design and build la gi

Design–build (or design/build, and abbreviated D–B or D/B accordingly), also known as alternative delivery,[1] is a project delivery system used in the construction industry. It is a method to tướng deliver a project in which the design and construction services are contracted by a single entity known as the design–builder or design–build contractor. It can be subdivided into architect-led design–build (ALDB, sometimes known as designer-led design–build) and contractor-led design–build.

In contrast to tướng "design–bid–build" (or "design–tender"), design–build relies on a single point of responsibility contract and is used to tướng minimize risks for the project owner and to tướng reduce the delivery schedule by overlapping the design phase and construction phase of a project.

Bạn đang xem: design and build la gi

Design–build also has a single point responsibility. The design-build contractor is responsible for all work on the project, so sánh the client can seek legal remedies for any fault from one tiệc ngọt.[2]

The traditional approach for construction projects consists of the appointment of a designer on one side, and the appointment of a contractor on the other side. The design–build procurement route changes the traditional sequence of work. It answers the client's wishes for a single point of responsibility in an attempt to tướng reduce risks and overall costs. Although the use of subcontractors to tướng complete more specialized work is common, the design-build contractor remains the primary liên hệ and primary force behind the work. It is now commonly used in many countries and forms of contracts are widely available.

Design–build is sometimes compared to tướng the "master builder" approach, one of the oldest forms of construction procedure. Comparing design–build to tướng the traditional method of procurement, the authors of Design-build Contracting Handbook noted that: "from a historical perspective the so-called traditional approach is actually a very recent concept, only being in use approximately 150 years. In contrast, the design–build concept—also known as the "master builder" concept—has been reported as being in use for over four millennia."[3]

Although the Design-Build Institute of America (DBIA) takes the position that design–build can be led by a contractor, a designer, a developer or a joint venture, as long as a design–build entity holds a single contract for both design and construction, some architects have suggested that architect-led design–build is a specific approach to tướng design–build.

Design-build plays an important role in pedagogy, both at universities and in independently organised events such as Rural Studio or ArchiCamp.

Design–build contractor[edit]

The "design–builder" is often a general contractor, but in many cases a project is led by a design professional (architect, engineer, architectural technologist or other professional designers). Some design–build firms employ professionals from both the design and construction sector. Where the design–builder is a general contractor, the designers are typically retained directly by the contractor. Partnership or a joint venture between a design firm and a construction firm may be created on a long-term basis or for one project only.

Until 1979, the AIA American Institute of Architects' code of ethics and professional conduct prohibited their members from providing construction services. However today many architects in the United States and elsewhere aspire to tướng provide integrated design and construction services, and one approach towards this goal is design–build. The AIA has acknowledged that design–build is becoming one of the main approaches to tướng construction. In 2003, the AIA endorsed "The architect's guide to tướng design–build services",[4] which was written to tướng help their members acting as design–build contractors. This publication gives guidance through the different phases of the process: design services, contracts, management, insurances, and finances.

Contractor-led design–build projects: the architect's role[edit]

On contractor-led design–build projects, management is structured so sánh that the owner works directly with a contractor who, in turn, coordinates subcontractors. Architects contribute to tướng contractor-led design–build projects in one of several ways, with varying degrees of responsibility (where "A/E" in each diagram represents the architect/engineer):

Three models of contractor-led design–build
Three models of contractor-led design–build
  1. Architect as employee of contractor: The architect works for the contractor as an in-house employee. The architect still bears professional risk and is likely to tướng have less control phàn nàn in other contractor-led design–build approaches.
  2. Architect as a subcontractor: Here, the architect is one of the many subcontractors on the team led by the contractor. The architect bears similar professional risk but still with little control.
  3. Architect as second tiệc ngọt in contractor-led integrated project delivery (IPD): The architect and contractor work together in a joint venture, both coordinating the subcontractors to tướng get the project built. The building owner has a single contract with this joint venture. The contractor leads the joint venture so sánh in supervising the subs, the architect might defer to tướng the contractor. The architect bears the same risk as they tự in the traditional approach but has more control in IPD, even if they were to tướng defer to tướng the contractor.

