by Jonathan McGaha | 30 November 2015 12:00 am

What are five revolutionary things that have changed the way we do business today compared to 40 years ago? Computers, smart phones, global positioning systems, nanotechnology and globalization are all good examples. But consider what has not changed in those four decades. The construction industry has not eliminated all of the conflicts and resulting waste that occur in the building process. These issues largely continue to occur, creating the same challenges today as we experienced 40 years ago.
There have, of course, been some innovations in the process, such as building information modeling (BIM), and there have certainly been advances in material technologies; but the design development and construction contracting process is still essentially the same. The traditional design-bid-build process- which is predominantly used in conjunction with conventionally framed design-leaves little opportunity for improvement because it is so fragmented.
A design/architecture firm works in isolation with an owner, then a construction management firm or an Engineering Procurement Construction (EPC) firm is hired to bid out the general contract, along with each of the trades and supply purchases. With this approach, there is no real opportunity for up-front collaboration that can impact the critical path for the enclosure of the building shell.
A study, published in the Journal of Construction Engineering and Management (“Quantifying Levels of Wasted Time in Construction with Meta-Analysis,” January 2005), revealed that up to 50 percent of time on a construction job site is devoted to wasteful activities. These include late deliveries, poor coordination of materials and trades, and correcting field mistakes. Due to the fragmented traditional process, in many cases the design team, key contractors and suppliers will be different for each new project, which wastes time. Every successive job is like re-creating the wheel. It fulfills Albert Einstein’s adage that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Metal buildings deliver unmatched value because collaboration can occur at the outset of design and optimize the critical path to completing the enclosure of the building shell. This not only reduces time in the design phase and building completion, but it also allows for the remaining, and far more costly construction scope, to be completed more quickly. This speed-of-delivery is built into metal buildings because our industry is design-build oriented-that’s where we leverage the greatest value. Traditional, fragmented contracting processes simply cannot deliver the integrated approach to solving the critical path that is derived from design-build collaboration.
Architects and owners reap many rewards from working with metal building systems. Here are just a few:
We have a method to get everything in place much faster and without the interference inherent in traditional construction methods. There is so much more risk in conventional construction than in metal buildings. The attributes above show how metal buildings outperform other forms of construction; but are you really leveraging these benefits with your customers? If no, then why not? It’s time for us to take the lead.
# # #
Tom Gilligan is chairman of the Metal Building Manufacturers Association. More information about the association is available at www.mbma.com.
Source URL: https://www.metalconstructionnews.com/articles/using-critical-path-as-a-lever-to-promote-metal-building-solutions/
Copyright ©2025 Metal Construction News unless otherwise noted.