makes DBB an easy choice, especially for those unfamiliar with construction alternatives. | Involves early engagement of construction expertise. While this may seem more complex initially, it allows for better planning and risk management. With an IPM, clients benefit from an advocate who guides them through the complexities of the process. |
| Division vs. Integration | DBB clearly separates design and construction responsibilities, with architects focusing on design and contractors on execution. Clients may believe this division provides more accountability, as each party has a distinct role. | Coordinates design and construction phases, ensuring alignment. This integration helps avoid disconnects between design and construction, ultimately resulting in fewer problems and more effective problem-solving. |
| Bidding and Perceived Cost | Uses competitive bidding to select the contractor with the lowest price, which can give clients a sense of initial cost savings. However, these low bids can lead to quality compromises and cost increases later in the project. | Utilizes competitive bidding but focuses on contractor qualifications and proposals, choosing options that balance cost with experience and quality, reducing the risk of budget overruns from low-bid quality issues. This approach results in more reliable bids and better long-term cost control. |
| Competition and Transparency | Projects often default to DBB for its perceived transparency, with competitive bidding providing a fair, open selection process. | Provides the added benefit of independent oversight and advisory services, offering more control over quality and cost without compromising fairness or competition. |
| Upfront vs. Total Cost | Because design and construction are handled separately, DBB requires less investment in pre-construction planning, giving clients the impression of cost savings. However, this often results in higher long-term costs due to changes, delays, and unforeseen expenses. | Higher upfront planning costs can lead to long-term savings. With construction expertise, IPM ensures practical designs ready for competitive bidding, attracting quality contractors at optimal prices. This approach minimizes changes and delays during construction. |
The Benefits of Expert Analysis in Construction
Risk Identification & Mitigation
Expert analysis helps identify potential risks early in the project lifecycle, allowing for proactive mitigation strategies that prevent costly delays and changes during construction.
Value Engineering
Construction experts can identify opportunities for cost savings without compromising quality, often suggesting alternative materials or methods that improve both performance and budget outcomes.
Constructability Reviews
Early reviews ensure designs can be built efficiently, identifying potential issues before construction begins and preventing costly rework or design changes during the building phase.
Making the Right Choice
While Design-Bid-Build remains popular due to its familiarity, the data clearly shows that integrated approaches with expert analysis deliver superior results. By investing in proper planning and expertise early in the project lifecycle, stakeholders can significantly reduce both costs and timelines.
The question isn't whether you can afford expert analysis—it's whether you can afford to go without it.
Ready to improve your construction project outcomes?
Learn more about how expert analysis can help your next project succeed.