Masonry Magazine October 2000 Page. 12
communication conflict is reduced.
DB reduces blame-passing from one entity to another, (i.e. it's no longer as easy for the builder to blame the poor design by the architect when he was a part of the design process himself!) and, better still, keeps the owner from being caught in the middle of disputes between architect and builder.
With all the players involved from the beginning, errors and conflicts in architectural and engineering design are minimized, eliminating costly delays required for correction and alteration of documents. Also, specifications are more custom-tailored to the project and include less "boiler plate" entries.
Change orders are minimized greatly, and if changes do arise (that result in additional cost), DB offers a far more agreeable atmosphere for negotiation than competitive-bid.
DB helps to eliminate purposely inaccurate contractor and supplier proposals or (as it's known on the streets) "lowballing." This is where a firm bids purposely and artificially low at bid time in order to win the job, all the while confident that he can make up his lost difference in change orders by exploiting ambiguous or erroneous direction and/or details in the bid documents (which are almost always present).
The GC's attitude is better. He's more willing to offer voluntarily cost-saving advice which unfortunately is not the case with competitive-bid. I can relate from experience that there is very real (and understandable) ambivalence toward the competitive-bid process and it's intrinsic "hit-or-miss" nature. GC's simply don't get as excited about their prospects and therefore aren't as willing to offer assistance such as cost-saving ideas. After all, why would we, when another contractor may well end up with the job only to run out to exploit our own ideas?
A big "pro" for the owner is that he now enjoys a single-source of warranty responsibility. It no longer matters whether it's a design error or construction error the owner can simply pick up the phone, call the GC, and say, "fix it!"
Overall project schedule (encompassing the planning, design, contract negotiation, construction, and project close-out phases) is now abbreviated. This is also sometimes called fast-tracking (getting a running start). DB also allows for the submittal and shop-drawing process to commence earlier than normal, giving the team the critical ability to release special-order and long lead-time items (a killer in conventional schedules) before ground is actually broken.
There is more contract flexibility. In real life, unfortunately sometimes things just "don't work out." DB contracts can be structured to give all the players certain "outs" should the project begin to go sour. Contract wording can be included that allows for a civil and organized parting of the ways, often with a caveat for payments being made up to that completed point. This is likely a rare situation (I've actually never seen it happen), but it's nice to know the option is available.
The owner can avoid the dreaded double-markup. It's common in competitive-bid situations for a sub or supplier proposal (already marked-up by that company) to be rendered to the GC during bid time, only to be automatically marked-up again when added to the GC's spreadsheet. With DB, the sub & supplier quotes are generally shared openly with the owner - and may or may not (depending on the owner's arrangement with the GC- often a flat fee) be marked up again. Again, at least the owner has the option.
The cost for the project is often less. With DB, value engineering (cost-saving alternative) is a continual part of the process. "Rolls-Royce" and single-source products (common in CB) are avoided and replaced with more commodity or standardized counterparts early in the process. Additional savings may also be realized through a reduction in the GC's overhead cost and interest savings for interim construction notes, now that the project has a shorter schedule.
One side-benefit from using standardized products and methods realized through value-engineering is the elevated quality of craftsmanship out on the job. Now stay with me on this one. It goes like this: now that the GC's crew and sub-contractors are installing products with which they are more familiar, fewer mistakes are made in the field. With fewer mistakes comes less correction, fewer schedule interruptions, and decreased warranty problems (due to faulty installation) once the project is complete.
The building process is more fun! Yeah, I know we're all not in this for the giggles, but when given the option, wouldn't you rather conduct the building process in the less stressful, less apprehensive atmosphere of DB as opposed to the more adversarial and mercenary surroundings of competitive-bid? Put another way: wouldn't you rather be working with someone you like than someone you don't?