Thoughts on the Bidding Process for Construction of New Schools

April 12, 2004

by David B. South

David B. South,
President of the Monolithic Dome Institute

A few nights ago, I ran into an interesting situation while making a presentation about Monolithic domes to a school board. One of the school board members said. "It is extremely important that we bid this project out." He was inferring that if they selected a Monolithic Dome they wouldn't be able to bid it. I explained to him that there were several people that could bid the Monolithic Dome and also explained that every single piece of the construction of any school building had to be bid.

On further reflection I realized how fickle the bid process is. For instance, if an architect specifies a certain type of roof, say a metal roof, that instantly eliminates everyone that sells built-up roofs, single-ply roof membranes, foam and coating roofing and leaves it in the purview of only the few metal roofers in the locality. A roof project certainly isn't something people are going to travel thousands of miles to do. Then the architect further specifies the actual steel by grade and number, the coating by grade and number, and the paint by grade and number. In effect, they are limited to one manufacturer, there may be such a thing that the manufacturer can sell to two or three applicators. The reality is the manufacturer specified has no one bidding against him.

This is true for the myriad of other items that go into a building. If a brick is specified by color and the color is actually one of a sample, there will be only one brick company that will make that particular color. Even though there may be several brick layers, they automatically settle on one brick company. So even the decision to use brick eliminates anyone that wants to bid siding or metal or any other wall covering.

The same thing applies to the structure. If the architect specifies concrete blocks there will only be one or two companies near the project that can afford to bid the project. This type of specifying and it immediately obviates any metal frame builders or any other structural component builders from bidding on the walls of the building in place.

This can even carry down to the door knobs. Many architects will specify a door knob and then allow an approved equal. That means if you want to bid using another type of door knob you have got to go through the hassle of getting the architect to approve it, which may or may not be a major project. In general, permissions to use our equals are only sometimes used. Mostly, it is easier to go with the flow and use those products specified. This is especially true for major products such as air conditioning units. An architect will have his own ideas of which units are better and he will specify those units. Whether they are better or not is often open to debate. The decision to use one brand verses another is automatically made and that automatically eliminates most of the competition for those units. It brings it down to one or two dealers for that particular brand of air conditioning.

We see this all through the bidding process for schools. For instance, if a school wants a new bus, they look at four or five bus manufacturers that still remain and they pick the bus they would like to have. Then they write up a narrow bid specifications where only that particular bus will pass the qualification. This theory is true for copiers, printers, computers and all sorts of things that are required by bid methods.

It is ironic that architectural services are never bid. In fact, in most cases fees are not allowed to be discussed until after an architect has been selected. I have always thought it very interesting that an architect, the person who can make the most difference in the cost of a school, is selected with out bidding. In fact, the system is designed where the board picks the architect and in effect tells the school to spend the maximum amount of money possible. That is the way the architect gets the maximum fee. The only constraint on price that an architect may feel is that of his own conscience. It is extremely difficult to expect an architect to spend serious amounts of time to cut the cost of the building . By doing so, he would essentially be cutting his own fee. Perhaps one day architecture will be charged a fixed fee or even better yet more people will begin to utilize the design/build option.

The Federal government is now turning loose many of their projects on what is known as design/build. The purchasing body specifies in general terms what they want such as a fifty thousand square foot building with so many offices, etc. and then those biding are allowed to bid what they have that will fit. You will have one group working with a metal building with their architect and the operative words here are working with their architect because now the architect and the builder are on the same team. It behooves them together to get the most effective, least expensive alternative. It also allows those in the metal building industry to bid against those in the concrete block industry etc. This is not a very popular system with schools yet, although we are seeing it done. It has enormous positive ramifications for the purchasing body (i.e. the school). If competitive pricing is one of the goals, design/build is probably the most competitive system of all.

Thoughts on the Bidding Process for Construction of New Schools

Related Links: