Architecture / June 6, 2018 / .
The factors influencing this decision include: Is the more expensive option a worthwhile investment? If it can be demonstrated that savings will arise as a consequence of incorporating the more expensive alternative, then the client is well advised to choose this option. The quicker the payback period, the more likely it is that the more expensive option will be chosen. How flexible is the client‟s budget to finance more robust, better quality or more economic structures or systems? Regardless of whether the client wants the more expensive alternative he or she may not be able to afford it. Retrofitting, however, is inconvenient, disruptive and much more expensive subsequently. Will the client occupy the building? Clients who develop to sell or lease may be less concerned with the operating and maintenance costs of the facility which will be passed onto the eventual purchaser or user of the facility. Clients who spend more initially will seek to recover their investment through higher rents or sales price. This approach may be adopted by future oriented private sector clients concerned with sustainability and green building issues. What is the life-span of the building? The shorter the planned life span of the building the less appropriate it is to incorporate robust and durable materials and systems.
The contractor is selected on the basis of competitive tendering on most building contracts. The price which the contractor quotes for the job is heavily influenced by both the amount and intensity of the competition expected. In an open tendering arrangement the level of the competition is at its most intense and contractors must submit highly competitive bids to have any chance of winning the contract. This usually secures a rock bottom price. With selective tendering a limited number of competent contractors are invited to tender for the job, this limited competition arrangement results in a keen price being obtained. In the case of a negotiated tender there is no explicit competition and the parties seek to agree a fair price for the work, implicit competition exists, however, as the employer can break off negotiations. If there is no competition the contractor can, in fact, name his price. The tendering arrangement is, therefore, one of the most cost significant decisions a client will make in the course of a building contract.
The relationship of quality to cost is often expressed in the saying that you get what you pay for. Cost is a critical factor in most building projects and some clients will seek a low price. Low price and maximum price competition, however, often have negative impacts on quality standards and achieving best value for money overall. In the current economic climate below cost tendering has heightened the risk of contractor insolvency and it may be difficult and expensive to obtain protection from this risk. Unrealistic and inadequate budgets often lead to projects becoming finance driven where cheaper options are preferred to better or more sustainable alternatives. Certain clients may have fixed budgets which may not be exceeded in any circumstances. In such circumstances the client will expect the quantity surveyor to maintain rigorous cost control during the project in order to deliver the project within budget. Designing to achieve such cost limits might curtail the introduction of beneficial features and or variations which may result in excessive running and maintenance costs later on.
This is where a client appoints consultants to produce the design, select the contractor and supervise the work through to completion. The contractor is usually selected on some basis of competition. The traditional procurement route prioritises quality aspects of the project and is also effective in delivering economic designs on most projects. The chief drawback of the approach is the extended project duration due to the need to complete the design prior to tender.