Architect-led design–build projects[edit]

Architect-led design–build projects are those in which interdisciplinary teams of architects and building trades professionals collaborate in an agile management process, where design strategy and construction expertise are seamlessly integrated, and the architect, as owner-advocate, project-steward and team-leader, ensures high fidelity between project aims and outcomes. In architect-led design–build projects, the architect works directly with the owner (the client), acts as the designer and builder, coordinating a team of consultants, subcontractors and materials suppliers throughout the project lifecycle.

Architects lead design–build projects in several ways, with varying degrees of responsibility (where "A/E" in each diagram represents the architect/engineer):

Three models of architect-led design–build
Three models of architect-led design–build
  1. Architect as provider of extended services: Contracted to tướng the owner, the architect extends his or her services beyond the design phase, taking responsibility for managing the subcontractors on behalf of the owner. The architect bears similar risk but has more control over the project phàn nàn in the traditional approach or on contractor-led design–build projects.
  2. Architect as primary tiệc ngọt in architect-led integrated project delivery (IPD): Again, as in working together in a joint venture, both coordinating the subcontractors to tướng get the project built. Again, the building owner has a single contract with this joint venture. This time, the architect leads the joint venture so sánh in supervising the subs, the contractor might defer to tướng the architect. The architect might bear more risk phàn nàn they tự in the traditional approach but risk is shared with the owner and the contractor, as outlined in their agreement. An alternative approach to tướng effectuating this delivery structure is for the architect to tướng contract directly with the owner to tướng design and build the project, and then to tướng subcontract the procurement and construction responsibilities to tướng its allied general contractor, who enters into further subcontracts with the trades. This is a difference in size, rather phàn nàn in substance, because the business and legal terms of the agreement between the architect and the general contractor may be the same regardless of whether they are characterized as a joint venture or as a subcontract. It is the "flip side of the coin" of the contractor-led approach described above in which the general contractor subcontracts the design to tướng the architect.
  3. Architect as full service leader of design build process: Contracted to tướng the owner, the architect offers full service to tướng the owner, taking responsibility for managing the subcontractors, consultants and vendors, and involving them throughout the project, start to tướng finish, from design through construction. The architect's role shifts during the project, from designer to tướng site supervisor (effectively taking the role of a general contractor), but monitors the project vision, and is able to tướng Điện thoại tư vấn upon subcontractors' construction expertise throughout. The architect bears the greatest risk but also has more control over the project phàn nàn in either the traditional approach, or in the contractor-led and other architect-led design–build projects.


A single mix of integrated contracts combining design and construction responsibilities, rather phàn nàn two discrete contracts for each, acknowledges the interdependence of the architects' and construction trades' project responsibilities, and reduces the likelihood of disputes.[5]

Design–build institutes[edit]

In 1993, the Design-Build Institute of America (DBIA)[6] was formed. Its membership is composed of design and construction industry professionals as well as project owners. DBIA promotes the value of design–build project delivery and teaches the effective integration of design and construction services to tướng ensure success for owners and design and construction practitioners. The Design-Build Institute of America is an organization that defines, teaches and promotes best practices in design–build.

The Canadian Design-Build Institute (CDBI) describes itself as "The recognized voice of Design-Build practitioners in Canada, promoting and enhancing the proper utilization of Design-Build method of procurement and contracting".[7]


Not all design–build projects are alike.[8] Here, there is a distinction between design–build projects led by contractors and those led by architects. Architect-led Design Build is a size of 'design–build' that, according to tướng the DBIA,[9] has been rapidly gaining market share in the United States over the past 15 years.[timeframe?] The Design Build Institute of America describes the design–build process as follows:

Taking singular responsibility, the design–build team is accountable for cost, schedule and performance, under a single contract and with reduced administrative paperwork, clients can focus on the project rather phàn nàn managing disparate contracts. And, by closing warranty gaps, building owners also virtually eliminate litigation claims.

