So, would you choose a two-legged stool over a three-legged one?
Well, maybe that’s a silly question. But figuratively speaking, two-legged stools are all the rage in the design and construction arena these days.
There is a common misconception that “design and build” equates to contractors handling all design work in-house with staff designers or architects. Not so. While this inflexible model works for some projects, it is not suitable for others and can serve clients quite poorly.
Why? Because it reduces the three-legged stool of project development -client, designer and builder- to two. The result? Lack of balance.
Don’t get me wrong; the problem is not inherent in design-build. It is with the distortion that the term really means.
“Design-build” actually refers to a project development strategy in which an entity brings together the architect, contractor, and client to foster collaboration. Done right, it’s a streamlined process that facilitates timely and meaningful input from all three “legs of the stool,” ultimately resulting in a stronger final product.
In other words, it is about establishing the conditions for effective advocates. For a project to reach its full potential and really shine, it requires a healthy and empowered advocacy of all three realms of project development:
- The designer: He advocates the way in which the spaces of a project work and interact with each other, their volumetry and their aesthetics.
- The builder: Advocates for safety, efficiency, cost containment and longevity of the building envelope.
- The client: Advocates for their needs now and in the future, financial realities, and all the ways they want the building to serve them.
A good project development process brings these three advocates together at a table to work together, advocate for what is important to them, fight for solutions together, and ultimately come up with a plan that is greater than the sum of its parts. . We are not talking about the first and easy solution here. It is the struggle that finally emerges, strengthened in every way by the creative and dynamic process that the three promoters have fostered and experienced. True cooperation.
The problem with design-build processes that hide the role of the architect behind the walls of the contractor is that it’s no longer a three-way conversation. The consideration of the concerns of the architect and the contractor still takes place, but behind closed doors, hidden from the client. In essence, the builder absorbs the design defense, digests it, and then communicates a simplified version to the client. The problem is obvious: real collaboration between the three defenders can no longer take place.
For smaller, simpler projects, that may be fine: updating bathroom surfaces, a change of doors and windows, a simple cabinet replacement, the deck out back. But with more complex projects like full kitchen and bath remodels, attic additions, basement renovations, full home remodels, and new homes, the client deserves (and truly requires) strong, independent voices to fully represent all advocates.
So should contractors use the design-build model? emphatically yes! But the development of the project must be done on a stable three-legged structure. It’s the best way to live up to John Ruskin’s admonition: “When we build, let it be work our descendants will thank us for.”