Construction Management and Economics (1994) 12, 155-163 Design and build: a survey of construction contractors’ views AKINTOLA AKINTOYE Department of Building and Surveying, Glasgow Caledonian University, Comcaddens Road, Glasgow G4 OBA, UK Received 3 April 1993; revised 13 August 1993, Design and build (D & B) has become a popular mode of procuring construction work. A total of52 construction firms responsible for 2 investigate their current » of UK construction outputfor 1901 were surveyed using astructured questionnaire 10 iews on this procurement route. The Novation D & B is widely used although not favoured by contractors. The contractors would like consultants to ‘and specification and would rather support the develop and co continue to provide them with concept design, mastruct technique. ‘Design and manage’ and “design, manage and construct’ are not attractive to clients and resented by contractors. The usage of D & Bon private sector projects is ~21% of work-load from this sector compared to 12", from public sector. Keyteords: Design and build, procurement, design and manage. Introduction ‘Many major private and public sector contracts are now let to Design and Build contractors. The system is working. It is gaining credibility’ (Chevin, 1992). Design and build (D & B)has become a popular mode of procuring construction work. A lot of advantages have ‘been claimed for its use even for complex construction, work. Watson (1990) reported on the use of D & Bon 390 bed hospital project and described the achievement ofthe D & B team on this project asa ‘rarity’. According to him, ‘the team broke all records in preparing from blank paper to start on site within six months, Hospital, lead-in time by traditional routes would have taken si years’. One of the most important advantages acclaimed, to D&B is greater price certainty because of shorter lead-in and construction timetable, ‘Much research has been undertaken to examine D&B in terms of its development, the construction industry’s perceptions of it, its organizational forms and its attributes (Pepinster, 1987; Rowlinson, 1987; Swan, 1987; Janssens, 1991; Hughes, 1992). It is not the intention of this study to review these aspects of the D &B procurement route. The essence of this study is, to investigate the current views of construction contrac- tors on this procurement route. The views of the UK 0144-6193. 1004. & FN, Spon contractors were sought by means of a structured questionnaire survey. Itis expected that this survey will complement other studies on performance, attributes and usage of this procurement system from the contrac- tors’ point of view. Survey methodology A four page questionnaire (available from the author) ‘was mailed to 100 UK construction contractors engaged in D&B. The selection of these contractors is not random, but based on a list of 100 construction contractors, published in Contractor File 1992 (New Builder, 1992) who are engaged in D & B. The ques- Hlonnaires were accompanied with a letter, indicating the objectives of the study, addressed to the managing directors of these firms, Within 1 month of mailing, 30 completed question naires had been returned. A reminder letter with another copy of the questionnaire was mailed to the 70 firms who had not replied. A further 33 replies were received within 1 month of the reminder letters. Table 1 shows the number of questionnaires sent and received.156 ‘Table 1 Statistics ofthe survey questionnaires ‘Number of questionnaires sent 100 Number of positive replies replied 52 Number of negative replies received n Per cent of positive replies to total sent 32 Per cent of total replies to total sent 63 6 ————— van negatives replies wrote letter i lation tothe following 1 firm ats gone into seceverships 2 frm has not yet undertaken any design and build projects: 3 fem does aot have spre time to fl questionnaire; 4 frm has corporate policy not to divulge sensitive information; 5. questionnaire act substantially completed 6. company has policy not to participate in questionnice surveys fue to many questionnaires being received from many sources Akintoye Table 4 Years firms have been involved in Years Number Per cent <10 ° ° 11-20 7 B a 7 3 51-100 8 29 101-200 u 2 >200 1 2 Not indicated 1 2 Toual 32 100 Table 5 Man ser fn he a3 Tune 2d of he ropes = Dosen Sane Face” Tomoe (lion) Nomar Peron Sapetociome: «2 som no eben Eretts soon UB Pokaan 2 pelere pein ; 2 er experience inthe sonst industry. Using iS bag fmton nnd work ‘apence inthe comtructin Direc include marketing, evelopment, commercial, cnginecring and business development. ‘Marketing maneger includes marketing services manager, building terprie manages, Business development, assistant marketing ‘manager and corporate market research manager. (Chief planners include chief planaing engineer and deputy chief engineet Table 3 Construction work experience of re- spondents Experience in years Number Percent = 1 @ 610 2 4 11-20 B 23 21-30 a 40 31-40 5 29 Total 2 100 Respondents’ positions and working experience of the construction industry ‘Tables 2 und 3 indicate the position of the respondents, and their working experiences in the construction industry. More than 50%, of the respondents are directors, Ninety-four per cent have more than 10 years’ industry as bases it can be inferred that the respondents have adequate knowledge of the theme of this study to support confidence in the data obtained through