The DBIA's 2005 chart shows the uptake of design–build methods in non-residential design and construction in the United States.[10]

Architect-led design–build is sometimes known by the more generic name "designer-led design–build". Although employed primarily by architects, architectural technologists and other architectural professions, the design–build structure works similarly for interior design projects led by an interior designer who is not an architect, and also for engineering projects where the design–build team is led by a professional structural, civil, mechanical or other engineers. In addition, it is common for the design professional who leads the design–build team to tướng create a separate corporation or similar business entity through which the professional performs the construction and other related non-professional services.[citation needed]

Xem thêm: Mitom TV - Kênh Xem Trực Tiếp Bóng Đá Chất Lượng Hàng Đầu

In 2011, design–build continued to tướng gain ground as a significant trend in design and construction.[11]

In March 2011, industry consultants ZweigWhite published "Design-Bid-Build meets the opposition".[12] In it, they suggest that while Design-Bid-Build "still rules", the traditional approach is losing favor as "alternative project delivery methods threaten [the] design-bid-build model." While not referencing the architect-led design–build approach specifically, the article states that D/B already accounts for 27% of projects, according to tướng their 2010 Project Management Survey and goes on to tướng argue that,

The emerging trends in delivery seem to tướng point to tướng a return to tướng the primordial concept of the masterbuilder, as exemplified by D/B and IPD [Integrated Project Delivery].

According to tướng the DBIA, the design–build approach offers advantages to tướng owners, including: "One team, one contract, one unified flow of work from initial concept through completion."[13]

Debate on the merits of design–build vs. design–bid–build[edit]

Traditional Design Bid Build
Design-Bid-Build project timeline
Architect-led Design Build Timeline
ALDB project timeline

The rise of design–build project delivery has threatened the traditional hierarchies and silos of the design and construction industry. As a result, a debate has emerged over the value of design–build as a method of project delivery.[14]

Critics of the design–build approach claim that design–build limits the clients' involvement in the design and allege that contractors often make design decisions outside their area of expertise. They also suggest that a designer—rather phàn nàn a construction professional—is a better advocate for the client or project owner and/or that by representing different perspectives and remaining in their separate spheres, designers and builders ultimately create better buildings.

Proponents of design–build counter that design–build saves time and money for the owner, while providing the opportunity to tướng achieve innovation in the delivered facility. They note that value is added because design-build brings value engineering into the design process at the onset of a project. Design–build allows the contractor, engineers and specialty trade contractors (subcontractors) to tướng propose best-value solutions for various construction elements before the design is complete. Design–build brings all members of a project team together early in the process to tướng identify and address issues of cost, schedule and constructability. Proponents suggest that as a result, design-build alleviates conflict between architects and contractors and reduces owner risk for design errors.[15] They argue that once design is finalized and construction begins, the greatest opportunity to tướng achieve cost savings has already been lost, and the potential for design errors is greater, leading to tướng change orders that create cost growth and schedule delays. Proponents note that design–build allows owners to tướng avoid being placed directly between the architect/engineer and the contractor. Under design–bid–build, the owner takes on significant risks because of that position. Design–build places the responsibility for design errors and omissions on the design–builder, relieving the owner of major legal and managerial responsibilities. The burden for these costs and associated risks are transferred to tướng the design–build team.

The cost and schedule reduction and decreased litigation associated with design–build project delivery have been demonstrated repeatedly. Researches on Selecting Project Delivery Systems[16] by Victor Sanvido and Mark Konchar of Pennsylvania State University found that design–build projects are delivered 33.5% faster phàn nàn projects that are designed and built under separate contracts (design-bid-build). Sanvido and Konchar also showed that design–build projects are constructed 12% faster* and have a unit cost that is 6.1% lower phàn nàn design-bid-build projects. Similar cost and time savings were found in a comparison study of design–build, and design-bid-build for the water/wastewater construction industry, a peer-reviewed paper authored by Smith Culp Consulting that will be published in July 2011 by the American Society of Civil Engineers.[17] A benchmarking and claims study by Victor O. Schinnerer, one of the world's largest firms underwriting professional liability and specialty insurance programs, found that, from 1995 to tướng 2004, only 1.3% of claims against A/E firms were made by design–build contractors. Advantages have been summarized as:

