Compare
Design-Build vs. Design-Bid-Build
Design-bid-build finishes the drawings, then puts them out to competitive bid. Design-build brings the contractor in during design. Both are legitimate. They fail in different ways, and the right choice depends on how firm your scope already is.
Send a floor plan, a lease exhibit, or a landlord work letter. We come back with a real number and the assumptions behind it.
Side by side
| Category | Romco Commercial | Design-Bid-Build |
|---|---|---|
| When we get involved | During design, so constructability and cost are tested while changes are still cheap | After the drawings are complete and stamped |
| Price certainty | A budget early that tightens as design develops, with assumptions written down | A hard number, but only once the drawings are finished |
| Competitive tension | On the trades — we buy out each subcontract competitively and show you the bids | On the general contractor itself, which is genuinely useful pressure |
| Schedule | Overlaps design and procurement, so long-lead items release earlier | Sequential — design must finish before pricing starts |
| Change orders | Fewer from constructability, because conflicts are found in design | More, because the contractor priced drawings they had no chance to influence |
| Who owns a design error | Shared, which can blur accountability | Clearly the design team — a real advantage if a dispute arises |
Our view
The honest verdict
Design-bid-build genuinely wins on two things, and they matter. You get direct competitive pressure on the general contractor’s price, and you get clean separation of responsibility if a design error causes a problem later. If your scope is fully defined, unlikely to change, and you are buying a well-understood building, competitive bid is a sound choice and we will bid it. Design-build earns its keep when the existing building is uncertain, when the schedule is tight, or when the budget has to be validated before a lease is signed — because in those cases the cost of finding problems late is far higher than the cost of losing bid tension.
Other comparisons
Us vs. the Landlord’s Preferred Contractor
Most South Florida landlords have a contractor they suggest, and some leases require one for specific scopes. That is not a scam — it exists for real reasons — but it is worth understanding whose interests the arrangement is built around.
Read more →
Local GC vs. a National Rollout Contractor
If you are a brand opening locations in several states, a national rollout firm is a reasonable answer. If your locations are in Florida, the calculation changes — because the thing that actually delays a build-out here is jurisdictional, and jurisdictions are local.
Read more →
Hiring a GC vs. Managing the Subs Yourself
Contracting the trades directly removes the general contractor’s fee, and on a small, simple job that can be the right decision. What it does not remove is the work the general contractor was doing — it transfers that work, and the risk attached to it, to you.
Read more →
A Licensed GC vs. an Unlicensed Crew
There is always a crew that will do it cheaper and start on Monday. On residential handyman work that is often fine. On permitted commercial work in a leased building, the exposure sits with you, not with them — and that is the part worth being clear about.
Read more →
Renovating vs. Renewing the Lease As-Is
The alternative most owners actually choose is to do nothing — renew the lease, keep the space as it is, and spend the money elsewhere. Sometimes that is exactly right. It is worth being honest about when it is not.
Read more →
Next step
Ready to price your project?
Send a floor plan, a lease exhibit, or a landlord work letter. We come back with a real number and the assumptions behind it.