the questionnaires. General information on the construction firms ‘Table 4 shows that the majority of the firms (85%) have been involved in the activities of the construction industry for more than 20 years. Table 5 indicates that the bulk of the firms (96%) surveyed were responsible for an annual turnover of more than £20 million in the last 3 years (1989-1992). These firms can be considered as either medium or large size construction firms. The ‘mean yearly turnover of these firms over the past 3 years was approximately £9000 million (mean= £192 mil- lion). Design and build activities of construction firms in private and public sectors Fifty per cent of the firms have <10% of a year's involvement in D & B contracts. This is not surprising, if one looks at the background to the development ofSurvey of construction contractors’ views Table 6 Years firms have been involved in Number Per cent ° Ww 18 5 5 96 96 96 96 96 100 ‘Table 7 Construction works procured based on D & B as percentage of all work from public and private sectors, respectively Percentage of Public sector Private sector Number Percent Number Per cent ° 10 9 3 6 Ls n 21 x B o0 10 10 1 11-20 0 woo 26 21-30 6 2 6 2 31-40 3 6 4 8 4150 1 2 5 18 >50 1 2 3 6 Total 32 mo 52 100 D &B as a new contract procurement system (CIOB, 1988; Hughes, 1992). Construction enjoyed a boom in the 1980s due to favourable economic and political conditions that pro- duced incentive and encouragement for private sector investment in construction works. This period wit- nessed the urgency of clients for early procurement of their building to secure an economic windfall. Coupled, with this, the clients were interested in guaranteed lower construction costs. The attributes of D & B fitted these requirements and awareness of the clients. ‘Table 7 shows the D & B works from the private and Public sectors as a percentage of the overall work-loads, ofeach of these sectors. Analysis of these data shows that, on average, 12 and 21°, of the workload of contractors, from public and private sectors, respectively were procured by D&B. Approximately 20°,, of the res- ponding firms have never been involved in public sector contracts using D & B, compared with 6% from the private sector. This may suggest that the principal characteristics of the D & B are better suited to the Private sector. This is not surprising in the sense that the private sector is usually regarded as being price and Profit conscious and has less restraint to changes ‘compared with the public sector which is associated with ‘bureaucracy and the need for open accountability, 157 Design and build techniques D & B means that the contractor accepts the responsib- ility for both designs and construction of the building to meet the requirements of the client (CIOB, 1988). In recent times variants if this procurement route have become noticeable (CIOB, 1988) including the follow ing: design development and construction, design and ‘management and British Property Federation (BPF) system. Six techniques (or hybrids) of D & B, from construc- tion procurement literature and practice, were identified and defined for the respondents. These techniques arc as follows. 1. Traditional design and build, The contractor accepts the total responsibility for both the design and construction to meet the requirement of the client. 2. Package deal (including turnkey contracts), The contractor provides standard buildings or system buildings that are adapted to suit clients’ space and functional requirements. 3. Design and manage. The contractor gets a fee for ‘managing all aspects of planning and design and supervising the subcontractors. The contractor has design responsibility. 4. Design, manage and construct. This is similar to “design and manage’ except that the contractor is involved in construction of some work sections in addition to coordinating the activities of the subcontractors on the site 5. Novation D & B. The client passes his architect to the contractor to produce detailed drawings as part of the contractor's team. During the design stage through to the appointment of the D & B contrac- tor, the architect works directly for and is paid by the client. Once a contractor had been appointed the architect's appointment is assigned to the contractor for whom the architect produces any outstanding information which is necessary 10 construct the work, Payment for this section of the architect's work is made by the contractor. In some ceases, once practical completion of the work has been reached, the architect reverts to being employed by the client to prepare the list of defective and outstanding items, monitor the ‘completion of the same and certify the completion of the project at the end of the defects liability period. Payment for this section of the architect's work is made by the client. 