  • Efficiency: Typically led by contractors, 'design–build' has evolved as an efficient way to tướng deliver projects primarily where the building project goals are straightforward, either constrained by budget, or the outcome is prescribed by functional requirements (for example, a highway, sports facility, or brewery). Construction industry commentators have described design–build as a high performance 'construction project delivery system', a dynamic approach to tướng making buildings that presents an alternative to tướng the traditional design-bid-build approach.
  • Single-source: Design–build is growing because of the advantages of single-source management: Unlike traditional design-bid-build, it allows for the owner to tướng contract with just one tiệc ngọt who acts as a single point of liên hệ, is responsible for delivering the project and coordinates the rest of the team. Depending on the phasing of the project, there may be multiple sequential contracts between the owner and the design–builder. The owner benefits because if something turns out to tướng be wrong with the project, there is a single entity that is responsible for fixing the problem, rather phàn nàn a separate designer and constructor each blaming the other.

Advantages for less-prescriptive projects[edit]

Architect-led design–build is suited primarily to tướng less prescriptive architectural projects (private residences, non-profit institutions, museums), for the efficiencies it yields and the sophisticated design interpretation it affords, particularly:

  • Where the primary project goals are design-driven or visionary rather phàn nàn prescribed by budgetary constraint or functional requirements
  • Where the project is specifically "Capital A"-artistically/creatively driven, in a way that traditionally yields the highest level of cost overruns.
  • Where the efficiencies of design–build approach and an architect's interpretive skill are equally important

These less prescriptive projects need not be stuck with the "broken buildings and busted budgets"[18] described by Barry Lepatner. Rather, the less prescriptive the project, the more the client needs an architect to tướng steward an emergent design from vision to tướng completion. So it follows that for the broadest range of building projects, the rigors of architect-led design–build is compelling and preferable where design is of paramount importance to tướng the client.

Recursive knowledge[edit]

The process and the knowledge it produces is recursive: Since subcontractors are engaged early and often in an architect-led design build project, to tướng assess efficiencies, opportunity costs, payback rates and quality options. Their input informs overall design decisions from the outset. Cost-benefit is also a constant consideration that informs design decisions from the outset. Building performance is measured early too, so sánh that trade offs between budget, schedule, functionality and usability can inform specification and continuous refinement of the design.

Architects engaged in this dynamic process understand and keep up to tướng date with the potential of contemporary technology[19] and materials available to tướng building professionals, and translate what they learn into their design work. This knowledge is fed back, not just to tướng the specific project but can be shared to tướng other project teams, throughout a studio, or more broadly to tướng the profession, and can become an active source of insight in and of itself.

Growth of design–build method[edit]

A 2011 study analyzing the design–build project delivery method in the United States shows design–build was used on about 40 percent of non-residential construction projects in 2010, a ten percent increase since 2005. The study was commissioned by the Design-Build Institute of America (DBIA) and was completed by RSMeans Reed Construction Data Market Intelligence.[20]

A study from the US Department of Transportation claims that: "Design-build delivery has been steadily increasing in the U.S. public building sector for more phàn nàn 10 years, but it is still termed experimental in transportation. To date, under Special Experimental Project 14 (SEP-14) the FHWA has approved the use of design–build in more phàn nàn 150 projects, representing just over half of the States. The European countries visited have used design–build delivery for a longer time phàn nàn the United States and provided the scan team with many valuable insights. The primary lessons learned on this scan tour relate to tướng the types of projects utilizing design–build, the use of best-value selection, percentage of design in the solicitation, design and construction administration, third-party risks, the use of warranties, and the addition of maintenance and operation to tướng design–build contracts."[21]

Criticisms of design–build[edit]

