TOPICS OF DISCUSSION
(scroll over each topic and click)
-
-
What are the key differences between traditional design-bid-build and Design & Build?
-
Design & Build has a reputation for being more functional and less ‘design’ oriented. Is this true today?
-
What are the steps to follow for a successful project and a satisfied client?
-
So is there still a case for the traditional method?
-
How can D&B firms successfully manage cost cutting and value engineering?
-
What is the good part about D&B?
-
Where does environment sustainability fit in? Is it a priority in the fast paced world of D&B?
-
Where is the future headed – towards traditional processes or the D&B method?
-
“You want a fair game,” says a design lead. “The design-bid-build method works well for large scale projects in industries, such as government, healthcare and industrial.”
However, certain parties disagree, insisting that the D&B method is equally capable of handling large projects as well.
“It depends on the requirements and client constraints,” mentions a project manager. “If for example, the requirement is for a commercial complex that does not need a complicated or specialist design, then the D&B method is more than capable of accomplishing that.”
“It depends on the requirements and client constraints,” mentions a project manager. “If for example, the requirement is for a commercial complex that does not need a complicated or specialist design, then the D&B method is more than capable of accomplishing that.”
We learn that even in the traditional method, not every design house can handle all specialist projects. You either have to go to a particular firm that specialises in corporate or healthcare. So it really depends on the scope of work. “However, clients these days are asking for more,” says another project lead. In such a case, the option of bringing a specialist designer on board for a particular project is a possibility which, we think, really broadens the playing field and reduces the gap between the D&B and traditional.