6. Develop and construct. This is a hybrid of D & B in which the contractor inherits the design that ‘might have been produced by client’s consultants up to Stage D on the RIBA Architect’s Appoint- ment Scale. This is developed further by the158 Table $ Techniques and methods of D&B ‘Techniques/methods ‘Mostly used Favoured Traditional design and build 28 32 629, Package deal including 8 2 turkey Design and manage 3 2 4% Design, manage and construct 5 9 17 Novation design and build 22 2 4% Develop and construct 25 48% 12238 contractor in terms of detailing taking into account the construction technique to be adopted for the project. This is different from Novation D & B in the sense that the architect that provides the concept design is not passed to the contractor by the client, ‘The respondents were asked to identify the hybrids of D&B that they had widely been involved with in the past and the ones preferred or favoured. The aim was to identify the technique(s) of D &B mostly used in practice. Some of the respondents identified more than fone technique: ‘Table 8 shows that traditional D & B, develop and construct and Novation D &B are the D&B tech- niques that are widely encountered in practice. Design and manage and design, manage and construct are less popular, This is probably because these types of procurement system, which are mostly fee-based, are similar to management contracting in terms of attri- butes, Management contracting is generally regarded as involving little or no risk on the part of the management contractor who has no incentive to keep the construction costs down. What the client is looking for is the possibility of transferring the bulk of the risks involved in the construction work to the contractor by demanding. fa guaranteed sum. The table also shows thar the traditional package deal (including turnkey contracts) is not widely used. ‘A majority of the contractors (62",) favour the procurement of construction work by the continuous use of traditional D & B contracts where the contractor hhas full responsibility for the design, fom concept design to detailed and production drawings and con- struction services. This is followed by the package deal (including Turnkey contracts) (33",) ~ another method. of construction procurement where the contractor is in total control of design and construction. "The current use of develop and construct is less favoured by contractors, Given a 48", current usage, ‘only 23°,, of respondents favour its future use. Novation D & Bis resented by almost all respondents; only 4°, of the respondents favour its continuous use as a D & B technique, Akintoye Table 9 Projects on which respondents firms have used D&B Types of Private sector Public sector project Per cent Number Per cent Health/hospital 163 3 Educational a OR BOS Housing Ba 4 % 31 ‘Commercial 8 8 6 0 2 4 Leisure so Industria/defence! 38 73 wo distribution Civil engincering 17 33 % 31 Refurbishment 24 46 7 B Table 10 Project types. on which respondents expect the use of D & Bin furure Types of Private sector Public sector project Number Per cent Number Per cent Healthjhospital 152916 Educational io om mw ge Housing a #6 6 ‘Commercial Obices Ss SS if Revail/shopping 17 33 1 2 Leisure a 2 ow Industral/defence) distribution 3669 w 18 Givilengincering 10 19 21 Refurbishment 713 6 2 Use of design and build on project type basis ‘Table 9 shows that D & B had been mostly used on the procurement of office and industrial buildings in the private sector, followed by refurbishment and residen~ tial projects. D & B had not been widely encountered (<35% response in all the cases) by the contractors on public sector projects. “The respondents were asked to indicate the project types in which they expect a future design and build procurement route. The essence of this question was to find out if the contractors expect the furure use of D & B to depart from the past. Table 10 shows that respon- dents do not expect a significant change in the use of D & Bonaproject type basis in the future. However, the use of D &B procurement methods on public sectorSurvey of construction contractors? views 159 Table 11 Time, cost and quality advantages derived (per cent) by using D&B compared with traditional alternatives EE Time Cost Quality Percentage Number Per cent Number Percent Number Per cent ° 2 4 2 eer 4 1 4 8 8 2 24 10 “ a 9 38 3 “4 1-15 1 “4 9 1s 5 10 16-20 8 16 3 6 2 4 >20 9 18 2 4 2 4 No response 6 2 7 410 20 Total 50 wm 32 10032 100 office building is expected to increase while this is expected to decline in relation to private sector civil ‘engineering (down from 33 to 19%, and refurbishment (down from 46 to 13%) works. Some of the reasons given for future decline in the Procurement of private sector civil engineering and, refurbishment projects using D & B method were: 1. difficulty in defining clients’ requirements; 2. difficulty in the apportionment of the risk involved; 3. clients unwillingness to appoint contractors early; 4. susceptibility of work to potential change (varia- tions from client); 5. lack of clarity in client brief - difficulty in obtain- ing accurate client brief 6. complexity of construction. ‘The use of design and build procurement methods for refurbishment projects is particularly not favoured by ‘many respondents. ‘Time, cost and quality benefits of design and build ‘Table 11 shows the level of expected time, cost and quality advantages claimed by the respondents by the use of D & B procurement methods. A majority of respondents (54%, ) claimed that the use of D & B for project procurement can account for up to, 20%, reduction in overall project time compared to the traditional JCTS0 contracts. Table 12 shows a list of factors identified by the respondents as contributing to the time advantage by the use of a D & B procurement method In terms of cost, a majority of respondents (62",) believe that up to 20%, can be saved by the use of D & B, This supports the view by Kenworthy (1992) that the cost of building can be reduced with D & B compared