Construction Project Delivery Methods

Choosing the Right Approach

The strategies utilized in the execution of construction projects significantly impact their outcomes in terms of success, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness. Each method presents its own unique set of advantages and disadvantages, tailored to specific project requirements. This article endeavors to analyze six prevalent construction project delivery methods, providing stakeholders with valuable insights to facilitate informed decision-making regarding the most appropriate approach for their projects.

Design-Bid-Build (DBB):

Overview: Design-Bid-Build represents a traditional and linear approach where the project owner engages an architect or designer to develop the project design. Upon finalization of the design, contractors submit bids, and the construction contract is awarded to the bidder offering the lowest price.

Advantages: Clear separation of planning and construction phases. Tendering processes often lead to cost savings in construction. 

Disadvantages: Limited collaboration between design and construction teams. Potential conflicts may arise among the owner, designer, and contractor.

Design-Build (DB):

Overview: Design-Build integrates both the design and construction phases into a single contract, typically awarded to a design-build firm or a general contractor with design capabilities. This method enhances collaboration between designers and contractors.

Advantages: Streamlined project delivery with a single point of responsibility.

Accelerated project completion due to concurrent design and construction phases.

Disadvantages: Potential conflicts of interest may arise if the entity managing both design and execution prioritizes cost over quality.

Limited control for the owner over the design process.

Construction Management at Risk (CMAR):

Overview: In the construction management at risk method, the owner engages a construction manager (CM) during the design phase. The CM provides input on constructability, scheduling, and budgeting. Upon finalization of the design, the CM acts as the general contractor, assuming construction risk.

Advantages: Early involvement of the CM allows for the implementation of value-adding and cost-saving measures.

Risk is shared between the owner and the CM, reducing the likelihood of cost overruns.

Disadvantages: Potential conflicts among the owner, designer, and CM may arise if roles and responsibilities are not clearly defined.

Higher initial costs due to the CM's involvement in the design phase.

Integrated Project Delivery (IPD):

Overview: Integrated project delivery involves a collaborative approach where the owner, designer, and contractor enter into a multi-party contract. All parties share risks and rewards based on project outcomes, promoting collaboration and innovation.


Enhanced collaboration and trust among project stakeholders.

Focus on shared goals, resulting in improved project outcomes.


Complex contractual agreements require a high level of coordination and trust among parties.

Limited acceptance due to unfamiliarity and perceived risks associated with IPD.

Public-Private Partnership (PPP):

Overview: Public-private partnerships entail collaboration between public and private entities to finance, design, build, operate, and maintain infrastructure projects. PPPs often leverage private sector expertise and resources for public infrastructure projects.


Access to private sector innovation, expertise, and funding.

Transfer of project risks from the public sector to private partners.


Complex procurement processes and contractual agreements.

Potential public resistance due to concerns about privatization and cost overruns.

Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT):

Overview: Build-Operate-Transfer is a financing model where a private company designs, builds, finances, and operates a project for a specified period. After the concession expires, project ownership and operation are transferred to the public sector.


Private sector bears financial and operational risks during the concession period.

Access to private sector expertise and funding without upfront investment.


Extended concession periods may limit public sector control over the project.

Potential conflicts between public and private sector interests.

Choosing the suitable technique for carrying out a construction project is pivotal for its triumph, maintaining financial boundaries, and managing uncertainties. Every approach presents distinctive advantages and hurdles, and the most fitting strategy hinges on project-specific elements like scale, financial plan, timetable, and risk acceptance. Through meticulous evaluation of each method's traits and harmonizing them with project goals, stakeholders can craft judicious choices that resonate with their aspirations and preferences.

Share this post
Sign in to leave a comment
Optimizing Project Management in Construction:
A Case Study of Intensive Care Unit Fitout in Hospital