IQ Summer 2011: The Federal Issue - (Page 45)

with a hands-on approach that is not unlike the traditional design-bid-build project delivery. Too often, this tendency limits the opportunity for industry to offer more innovative solutions. Additionally, issuing multiple notices to proceed (NTP) can severely limit the design-builder’s ability to fast track the project and is certainly not a design-build best practice. Ironically, such a heavyhanded approach to the project can result in the owner reassuming responsibility for the project end performance, potentially indirectly shifting risk back to the owner and relieving the designbuilder from such liability. Such behavior has the effect of diminishing a primary advantage of design-build project delivery. However, when the owner assumes such a proactive assertive role, it is the responsibility of the design-builder to properly notify the owner, specifically the contracting officer in a timely manner that such behavior is interfering with the contractor’s ability to adequately move forward on the project. The design-builder’s willingness and ability to submit a fixed price for the owner’s work necessarily relies on being afforded the flexibility to select the most economical design within parameters clearly defined by the owner during contract price negotiations. It is not unusual for design-builders to exhibit an accommodating attitude early in design development meetings often in anticipation of winning future projects. This tendency may result in self-inflicted damages resulting from the designbuilder’s ineffective management of the design process. Tolerating overreaching owner involvement can have significant negative consequences downstream. Such behavior can range from a potentially disruptive more hands-on approach by the owner to, often, inattentiveness to critical issues affecting the project. At its core, “post-award” actually begins during “pre-award” with the entire design-build team actively participating in developing the solution. In my experience, the owner must set the tone of the collaborative relationship throughout the team. The delicate balance of owner involvement during the post-award process is critical to the success of the project. Owners must keep in mind that assuming a more obtrusive role in the post-award design development may hinder the designbuilder’s contract performance. On the other hand, simply reviewing the 35 percent conceptual design and throwing it “back over the wall” to the design-builder (and, again, at the 65 percent design development stage and yet again at the 95 percent, etc.) will not provide the vitally needed owner input during design. Design-builders must remember the responsibility for managing the design process lies with them and strive to create cohesion within the team. Remember you are only as good as your last job and accommodating an overly involved owner can backfire and negatively impact the final project. Similarly, an owner’s attempt to assume duties and responsibilities for design management—even with the intent of being helpful—may result in risk reverting back to the owner. As a former owner I know this is a good time to remind ourselves why we selected the winning design-build team. If we do not have a high level of confidence and trust in the design-build team, perhaps we should have chosen another project delivery method. In closing, I am frequently puzzled by the fact that key personnel from both the design-builder and owner sides fail to recognize the need for formal training in design-build before execution of a contract. Also, including DBIA’s model designbuild process “award fee” program to incentivize high performance during post-award is probably the single most useful tool (and unfortunately the least understood) to achieve optimal results in designbuild project delivery. Is design-build done right easy? No! I am reminded of Winston Churchill’s famous quote: “It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government –except all the others that have been tried from time to time.” CRAIG UNGER HAS MORE THAN 30 YEARS EXPERIENCE IN GOV ERNMENT CONTR ACTING. HE IS PRINCIPAL OF UNGER SECURIT Y SOLUTIONS, LLC, AND PRE VIOUS EMPLOYMENT WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE) AND DBIA (DBIA PAST PRESIDENT). dbia.org summer//2011 45 http://www.dbia.org

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

IQ Summer 2011: The Federal Issue