JCTSO by ~15%. The cost savings can be associated with being greater in the use of materials and construction techniques. Table 12 Factors claimed by respondents as responsible for reduction in overall project time using D & B compared to the {raditional JCTSO contracts A list of factors identified by respondents 1, Incorporation of design process into construction programme integration of desiga and construction 2. Overlap of design and construction (reduced lead-in period) ~ “Time from i I design to on-site can be as litte as 1 month and site work can progress while design is being finalized” ‘Speed of response to alterations ~ design changes can often be accommodated more speedily Buildability Pre-contract planning is more det One route decisions ~ better coordination and easier decision making ‘Motivational benefi of the design and construction teams being on the same side Fewer reasons for extension of time 3. 4 5 6. Opportunity to choose construction methods with shorter lead-in site times 7 8 9. Contractors in best position to reconcile time with materials specification method of construction 11, Design development and pricing run in parallel 12, Overall scheme (design and specification) agreed with client at start of contract 13. Better rationalization of design detailing 14. Better and right solution prior to activity on site minimizes abortive work 15._ Short cuts available to designer/builder- less parties involved in the design160 Akintoye ‘Table 13. Factors claimed by respondents as responsible for reduction in overall project cost using D & B compared to the traditional JCTSO contracts AA list of factors identified by respondents ‘Cost effective design - simplified design solutions ‘Working to an accurate fixed cost Shorter period from conception to completion Barly ordering ‘Value engineering appraisal through: (@) alternative solutions to engineering problems; (b) early cost appraisal of efficiency of plan layouts; (6) selection of alternative materials and method of construction 6, Cost benefit are discussed as part of design discussions 7. In-house ability to buy in materials of equal quality at lower prices 8. Reduced design fees 9, Reduced building cost on M & E 10. Better knowledge of construction solutions 11. Better knowledge for specification of alternative materials 12, Contractor buildability input 13. No split responsibilities between consultants contractors and specialist subcontractors: {a) release of designers to design exclusively with contractor adopting administration roles (b) elimination of overlapping functions; (©) contractor control of time scales (@) streamlined communications 14, Limited variation opportunity (no potential claims): fewer problems delays during construction 15, Contractor's expertise in developing ‘the solution’ first time 16. Contractor has tight control on specification in relation to cost plan 17. Minimum construction and design risk to client — contractor takes on board more risk than traditional contracts 18. The team know their capability and best practice and are able to work within it 20. Competitive design fees and ability of construction teams to point out expensive options used 21, Practical solutions reflecting current market conditions: contractors’ experience of construction market 22. D & B motivates contractor to perform in shortest time 23, Reduced construction 24. Vulnerable to very competitive subcontract packages ‘Table 13 shows the factors identified by the respond~ cents as being responsible for cost advantage by the use of D&B procurement method. The cost advantages are summarized by the comment of one of the respondents as follows: ‘A wider and more up-to-date access to the procurement market is available via the contractor's ‘organisation and therefore better opportunities exist to ‘examine the cost implications of design options.” Respondents did not expect to sce significant quality advantages following the use of the D & B method. ‘Twenty per cent of respondents did not respond to this, question. This may imply one of three things: they expecta reduction in quality, they arenot sure or they do not understand the question, Professional discipline available in-house for D&B D&B requires that the contractor is in a position 10 have access to architects and engineers either in-house or in-house supplemented by external consultants for Table 14 Professional disciplines available in-house Sources Number Per cent of firms Architecture 16 3 Structures 2 2 ‘Mechanical engineering 16 31 Electrical engineering 7 33 Process services 5 10 Construction management 47 90 None 4 8 complex projects, The contractors were asked to identi- fy which of the listed professional services were available in-house to provide a design service exclusively or to be supplemented by the external consultants. ‘Table 14 shows that almost all the firms (90%) have construction management services provided in-house. Professional disciplines in relation to architectural design and structures are available in <50",, of the firms. This supports the high usage (42) of Novation D&B. Alternatively, construction firms may haveSurvey of construction contractors’ views Table 15 Responsibilities for client appointed architectsand engineers Frequency Number Per cent of firms Design coordination 2 ro Vetting design variations 2 a Site inspection|supervision officer 12 23 ‘Maintenance manual preparation 15 30 Providing concept design 