DESIGN MANAGEMENT IN DESIGN AND BUILD PROJECTS: THE
NEW ROLE OF THE CONTRACTOR
Edwin H. W. Chan1, Albert P. C. Chan2 and Ann T. W. Yu3
ABSTRACT
The team members in Design and Build D&B projects, including owner’s representative,
contractor and architect/engineer, have to re-adjust their traditional thinking and to learn
extra professional skills to cope with the increasing complexities and demands of modern
practice and for managing the design of large-scale projects. In D&B contracts, the design
responsibility is transferred from the owner’s organization to that of the D&B contractor.
This paper presents a study, which reviews the project management of D&B projects and
also analyses the issues relating to design management process and design risk of the project
participants with their changed roles. The study explores the performance and adaptability of
the D&B contractor in design management. A questionnaire survey and structured interviews
of three groups of project participants: owners, designers and contractors were carried out.
The study results indicate that, though there are identified areas needing improvement, most
of the respondents have satisfactory experiences with the D&B contractor’s performance in
terms of effectiveness in managing the design team, adequacy of design knowledge and their
ability in managing the design process.
KEY WORDS
Design and Build, Design management, Contract, Contractor’s Role.
INTRODUCTION
In the last decade, Design and Build (D&B) system has been gaining its popularity both in
Hong Kong and worldwide as an alternative procurement method to offset problems
associated with the traditional procurement system (Akintoye, 1994; Lam and Chan 1995;
Ma and Chan 1997; Yu, 1998; Deakin, 1999; Love et al. 1998; Chan & Chan 2001, 2000;
Chan et al. 2001a; 2001b, Lim et al. 2002). In D&B system, the design-builder may employ
architects or engineers (either as the design-builder’s staff or as contracted consultants), and
such design professionals are directly responsible to the design-builder, not the client. Tam
1
Associate Professor, Department of Building and Real Estate, the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung
Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China. Tel. (852) 27665800, Fax. (852) 23623979, E-mail:
bsedchan@inet.polyu.edu.hk
2
Professor, Department of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom,
Kowloon, Hong Kong
3
Research Associate, Department of Building and Real Estate, the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung
Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong
1
(2000) confirms that the designer and contractor developing detailed design together can
improve buildability. It is said that the end products of D&B contracts are usually
uninteresting and dull, since the designer’s creativity can be stifled because of interference
from the leading role of builder in design. Chan and Chan (2000) found that this perception
is not necessarily true because innovative designs that incorporate constructability and
practicality do exist. On the other hand, D&B system requires the design-builder to adopt an
active role in the management of design process.
Design management is to ensure that all the information is managed and distributed
sensibly and responsibly at the right time (Gray and Will, 2001; Dulamimi et al. 1995).
There are studies that recognize the difficulties encounter in design management due to the
need to collaborating multidisciplinary personnel and issues (Zaneldin, Hegazy & Grierson,
2001; Hampton, 2001, Pertti LahdenperÄ & Veli-pekka TanhuanpÄÄ, 2000). Culley (1992)
found that engineers and designers spend between 20-30% of their time searching for and
handling information. Problems associated with design management include coordination of
different requirements, scheduling of information required time, appropriate training with
overall knowledge to coordinate different disciplines of the design team and appreciation of
design performance construction practicality. Design management also involves the
allocation of design responsibilities among all the project participants and appreciation of
contractual implication in the process (Chan and Chan 2001, 2000). Early research by Chan
(2000) found that the main problem with D&B projects is the limited number of companies
with a proven record of both designing and constructing. Contractors may be competent in
general construction but with limited experience in design management. The key question in
this study is whether the design-builder is ready and capable for the leading role in design
management for D&B projects.
Although the production of information and the management of its flow may be separated,
they must be integrated within the process of design management to meet the project
objectives. There are also many inherent problems in the nature of design developments of a
project (Dulamimi et al. 1995). The following issues affect the effectiveness in the design
management of D&B system.
DESIGN RISK IN THE CHANGED ROLES OF CLIENTS AND CONTRACTORS
On the face of it, D&B system provides the client a very convenient contractual arrangement
with which the client off-loads most of the project risks to the contractor. A close analysis
will reveal that the client is not without risk in using the D&B system. The problems
associated with design management in D&B system include the following:
 The system depends on how clear the Client’s Requirement is.
