Alternative Contracting Methods

Traditional methods of project procurement of have remained virtually unchanged in the U.S. infrastructure construction industry for more than 50 years. The traditional method, Design-Bid-Build (DBB), uses a two-step process that separates planning and design from construction. Design is generally done by the public agency and their consultants and the subsequent construction contract is procured from the private sector, almost always by a “low-bid” approach. This method has worked well for many projects, delivering quality work for the lowest bid price. This is particularly true for those projects where the work, and the public agency’s management procedures, are well understood by the contracting community and there is relatively low uncertainty in the work or conditions, particularly geotechnical conditions for underground construction. However, concerns exist with the DBB process. It is time consuming because all planning and design work must be completed prior to beginning any construction work and it is of concern for complex or large projects, plus those with significant risk, where the separation of design and construction, in conjunction with pressures resulting from the low-bid environment, often result in substantial cost and schedule increases. Frequently, these increases occur in a non-productive, inefficient, adversarial work environment leading to claims, disputes and costly litigation (Quick 2002).