40 7 Providing specification 3 8 Quality control 3 6 None 2 4 1. “Prowsion of concept and detsiled design under our specialized project managers’ direction’; 2. preparation of working drawings for schemes; 3. providing alternative design to ensure client have maximum ‘alue for moneys 4. envelopment with contractor in discussing proposals with client at submision stages specialized design function Table 16 Group responsible for introduction of D & B for most project procurement Group Number Per cent Glieat 2 54 Contractors 7 B Architects 1 2 ‘Quantity surveyors 6 2 Client/contractors dialogue 5 10 Client/contraccors/QS dialogue 5 10 formed consortia with consultant architects and engin- cers to offer D & B services, Responsibilities for client-appointed consulting architects and engincers ‘Table 15 shows the responsibilities that respondents wish clicnt-appointed consulting architects and engin- cers to undertake in D & B contracts Contractors want client-appointed architects and engineers to provide project concept design and speci- fication. The responses suggest that contractors want architects to be involved up to the concept design stage in the RIBA scale of appointment. This correlates with, respondents favouring develop and construct contracts, and a reluctance to accept from the client, architects, appointed for concept design and specification. Initiation of D & B procurement route ‘Table 16 shows individuals or groups that could be responsible for introducing the D & B procurement 161 route on most construction projects. This table shows that in the majority of cases, initiative for the use of D &B came from clients. ‘Nonetheless, contractors and quantity surveyors have prominent part to play in the use of the D&B procurement route, The contractors’ introduction of, D & B procurement could take the form of advertising, presentations and providing incentives to clients to place an order. In view of the importance of the need for awareness of D &B by the clients, the respondents were asked about the marketing activities of their firms towards D & B. Sixty per cent of the firms have a functioning marketing unit to support their D & B activities. To be able to. provide an adequate D & B service eight firms (16%, of the total) have a design and build division as a subsidiary of the main construction firm. For the rest of the firms, (84%, ), D & B is an integral part of the main construc- tion activities General comments on design and build ‘The respondents were asked 10 give their opinions on some of the comments generally made by clients, architects, contractors, quantity surveyors, engineers, te., about D & B procurement routes by indicating. whether they agree or disagree with a list of statements on D & Bin the questionnaire. The level of agreement is, ‘measured on a scale of 5-0 (5 denotes strongly agree and 0 denotes strongly disagree). The essence of this section of the study is to cross-examine some of the earlier responses of respondents. “Table 17 shows that respondents generally disagreed with the opinion that the consulting architects and engineers should provide leeway in terms of design and specifications (level of agreement = 1.67). The respond cents, however, agreed (level of agreement =3.63) that the clients often employ their own consultants to provide the concept design, Contractors were divided (level of agreement =2.92) on whether the client’s brief should be limited to basic space and performance as contended by D & B purists. It is @ general consensus of the respondents (level of agreement=3.79) that the success of the D & B depends ‘toagreater extent on the quality of the client’s brief. The fact that the contractors prefer a traditional D & B is supported to a great extent by the respondents that D&B should put a contractor in charge of the whole Project both the design and construction (level of agreement = 4.25) ‘There is general agreement that a better flow of information and communication is achieved by the use of D & B compared with a traditional contract procure- ‘ment route. Hughes (1992) noted that, ‘The communi162 cation patterns observed in design and build projects are amongst the most effective to be found on any form of procurement’. Summary and conclusions ‘A questionnaire survey of this nature may not neces- sarily provide conclusive evidence of the complete views of contractors on the use of a D & B procurement route. However, the total turnover of firms surveyed (£9000 million) represents ~25% of UK contractors’ output, for 1991. This and the calibre of the respondents, in terms of their work experience in the construction industry and the strategic position they occupied in their respective firms, give us confidence in the opinions expressed in this study. The results of the study are summarized and commented as follows, 1, The Novation D & B (where the client passes the consultants to the contractor) is widely used in practice, but is not favoured by the contractors ‘This is because it does not put contractor's organization in charge of the whole project but gives them the responsibility. The contractors would like the consultants to continue to provide them with concept design and specification and would rather support the develop and construct technique, 2. ‘Design and manage’ and ‘design, manage and construct’ which are mostly fee-based are not attractive to clients because they offer no incentive for contractors to