 It is very important and yet difficult to agree upon how the Contractor Proposal has met
the Client’s Requirement. It is also the source of conflict in the later stage of the contract.
 Contractor’s resources could be wasted in the tender stage to prepare Contractor’s
Proposal and the waste resources may ultimately reflected in the tender price.
 After the contract is awarded, the contractor may cut his own cost by manipulating detail
designs for his benefit;
 Contractor may sacrifice on quality to reduce cost, hence argument of quality on site.
2
Under the building control system of many jurisdictions, the legal responsibility of
project participants in D&B contracts is an area of concern. The legal responsibility of the
contractor and architect/engineer established in the building control system is based on the
contractual arrangement of a project with the traditional procurement method. . For example,
with reference to the detailed requirements in the Buildings Ordinance in Hong Kong, the
Authorized Person (an architect/surveyor/engineer registered under the Ordinance) and the
Registered Contractors are sharing many responsibilities together to comply with statutory
requirements (Chan, Mok & Scott 2001). One of the major roles of the Authorized Person
(architect/engineer) is to supervise the works of the contractor and to check or sanction the
contractor’s work for compliance with the Buildings Ordinance, though the government
officials will carry out curtailed checking (Chan & Chan 1999). Under a D&B procurement
system, the architect/engineer employed directly by the D&B contractor may find it difficult
to discharge his statutory duties as a “statutory agent” of the Buildings Authority (HKIA
1998; Chan 1998). Architects/engineers all over the world should have the responsibility to
ensure that the buildings designed by them will comply with building regulations. Their
concern about proper discharge of their legal duty would be the same largely.
PROBLEMS IN DESIGN MANAGEMENT OF D&B CONTRACTS
Literature review has identified the following specific problems associated with design
management in the D&B system:
 Client has difficulties in preparing an adequate brief (Yu, 1998; Bubshait et al. 1999);
 Client has less control over the design aspect of the project (Yu, 1998);
 Mis-interpretation by the Client on contractor’s design proposal (Chan and Chan, 2001;
Ng and Skitmore, 2002);
 Separation of design roles and overall design management (Love et al. 1998);
 Separation of design and site supervision (Chan and Chan, 2000; Chan & Chan 2001);
 Insufficient time for thorough design and detailing at the tender stage which is normally
allowed 8 to 10 weeks only (HKIA, 1998);
 Conflicts of interest in the architect’s/engineer’s role under the D&B contract and in his
duties under the Buildings Ordinance (HKIA, 1998);
 As far as the bare minimum standards stipulated in the Employer’s Requirements could
be met, to save cost and time, the contractor is reluctant to improve on design and
detailing, even there may have some deficiencies in the design submitted at tender stage.
(HKIA, 1998)
 There are limited numbers of companies with proven records in both designing and
construction to compete in the D&B market. (Yu, 1998; Chan, 2000)
 Difficulties encountered in the coordination of various designers and in scheduling design
information production (Baldwin et al. 1999)
 Dispute on design responsibility (Chan and Chan, 2000; Ng and Skitmore, 2002)
 Inheritance of design errors (Ng and Skitmore, 2002)
 Client changes (Yu, 1998; Bubshait et al. 1999). It is important that proper procedures for
managing design changes should be established such that only the correct design
documents are distributed to the project team.
3
OBJECTIVES OF THIS PAPER
The above paragraphs review the problems associated with design management. In this
study, design management means effective management of design process, proper allocation
of design liability, cost effective in design process, etc. As part of a research project funded
by the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, a study was carried out in June 2002 to
investigation issues concerning design management in D&B contracts. This paper extracts
the relevant parts of data collected in the above-mentioned study and explores the
performance and adaptability of the D&B contractor in design management with the
following specific objectives:
 To investigate the importance of design management as expressed by clients, designers
and contractors.
 To evaluate the capability of the D&B contractor for the leading role in design
management.
 To recommend the appropriate roles of the project participants for design management in
D&B projects.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The study included questionnaire survey to collect opinions from a sample size of about 250
construction professionals, including clients, designers (architects and engineers) and
contractors and subcontractors, who are key personnel in firms and companies known to have
experience with D&B projects. Considering the size of the Hong Kong construction industry
where, as an illustration, there are only about 160 architectural firms and practically all D&B
contracts are public sector projects, the sample size is significant enough for the purposes.
The targeted samples were requested to answer questions on the problems associated with
design management in D&B projects and to suggest contract provisions to govern the design
management and to allocate design responsibilities in D&B contracts for the following
parties: (i) D&B contractor and client; (ii) D&B contractor and designer; and (iii) Client and
independent checker.
Based on literature review, the following are some of the topics/issues included in the
questionnaire, which are relevant to the competency of the D&B contractor in the role of
design management:
 Are design management and design responsibility the major considerations for using
D&B procurement system?
 In what priority of importance are design management and design responsibility
compared with the other factors such as single point responsibility, cost certainty,
constructability and shorter project duration?
 The key considerations in design management process such as who should prepare and
approve the design work for construction.
 The satisfaction level on the contractual arrangement for design management and on the
performance of designers, independent checkers and contractors in design management.
The target samples were briefed in the questionnaire of this study that D&B projects refer
to those projects, which the contractor is responsible for the complete design and
construction. Design Management for this study means effective management of design
4
process, proper allocation of design liability, cost effective in design process, etc.
Subsequent to the questionnaire survey, structured interviews were conducted with 15 project
participants including clients, designers and builders to have detailed discussions on the
preliminary findings of the questionnaire to collect qualitative data for the study. As early as
the 1950s, research approaches have combined quantitative and qualitative methods (Shapiro,
1955). The integrated method is said to have reaped the “best of both worlds” (Csete and
Albrecht, 1994). In the current study, qualitative data were collected through structured
interviews to support the quantitative research results of questionnaire through
“triangulation” (Jick 1979). By applying both the quantitative and qualitative methods as a
triangulating strategy, data of one research method (qualitative in this case) helps
generalization of the findings based on another research method (quantitative in this case) for
the same topic. This paper presents the results of the questionnaire survey and structured
interviews.
DATA ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
The data collected in the study were input into a Microsoft Excel file in form of a matrix.
Frequencies, percentages of the cases were calculated. Pie charts, bar charts were plotted and
tables were produced to present and interpret the results. The indices of factors were
calculated based on the weighting:
 “Most important” or “First priority” was given 5 points
 “Important” or “Second priority” was assigned with 4 points
 “Neutral” or “Third priority” was given 3 points
 “Less important” or “Fourth priority” was assigned with 2 points
 “Least important” or Fifth priority” was given 1 point
The index of each factor can be calculated by the following equation:
5
W
Index of factor i =
j 1
j
 f ij
5

j 1
f ij
Where W j = weights of the degree of importance j of factors (5, 4, 3, 2, 1);
f ij = corresponding frequencies of the degree of importance j of factor I;
5

j 1
f ij = total number of respondents
The ranking of the factors were based on the indices calculated using the above equation.
The higher the index, the higher the priority ranking is.
5
CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
The choices of respondents for each of the questions in the questionnaire were encoded with
nominal and Likert scale on which they are measured. The Pearson correlation coefficient,
which ranges from -1 to +1, was used to indicate the agreement among the choices in two
different questions. In this research, the Pearson correlation coefficients range from 0 to +1.
The more the coefficient is closer to +1 indicates the more perfect the agreement of the
responses for two different questions.
SURVEY RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The following presents the results and findings of the survey after combining the results of
both the questionnaire survey and structured interviews.
PROFILE OF SURVEY RESPONDENTS
There were 39 completed and valid questionnaire sheets returned representing a response rate
of 16%, which is close to a normal expectation for opinion survey. The questionnaire data
was buttressed by 15 follow-up interviews with individual construction professionals who
were willing to take part in the research. The majority of the respondents were D&B
contractors (42%) while the clients and designers each accounted for 29% of the respondents.