During the design–build procedure, the contractor is deciding on design issues as well as issues related to tướng cost, profits and time exigencies. Whilst the traditional method of construction procurement dissociates the designers from the contractors' interests, design–build does not. On these grounds it is considered that the design–build procedure is poorly adapted to tướng projects that require complex designs for technical, programmatic or aesthetic purposes. If the designer/architect is 'kept' by the construction company, they probably will never push the envelope as to tướng what might be possible. A notable design–build project that received significant criticism, not only for excessive cost but for environmental issues, was the Belmont Learning Center. The scandal involved alleged contaminated soil that caused significant delays and massive cost overruns.[22] In Los Angeles, District Attorney Steve Cooley, who investigated the Los Angeles Unified School District's Belmont project, produced a final investigative report, released March 2003.[23] This report concluded that the design–build process caused a number of issues relating to tướng the Belmont scandal:

  • Design–build does not make use of competitive bidding where prospective builders bid on the same design.
  • Criteria to tướng select contractor are subjective and difficult to tướng evaluate and to tướng justify later.
  • The design and price selected arouses public suspicion, true or not.
  • This can lead to tướng loss of public confidence.
  • The design brief is subject to tướng different interpretations from both the client and contractor, creating a conflict of interest.

It concluded the "design–build" approach and "mixed-use concept" together caused controversy, uncertainty, and complexity of the Belmont project which helped increase the potential for project failure. While the Belmont investigation cleared the Los Angeles Unified School District of any criminal wrongdoing, the task force recommends strict oversight, including written protocols, a vigorous Office of the Inspector General, and other recommendations if it decides to tướng continue to tướng use the design–build approach. During the period in question, the ex-Superintendent of LAUSD, Ramon C. Cortines, working with the LAUSD Board of Education, whose president is Monica Garcia, actively tried to tướng cut the Office of Inspector General by 75% (compromising on 25%) and subsequently removed the Inspector General Jerry Thornton after he produced critical audits that showed misuse of construction funds.[24]

Xem thêm: luôn có giáo viên phải mời phụ huynh

Others have argued that architect-led design–build still does:[5][25][26]

  • Typical project management issues (establishing liability, writing contracts, scoping estimates and schedule) or
  • Variation across different states' licensing laws or
  • Conflict of interest and ethical issues

It also imposes:

  • Greater business and financial risks associated with architect taking on general contractor responsibilities
  • Changes to tướng the way architects tự business, so sánh they
    • Establish a construction company as a separate corporation that signs a separate construction contract, so sánh they are able to tướng insure and simplify liability insurance coverage
    • Either they have, or are able to tướng acquire, the skills of a design–builder
    • Recognize the parties' different incentives
    • Modify how they prepare Contract Documents, relying more on performance specifications phàn nàn they tự currently, to tướng facilitate substitutions for the benefit of the constructor.

Project examples[edit]

Examples of contractor-led design–build projects include:

  • Dena'ina Civic & Convention Center, Anchorage, AK, Neeser Construction, Inc.: In 2010, it won the 2010 DBIA Design Build Merit Award for a public sector project over $50 million.[27]
  • Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication: Phoenix, AZ, Ehrlich Architects.[28][29][30] In 2009, it won the 2009 DBIA National Design Build Award for a public sector project over $25 million.[31]
  • Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Dormitory, North Charleston, SC, The Korte Company. In 2012, it won the 2012 DBIA Design Build Merit Award for a public sector project over $15 million.[32]

See also[edit]