control cost. The use of these techniques is equally not favoured by the con- tractors either because it offers no potential support from the clients or because contractors would like to convince the client that they are capable of bearing the contract risk (a very attractive feature of D & B for clients}. Akintoye 3. The critics’ contention that D & B cannot be used ‘on complex projects is not supported by this survey. This survey shows that D & B has been, used on private sector healthy/hospital, refurbish- ment and civil-engineering projects. However, most respondents expect a decline of D & B on refurbishment and civil engineering projects due to difficulties in defining clients’ requirements, difficulties in apportioning risk, lack of clarity in clients’ briefs, ete. Refurbishment and civil engin- ceering contacts are associated with job variations, remeasurement and repricing as construction pro- gresses, all of which are not conducive to D & B procurement. Although, the current use of D & B for refurbishment and civil engineering is high, its ‘expected lower use due to the identified problems, shows that D & B contractors have been relatively unsuccessful in these construction submarkets. ‘Changes in the nature and volume of work, which characterize refurbishment and civil engineering, contracts, may be costly to client using D & B. ‘This is neither in the long-run interestof client nor the D & B contractor who may lose the trust of the, client. 4, The use of D &B in private sector projects is about 21°), of work-load from this sector com- pared with 12°, for the public sector. Although, the D & Bisa growing market it remains necessary for contractors to improve the private and public clients’ awareness of the D&B procurement route. ‘There is need to establish a formal relationship between, contractors and consultants engaged in D & B: Nova tion D & B may not necessarily be the answer in view of divided loyalties to the contractor and the client that may be associated with this approach. Nonetheless, D&B contractors require the services of consultant designers as D & B's share of the construction market Table 17 Level of agreement on general comments on D & B procurement General comments Level of agreement [Better flow of information and communication than traditional contracts| 451 ur contractors in charge of the whole project 425 ‘Success or not of D & B depends on the quality of client's brief 3.79 Designers’ membership of construction team provides flexibility and better quality of design 378 Clients often appoint designers to provide concept design 3.63 Contractor can relate berter to specialized needs on a project than the consultants 3.39 Provides competitive prices for each section of work comprising a project 3.10 D&B restricts clients from making changes to project requirement once tender is accepted 2.95, D&B works better where client's brief is limited to basic space and performance requirements 2.92 D&B provides for design to be done ata staggering speed into the construction stage 278 ts hardly give contractors free hands in terms of design ideas and materials specifications 251 ‘Consultants should provide leeway in terms of design and specification such that contractors 167 cannot compromise on qualitySurvey of construction contractors’ views continues to grow. The survey supports the notion that, D &B firms are looking to consultant designers (archi tects, structural engineers, etc.) rather than employing, in-house designers. ‘The overriding success of D &B demands clear understanding of obligations and performance stand- ards contained in the D&B contract on the part of parties to the contract and the clarity of construction clients’ briefs. D & B contractors nced to be innovative as much as possible in their approach to D & B and ‘ensure that construction clients are in a position to derive the benefits of this procurement method without sacrificing quality, if the confidence of clients is 10 continue. Although, respondents claimed that aD & B. procurement route is time and cost saving, it should not bbe seen merely as a means to achieve cheaper construc tion, butalso asameans to achieve better construction, if is to continue to find favour with construction clients. References ‘Ghevin, D. (1992) Multiple choice: design and buildin special feature on design and build, Building, CCLVIL, 24. 163 CIOB (1988) Gode of Estimating Practice, Supplement No. 2, Design and Build, Chartered Institute of Building, Ber shire, UK. Hughes, WP, (1992), Analysis of the JOT Design and Build ‘contract, Construction Papers, No. 6, Chartered Institute of Building, Berkshire, UK. Janssens, D.E.L. (1991) Design and Build Explained, Macmil- lan, London: Kenworthy, N. (1992) An old wives’ tale firmly rebutted, special feature on design and build, Building, CCLVH, 25, ‘New Builder (1992) Contractors File 1992, Who Does What, supplement to New Civil Engineer and New Builder (edited. by M. Winney), pp. 45-9, Pepinster, C. (1987), Where D & B gives a better perform- ance, CBI-Nexws, May, 19-20. Ridout, G. (1992) Brief encounters in special feature on design and build, Building, CCLVHL, 34 Rowlinson, S. (1987) Design build, its development and, ‘present status, Occasional paper No. 36, Chartered Institute of Building. ‘Swan, R. (1987) The profit motive behind the trend, Contract Journal, July, 12-13. Watson, K. (1990), West Fife hospital; race against time, Building, COLY, 61