DESIGN MANAGEMENT PROCESS
Designer
According to the questionnaire survey, the architects/engineers (as the contractor’s designers)
are found to be the most appropriate person to prepare the design for D&B contracts. As
clarified through the structured interviews, the best approval channel for design proposals in
D&B projects is from designers to contractors and then to client’s representatives. Most of
the interviewees felt that the design proposals should be submitted to the client’s project
manager or consultants for final approval.
Design manager
Who is the best party to be responsible for overall design management process? In this study,
the client’s group and the contractor’s group opined that the D&B contractor was the
appropriate party to be responsible for overall design management process while the
designer’s group expressed that the Client’s project manager is the best party instead.
Subsequent interviews with clients, designers and contractors revealed the underlining
reasons. The client and contractor agreed that the D&B contractor was the best party to be
responsible for overall design management because the project was a D&B contract in which
the contractor should be the team leader of the project. He knew when the drawings and
information were required to suit his construction schedule. The D&B contractor was also
responsible for cost control as well as satisfying client’s requirements. However, some of the
designers were concerned that the D&B contractor, in managing the design process, would
consider over favorably for construction issues at the expense of design matters.
6
Design Responsibility
In the structured interviews, the results confirmed that the contractor as the overall
coordinator should be responsible for design faults. 73% of the interviewees agreed that the
contractor should be responsible for any lack of coordination in drawings. The reason given
was that the design responsibility in a D&B project is transferred to the contractor as the
contracting party and he should carry the overall responsibility in design aspects. From
practical points of view, interviewees expressed that there were always discrepancies found
in structural and building services drawings. The contractor should prepare integrated
structural and services drawings to avoid discrepancies and the contractor should appoint
design coordinators to coordinate E&M drawings. It was also suggested by interviewees that
resources in time and cost should be allowed for coordination of design drawings and a fee
should be clearly identified in the D&B tender price for that purpose.
SATISFACTION WITH PERFORMANCE IN DESIGN MANAGEMENT
Traditionally, the role of management of design process and construction process are well
defined and taken up separately by the designer and contractor. With the D&B, the
management of design process is one of the concerns for the D&B contractor organization.
Who and how at different stages of the project should be involved may affect the project
performance. In this study, 62% of the respondents are satisfied with the arrangement for
design management in the projects that they have been involved (See Figure 1).
Figure 1 also shows the satisfaction level with the D&B contractor in terms of the
following aspects: (i) experience as being the project team leader; (ii) effectiveness in
managing the design team; (iii) adequate design knowledge; and (iv) ability in managing the
design process. The results show that nearly 60% of the respondents are satisfied with the
D&B contractor’s performance in terms of experience as being the project team leader,
effectiveness in managing the design team and adequate design knowledge. About 50% of
the respondents are satisfied with the contractor’s management of the design process.
The data of satisfaction levels are also input into SPSS statistic package version 11.0 for
analysis. For those who are satisfied with the experience of the contractor as being the project
team leader, they are also satisfied with the contractor in terms of effectiveness in managing
the design team. The Pearson Correlation Coefficient for this correlation testing is 0.737.
The result also agrees with those who are satisfied with the contractor in terms of managing
the design process. The Pearson Correlation Coefficient is 0.711. Furthermore, for those who
are satisfied with the contractor’s effectiveness in managing the design team, they are also
satisfied with the contractor’s managing the design process, with a Pearson Correlation
Coefficient of 0.700. The correlations are all significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Therefore,
significant correlation exists to agree on the D&B contractor’s performance in terms of: (i)
experience as being the project team leader; (ii) effectiveness in managing the design team;
(iii) adequate design knowledge; and (iv) ability in managing the design process.
7
70%
60%
Percentage
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1
2
3
4
5
Satisfaction level with the
arrangement of Design
Management in the project
5%
57%
24%
11%
3%
Satisfaction level with the
Contractor's experience as
being the project team leader
11%
60%
16%
13%
0%
Satisfaction level with the
Contractor's effectiveness in
managing the design team
5%
53%
18%
21%
3%
Satisfaction level with the
Contractor's design knowledge
0%
55%
24%
21%
0%
Satisfaction level with the
Contractor's management of
design process
0%
50%
34%
13%
3%
Rating
(1-very satisfied, 3-neutral, 5-very unsatisfied)
Figure 1: Satisfaction levels with performance in design management
RECOMMENDATIONS
SEPARATION OF DESIGN AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT
The survey results provide strong support for employing separated parties for the functions of
design and design management. The architects/engineers are the strong candidates to lead on
design matters, whilst they are not regarded as the most appropriate persons to carry out the
design management in D&B projects. It is recommended to appoint an experienced project
participant as the design manager to be responsible for the overall design management.
