President and COO
In commercial construction, delivery method isn’t just a technicality. It’s a decision that shapes everything. Including your timeline, your costs, your stress level. And if you’ve built anything in California recently, you know this choice matters.
I’ve worked on both sides of the table. In one model, you’re playing quarterback, managing a design team on one side and a contractor on the other. In the other, you’ve got a unified squad pulling together from the start. Both can work, but knowing when to use which — that’s the trick.
Most public and institutional projects still run this way. You hire a designer to draw the plans, then you send those plans out for bid. Lowest responsive contractor usually wins, and off you go into construction.
In theory, it creates checks and balances. You’ve got the architect looking out for design intent and the contractor keeping an eye on cost and constructability. But in practice? It often means a lot of back and forth. Contractors are pricing something they didn’t help design. If the drawings are off or don’t account for real world conditions, you get change orders. That can stall the schedule and blow up your budget.
That said, there’s a time and place for it. If you’re working in a heavily regulated environment or need hard bidding for funding, DBB still makes sense. Just be ready for a little more process and a little less speed.
Now here is where things get interesting. Design-build flips the model. You hire one entity, contractor, and designer together, from day one. Everyone is rowing in the same direction, and that alignment can be powerful.
We’ve used this method a lot, especially on complex builds like dealerships, medical office space, and adaptive reuse. The benefit? Real time collaboration. While we’re still sketching layouts, we’re also talking costs, materials, schedules, phasing. It means fewer surprises, quicker approvals, and faster execution once we’re on site.
It also means you, the owner, have a single point of contact. You’re not fielding conflicting messages from the architect and the GC. That simplicity can be a huge relief, especially when things get complicated. And they always do.
Recent national studies back this up. According to the DesignBuild Institute of America (DBIA)’s 2023 midcycle report, designbuild projects are delivered about 33 percent faster and come in at roughly 6 percent lower unit cost than designbidbuild.
Further, the 2024/25 utilization and forecast data show designbuild is on pace to expand to nearly half of all U.S. construction spending within the next few years.
In California, legislative momentum adds to the trend. Senate Bill 706 (SB706) expands authorization for local agencies to use progressive designbuild (PDB) processes for projects in excess of $5 million.
In today’s climate of high interest rates, tight supply chains and schedule pressure, selecting the right delivery method has never been more critical. Projects that overlap design and construction get a headstart. Budget certainty and coordination matter more than ever. At Simile Construction we’re seeing owners move toward designbuild when speed and complexity are in play, yet we still lean designbidbuild when the scope is straightforward and funding demands competitive bid. It’s about matching the method to the project environment.
We’re not dogmatic about either approach. There are jobs where Design Bid Build still fits the bill. If it’s a straightforward spec building of a public bid, we’ll run that play all day. But if it’s a project where speed, collaboration, and complexity are in the mix, we’re steering our clients towards Design Build every time.
Because here’s the truth: the earlier we’re all on the same team, the smoother things tend to go.
Shoot me an email or give me a call. Happy to walk you through what’s working and what’s not out here in the field.
Email me at: j.simile@similebuilt.com.
Joseph J. Simile
President, Simile Construction
209.545.6111