  • Architectural management
  • Design–bid–build


  1. ^ "Alternative Delivery Program - Design-Build & Contract Manager / General Contactor". Colorado Department of Transportation. Retrieved January 23, 2023.
  2. ^ "Construction Contracts: Law and management" by John Murdoch and Will Hughes, published in 2007 by "Taylor & Francis E-library", fourth edition, United Kingdom ISBN 0-203-96574-4 simultaneously published in USA ISBN 978-0-415-39368-3 and Canada ISBN 978-0-415-39369-0
  3. ^ "Design-Build Contracting Handbook", by Robert Frank Cushman & Michael C. Loulakis, published in 2001 by Aspen Law & Business, USA ISBN 0-7355-2182-4
  4. ^ "The architect's guide to tướng design–build services" By G. William Quatman & Ranjit Dhar, published in 2003 by John Wiley & Sons Inc., USA ISBN 0-471-21842-1
  5. ^ a b "Advanced Design-Build Strategies for Architects by Dorwin A.J. Thomas, DBIA" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on March 21, 2012.
  6. ^ "Home".
  7. ^ "Canadian Design-Build Institute — Promoting and enhancing the design-build industry – where creativity and construction meet".
  8. ^ Hopes and Fears of Design–build, Nancy Solomon, Architectural Record, November 2005
  9. ^ "There's a Better Way to tướng Build". DBIA.
  10. ^ " Wins Industry Award". July 1, năm 2016. Archived from the original on May 11, 2011.
  11. ^ "Architects Should Be Leading Design-build Projects, by Luis Jauregui Residential Design Build magazine, October 2010". Archived from the original on February 8, 2011.
  12. ^ The Zweig Letter, ISSN 1068-1310, issue 902
  13. ^ "DBIA: What is Design-Build?". Archived from the original on 2011-05-11. Retrieved 2011-03-23."Westover Construction - Custom Wood Source Solutions". Archived from the original on 2012-08-22. Retrieved 2012-08-22.
  14. ^ "Design/Build VS. Architecture Firms". Architectural Design. Archived from the original on 2011-06-11.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
  15. ^ "Design-Build: The Complete Guide | The Korte Company". 22 February 2018.
  16. ^ Victor Sanvido & Mark Konchar (April 1998). "Project Delivery Systems: CM at Risk, Design-Build, Design-Bid-Build". Construction Industry Institute Research Report: 133–11.
  17. ^ "New Report Describes Time and Cost Savings From Design Build Project Delivery". PRWeb. 13 June 2011.
  18. ^ LePatner, Barry. "Broken Buildings, Busted Budgets: How to tướng Fix America's Trillion-Dollar Construction Industry". The University of Chicago Press, 2007.
  19. ^ An Enthusiastic Sceptic by Nat Oppenheimer, Architectural Design (2009) Volume: 79, Issue: 2, Pages: 100–105, an assessment of Building Information Management (BIM) software
  20. ^ "Report by Reed Construction Data/RSMeans Market Intelligence".
  21. ^ US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, International Programs, Chapter 4 – Contract Administration: Technology and Practice in Europe
  22. ^ [1] Belmont scandal
  23. ^ "Final Investigative Report" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-05-27. Retrieved 2010-11-23. Los Angeles DA, Steve Cooley final Investigate report on Belmont
  24. ^ [2] Daily News – LAUSD watchdog office to tướng be cut by 25%
  25. ^ "Reports". February 8, 2017.
  26. ^ ""Designer-led Design-Build" by Mark Friedlander, Schiff Hardin". Archived from the original on October 28, 2010.
  27. ^ "DBIA: 2010 National Design-Build Award Winners". Archived from the original on 2011-05-11. Retrieved 2011-03-23.
  28. ^ Walter Cronkite School of Journalism, Phoenix, by Sam Lubell, Architect magazine, July 30, 2009
  29. ^ "Cronkite Communication School Speaks to tướng Phoenix Redevelopment". Building Design + Construction. August 11, 2010.
  30. ^ "Reports". February 8, 2017. Archived from the original on April 8, 2011.
  31. ^ "DBIA: 2009 Design-Build Award Winners". Archived from the original on 2011-07-20. Retrieved 2011-03-29.
  32. ^ "Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Dormitory - The Korte Company". 2018-03-13. Retrieved 2023-08-15.

Further reading[edit]

  • "A New Solution For Public Construction Projects: Sequential Designer-Led Design-Build", by Mark Friedlander
  • "Design-Build and Integrated Project Delivery: Narrowing the Gap" American Institute of Architects (AIA), issue 21, August 21, 2009
  • When Is Hiring Professionals Worth It? The Bottom Line: It Depends.; Architects vs. Contractors vs. Design-Build Firms . . . There Are Several Options and No Easy Answers, by Denise DiFulco, The Washington Post, July 17, 2008
  • 'Design-Build' Trend Sweeps Redo Market; 2-Step Approach Unites Architects, Contractors by Ann Marie Moriarty, The Washington Post, March 27, 2002

External links[edit]

  • The Design/Build Institute of America
  • The Design/Build Institute of Canada