APPROPRIATE DESIGN MANAGER
Results of the questionnaire and structured interviews indicate that the D&B contractor is the
appropriate party to carry out design management in D&B contracts. This reflects the views
of the Contractors/Consultants/Employers, which are based on their experience in dealing
with D&B projects. The contractor was found to possess the appropriate knowledge and skill
to coordinate different disciplines of professionals in the project team for controlling the
design information to meet a construction programme. The D&B contractor should be the
designated design manager and be responsible for the design information flow and any
discrepancies in the overall design, as he knows the construction time schedule.
8
ROLE CHANGE TO BE REFLECTED IN CONTRACTS
In D&B contracts, the project participants have to adapt the changed roles and
responsibilities. It is suggested the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved in design
and design management should be clearly specified in the respective contracts to avoid
misunderstanding and dispute. Site supervision and statutory responsibilities are the grey
areas where clarification of ambiguity is required. Lack of coordination in drawings is also a
common fault. The contractor should appoint a design coordinator to coordinate the drawings
issued by different disciplines of the design team.
Limitation of the Recommendations
Although the study was carried out with cases in Hong Kong, the practice and professional
persons involved in large-scale projects in Hong Kong are very much international in nature.
Therefore, the study results would apply to the similar situations in many countries.
Although the study had covered the D&B sector of construction works comprehensively, it
was limited with sample size in Hong Kong. In addition, the majority of the respondents in
the survey were contractors (about 42%) and there were only a small number of D&B
contractors competing in the Hong Kong market. The conclusions so overwhelming
endorsing the D&B contractor’s performances and in favour of him for the role of design
management should be regarded with a slight caveat that there could be many self-serving
elements in the survey responses. Moreover, other data from this study also points out that
there are scopes for improvement both in the arrangement of design responsibility and in the
competency of the contractor and other project team members in the design management
process. These issues would be further analyzed in another research paper.
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, design management means effective management of design process, proper
allocation of design liability, cost effective in design process, etc. The study includes a
review of the project management of design-build projects and a critical analysis of the
design responsibility and design management process involved in the D&B contracts. In
D&B contracts, the design responsibility is delegated to the D&B contractor. Design
management and design responsibility are the major consideration for designers and D&B
contractors in using D&B procurement system. In the case of Hong Kong, the survey
respondents found that the D&B contractor’s performance is satisfactory in managing the
design process. The study can be concluded that the D&B contractor, as distinguished from
an ordinary contractor, is becoming ready and capable for the leading role in the design
management of D&B projects.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This paper is supported by a research grant provided by The Hong Kong Polytechnic
University.
REFERENCES
9
Akintoye, A. (1994). Design and build: a survey of construction contractors’ views,
Construction Management and Economics, 12(2), 155-163.
Baldwin, A.N., Austin, S.A., Hassan, T.M. and Thorpe, A. (1999). Modelling information
flow during the conceptual and schematic stages of building design, Construction
Management Economics, 17(2), 155-167.
Bubshait, A.A., Farooq, G., Jannadi, O. and Assaf, S.A. (1999). Quality practices in design
organizations, Construction Management and Economics, 17(6), p. 799-809.
Chan, A.P.C. (2000). Evaluation of enhanced design and build system – a case study of a
hospital project, Construction Management and Economics, 18(7), 863-871.
Chan, A.P.C., Ho, D.C.K., and Tam, C.M. (2001a). Effect of interorganisational teamwork
on project outcome, Journal of Management in Engineering, ASCE, 17(1), 34-40.
Chan, A.P.C., Ho, D.C.K., and Tam, C.M. (2001b). Design and build project success factors:
multivariate analysis, J. Constr. Eng. and Manage., 127(2), 93-100.
