In this episode of Laying the Foundation, we sit down with Mike Thole, an Associate Principal at CMBA Architects, to demystify the increasingly popular "Design-Build" project delivery method. Moving beyond the traditional silos of design-bid-build, Mike explains how bringing architects and contractors together from day one creates a unified "three-legged stool" of collaboration between the owner, the designer, and the builder. The discussion dives into the practical benefits of this model, from real-time cost transparency and accelerated schedules to the critical role of team chemistry, while also identifying which project types are best suited for this integrated approach. Whether you’re an owner looking for more certainty in your next build or an industry professional navigating a shifting landscape, this conversation offers a clear roadmap for understanding how partnership-driven design is shaping the future of the built environment.
(Skyler): Welcome back, everybody, to another episode of the Laying the Foundation podcast. My name is Skyler. Today, joining me for a special "Leading the Way" episode is Mike Thole from our Cedar Falls office. Mike is an associate principal here at CMBA. Welcome to the show, Mike.
(Mike): Hey, thanks, Skyler. Happy to be on.
(Skyler): Happy to have you. Today, you're going to tell us all about "Design-Build"—what it entails, when to use it, and perhaps when it might not be the best fit. For those who might be more familiar with the traditional "Design-Bid-Build" method, or for someone like me who is still learning the ropes, what exactly is Design-Build and how does it differ from the traditional option?
(Mike): In the traditional "Design-Bid-Build" world, projects are often dictated by the funding source—many schools, hospitals, and municipal works are required to go that route. We architects work on a design for months or even a year; the project then goes out to bid, and through that process, the general contractor and the rest of the team are assembled. The clear difference in Design-Build is that you remove the traditional bidding phase.
Typically, there is a single contract for the owner, and most importantly, the contractor is brought on board day one. That collaboration starts immediately between the architect, owner, and contractor.
(Skyler): And that really stems from having a close relationship with the contractor and the client. Is this a trend we're seeing an increase in lately?
(Mike): When appropriate, yes. Much of it has to do with schedule and supply chain issues. By eliminating the bidding timeline, we can hit the ground running faster. Because the contractor is involved from the beginning, we get early cost feedback and constructability reviews. We can talk through details while we're designing, rather than finding out months later that a detail is too expensive or difficult to build. Clients value the trust built through these relationships.
(Skyler): Which industries or project types tend to favor the Design-Build side?
(Mike): It’s common in manufacturing, industrial projects, dental clinics, and privately funded childcare facilities—essentially anything that doesn't meet the threshold requiring a public bid.
(Skyler): How does the architect's role shift in this model?
(Mike): It depends on who is brought on board first. If we are architect-led, we might help the owner interview and select the general contractor. If the contractor brings us on, we work under them. Either way, the contractor is involved even in site selection, which is valuable for evaluating costs. Our documentation also looks different; we typically don't produce massive specification books for Design-Build projects. We rely more on communication and trust with the contractor regarding pricing and execution of details.
(Skyler): That makes sense. It seems to require a high level of team chemistry.
(Mike): Absolutely. Culture and chemistry are based on trust, not just a transaction. I like to think of it as a three-legged stool: the owner, the contractor, and the architect. We all have to collaborate for the project to stand. This extends to our consultants—structural, civil, mechanical, and electrical engineers—and even the subcontractors. Everyone needs the right mindset to provide expertise when drawings might not be fully developed initially.
(Skyler): What are some of the major challenges or hiccups in this style?
(Mike): Projects succeed when there are clear goals, expectations, and budgets established at the start. They can fail if communication breaks down. Because these projects move quickly, decisions are made fast. We have to keep the owner informed to avoid unexpected change orders. We also have to set the quality standards early since we don't have that traditional spec book. For example, if a client wants high-end lighting rather than the cheapest fixtures, that needs to be communicated clearly even if it isn't fully spelled out in a plan yet.
(Skyler): How does Design-Build change the conversation about cost transparency?
(Mike): In traditional projects, architects provide a cost opinion. With the GC on board early, we get real market costs immediately. Many contractors work with a "Guaranteed Maximum Price," which gives the owner more certainty. Most of the contractors we work with are "open book," so there's a lot of transparency regarding overhead and profit.
(Skyler): How does the fast-track schedule dictate design decisions?
(Mike): We have to look at lead times early. Post-COVID, availability was a huge issue. We once had a large warehouse project where we had to order the building components a full year in advance. We had to finalize the building shape and code requirements quickly and then design the rest of the facility within those constraints. We often produce a permit set of drawings to get the project off the ground and then work through finer details with the contractor as construction progresses.
(Skyler): From a client’s perspective, what is the learning curve?
(Mike): It’s much more collaborative and less linear. We need to be transparent about budget, scope, and timeline because things move rapidly. Clients often appreciate having everyone at the table at once. We're also open to adjusting our designs if a contractor has a more efficient method of building a detail. We aren't above learning new methods from the people in the field.
(Skyler): Do you think we'll see more Design-Build in the future?
(Mike): Yes, especially as owners look for the best value rather than just the lowest price. The rapid schedules of today’s market really favor this method. Even though there's a high level of trust, we're also seeing contractors adopt more formalized processes—like using Procore for submittals—which gives owners the best of both worlds: speed and documentation.
(Skyler): What practical advice would you give to architects new to this concept?
(Mike): The biggest thing is understanding that a contractor is a great resource. Don't be intimidated by being on a job site or working directly with them. Utilize their expertise, ask questions, and focus on being a team. At the end of the day, consult with your architecture team on which delivery method is best for your specific project. We’re here to be a resource even before you have a project finalized.
(Skyler): Well, Mike, I really appreciate you sitting down and talking to me about Design-Build. I've learned a lot, and I hope our listeners have too.
(Mike): You bet. I appreciate it.