IQ Summer 2011: The Federal Issue - (Page 44)

PERSPECTIVES// design-build = optimal results should be confined to confirmation of the design intent—not to performing a quality-control function of the documents. This is the phase of the project where the design-builder needs to “get it right.” More feedback from the owner is better than less (again, the design-build project manager must provide a delicate balance in leadership to manage expectations). It becomes much more costly to make changes downstream. Hindsight demonstrates again and again that this is the moment when all parties must arrive at a meeting of the minds on what constitutes “design commitment.” That being said, more is not necessarily better. Clear and concise communication is the key. As Mark Twain once said, “If I had more time, I’d write a shorter letter.” So, what is the ideal role of the owner during the post-award phase? Design-build project delivery shifts significant risk to the design-builder. However, it also requires the owner to be responsive and decisive throughout the process. The owner does not “own the details” of the design but does retain the authority to concur that the design and construction have met the design criteria in the contract. Of course, the owner can direct changes to the contract, but such changes may generate cost and time considerations for the design-builder. A primary responsibility of the design-builder is managing expectations and ensuring that “scope creep” does not occur. It is incumbent upon the design-builder to put the owner on timely notice if any requests/actions will impact cost and/or time. Since the design-builder is contractually responsible to complete the design, construct, deliver and warrant the project all within a firmfixed price and schedule, the team serves as both the architect/engineer-of-record as well as the contractor-of-record. If the design-builder anticipates any damages as a result of owner encroachment into their realm of responsibility, the design-build entity must take a proactive notification approach to protect its self interests. Formal Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) Partnering is an excellent tool to ensure the project starts off right. Partnering arrangements present an ideal opportunity to establish an informal dispute resolution process for the length of the project. Periodic face-to-face meetings check the pulse of the relationship within the entire design-build team including the owner. Kickoff meetings immediately after contract award are vital to confirm design validation. Such early discussions present an exceptional opportunity to better understand specific concerns, but, even more importantly, this is the perfect time to set the tone and begin the collaborative process—proactively taking advantage of the opportunity to get everyone on the same page. Unfortunately, many owners—public owners in particular—administer design-build contracts 44 summer//2011 the quarterly publication of the design-build institute of america

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IQ Summer 2011: The Federal Issue

IQ Summer 2011: The Federal Issue