Chan E.H. (1998). Building Control in Connection with Real Estate Developments, in Real
Estate Development in Hong Kong, Poon & Chan (eds.) Pace Publishing Ltd., 66-81.
Chan E.H. & Chan T.S. (1999). Imposing ISO 9000 Quality Assurance System on Statutory
Agents: a case in the Hong Kong Construction Industry, J. Constr. Eng. and Manage.,
125(4), 285-291.
Chan E.H. & Chan A.P.C. (2001) Managing Conflict in Design Information of International
Construction Projects, Journal of Architectural Management, 16(1), 32-57.
Chan E.H and Chan A.P.C. (2000). Design-Build Contracts in Hong Kong – Some Legal
Concerns, Information and Communication in Construction Procurement, Serpell, A
(ed.). Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Chile, 183-200.
Chan E.H., Mok, P. & Scott D. (2001) Statutory Requirements for Construction
Professionals, Pace Publishing Ltd., Hong Kong.
Csete J. M. and Albrecht R.R. (1994). The Best of Both Worlds: Synthesizing Quantitative
and Qualitative Research in Medical Setting, Proceedings of the Primary Care Research
Methods and Statistics Conference, San Antonio, Texas, 3 December 1994, 13/1-13/15.
Culley, S (1992). The information requirements of Engineering designers, Engineering
Design, May.
Deakin, P. (1999). Client’s local experience on design and build projects, in Seminar
Proceedings on Design and Build Procurement System, CITA, Hong Kong, 11-15.
Dulamimi, M.F., Morris G.K. and Baxendale T. (1995). The role of Design Management in
improving the effectiveness of Design and Build Projects, International Congress on
Construction Design and Build Projects – International Experiences, Raffles City
Convention Centre, Singapore, 5-6 October.
Gray, C. and Will H. (2001). Building Design Management, Butterworth-Heinemann,
Oxford.
Hampton, R. K. (2001) Collaborative Multidisciplinary Design Optimization. Leadership
and Management in Engineering, 1(3), 23-28
Hong Kong Institute of Architects (1998). Report of the Design & Build Task Force, HKIA.
Jick, T.D. (1979). Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action”,
Administrative Science Quarterly, December, 24, 602-611.
10
Lam, P.T.I. and Chan, A.P.C. (1995). The recent trend of construction procurement systems
in Asia-Pacific world, in International Conference of the Australian Institute of Project
Management, Adelaide, Australia, 520-527.
Lim, J.Y., Wang, S.Q. and Ting, R. (2002). Precasting in Singapore’s Design & Build
Projects, The International Journal of Construction Management, 2(1), 1-12.
Love, P.E.D., Skitmore, M. and Earl, G. (1998). Selecting a Suitable Procurement Method
for a Building Project. Construction Management and Economics, 16(2), 221-233.
Ma, T.Y.F. and Chan, P. (1997). Is design-build leading the trend? A study of procurement
systems in Australia, in Leadership and Total Quality Management in Construction and
Building, Singapore, 123-129.
Ng, S.T. and Skitmore, R.M. (2002). Contractors’ risks in Design, Novate and Construct
contracts, International Journal of Project Management, 20(2), 119-126.
Pertti LahdenperÄ & Veli-pekka TanhuanpÄÄ, (2000), Creation of a new design
management system based on process optimization and proactive strategy. Engineering
construction and Architectural Management, 7(3), 267-277.
Shapiro G. (1955). A comparison of participant observation and survey data, American
Sociological Review, 20, 28-33.
Tam, C.M. (2000). Design and Build on complicated redevelopment project in Hong Kong:
The Happy Valley Racecourse Redevelopment, International Journal of Project
Management, 18(2), 125-129.
Yu, A.T.W. (1998). Evaluation of integrated procurement systems in Hong Kong,
Unpublished MSc Thesis, City University of Hong Kong.
Zaneldin E., Hegazy, T. & Grierson, D. (2001), Improving Design Coordination for Building
Projects II: A collaborative system, J. Constr. Eng. and Manage., 127(4), 330-336.
11