When it comes to project delivery methods, choosing which to use is one of the most important early decisions in any construction project. It sets the foundation for how the project will be organized, defining roles, responsibilities, and how teams will interact from planning through construction.
With several proven approaches available, understanding how each method functions and the trade-offs involved is essential. This guide breaks down the most common delivery methods to help you evaluate your options and align your choice with your project goals.
Project delivery methods are what define how a construction project is structured from initial planning through final completion. It determines the contractual relationships between the owner, designer, and builder, and lays out the sequence of key activities. Each method comes with its own contract format, risk-sharing structure, and level of owner involvement.
Ultimately, it answers questions like: Who holds the contracts? When does construction begin relative to design? How is pricing determined? The delivery method you choose impacts the project’s budget control, timeline, flexibility, and communication. Selecting the right method early can help reduce risk and improve alignment with your goals.
There’s no one-size-fits-all solution. Each of the project delivery methods approaches team structure, timelines, and risk differently. Your choice will depend on your project’s complexity, budget, timeline, and collaboration needs. Here are the most common approaches used in industrial and commercial construction:
Design-bid-build is the traditional method for construction delivery. The process is sequential: the project is fully designed, then competitively bid out to contractors, and finally built by the selected firm. The owner holds separate contracts with the designer and the builder.
This method offers a clear separation of responsibilities. The designer creates the plans and specifications, while the contractor executes the work. Competitive bidding also promotes pricing transparency by allowing the owner to evaluate multiple proposals.
However, DBB generally results in longer schedules since construction can’t begin until design is complete. It also limits contractor input early on, which may reduce opportunities for cost-saving or constructability feedback during design.
Design-build offers a more integrated approach. The owner signs a single contract with one entity responsible for both design and construction. This firm may be a single organization or a team of partners. With overlapping design and construction activities, projects often progress faster than with DBB.
Design-build fosters collaboration between designers and builders from the outset. It simplifies communication and often leads to innovative solutions, improved coordination, and shorter timelines.
A potential downside is reduced owner control over specific design details, as decisions are often made by the design-build team. Pricing is typically established earlier, which can limit transparency into how design choices affect cost. Still, for owners seeking speed and unified accountability, design-build is an efficient option.
In the Construction Manager at Risk model (CMAR), the owner hires a construction manager during the design phase. The construction manager provides preconstruction services and ultimately commits to delivering the project within a guaranteed maximum price.
One of CMAR’s strengths is early contractor involvement. The construction manager helps refine the design, assess costs, and provide constructability input during the early stages. This can lead to better budget alignment and fewer changes during construction.
CMAR relies on strong collaboration and trust between the owner and the construction manager. It may come with higher upfront costs and require careful contract coordination, but it offers a good balance between control, risk management, and collaboration.
Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) is a collaborative model where the owner, designer, builder, and often key trades sign a single, multi-party agreement. Everyone works toward shared outcomes with clear financial incentives for success, creating a unified team with a common mission.
IPD encourages open communication, early problem-solving, and transparency throughout the project lifecycle. It’s ideal for complex projects that demand speed, innovation, and tight coordination.
However, IPD requires a high degree of commitment and legal coordination. It works best when all parties have experience with collaborative delivery models and are invested in collective success. When done right, IPD can significantly reduce waste, accelerate timelines, and improve project outcomes.
Each method offers distinct benefits depending on your priorities, whether it’s speed, cost control, collaboration, or owner oversight. Here’s a quick comparison:
Picking one of the project delivery methods starts with defining your project’s goals, risk tolerance, and available resources. Do you need speed? A high degree of design control? Budget predictability? If fast delivery is a top priority, design-build or IPD may be the right fit. If transparency and control are essential, DBB or CMAR may offer better alignment.
Also, consider your internal capacity. IPD and CMAR require active involvement and strong collaboration, while DBB may be easier to manage for teams more familiar with traditional processes. Public or heavily regulated projects often benefit from the clear documentation and open competition that DBB provides.
By evaluating your needs early in the process, you can choose a delivery method that supports your objectives and reduces costly surprises later.
Selecting a delivery method is more than a procedural decision; it shapes your entire project experience. With the right approach, you gain clarity, accountability, and efficiency throughout every phase of your build.
At Moltus Building Group, we help industrial and commercial clients make these decisions with confidence. Our team has deep expertise across all major construction models and works closely with owners to align strategy with business outcomes. Whether you’re launching a new facility or tackling a capital upgrade, we’re here to guide you every step of the way.
Contact Moltus Building Group today to start a conversation about project delivery methods and which is right for your next build.
Our Design-Bid-Build approach separates design, bidding, and construction into distinct phases, ensuring detailed oversight and transparent cost management. Contact us today to discover how we can streamline your construction project and make your vision a reality.