Go/No-Go Decision Making in Construction Projects
This paper examines the go/no-go decision-making process as applied to a Design-Bid-Build office building project in Auburn, Alabama. Written from the perspective of a medium-sized general contractor, it outlines four key decision points: evaluating architectural design specifications against Alabama's Building Code, assessing available resources and project timelines, determining the company's technical expertise relative to competing bidders, and weighing bidding costs against potential fees. The paper also presents a decision flowchart designed for an owner's representative to systematically evaluate and select the most qualified general contractor, distinguishing between new contractors without a performance record and established contractors with documented project histories.
- Introduction to Go/No-Go Decision Making: Overview of go/no-go decisions in modern construction
- Go/No-Go Analysis in Design-Bid-Build Projects: How go/no-go analysis applies to Design-Bid-Build delivery
- Key Decision Points for the Auburn Office Building Project: Four evaluation criteria for the Auburn office project
- Contractor Selection and the Decision Flowchart: Owner's flowchart for selecting the best general contractor
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper applies a practical, industry-specific framework (go/no-go analysis) to a concrete scenario, grounding abstract decision criteria in a real project context.
- It progresses logically through four numbered decision points, making the argument easy to follow and demonstrating structured analytical thinking.
- The inclusion of a decision flowchart shifts the perspective from contractor to owner's representative, showing the student's ability to consider multiple stakeholder viewpoints.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates applied analysis — taking a theoretical business decision framework and translating it into specific, sequenced evaluation criteria for a real-world construction scenario. Each decision point is justified with reference to industry practice and cited sources, connecting practical judgment to scholarly and professional literature.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a general introduction to go/no-go decisions in construction, then explains the Design-Bid-Build delivery method and its three phases. The core section works through four decision points specific to the Auburn project. The paper then shifts perspective to the owner's representative role, presenting a decision flowchart for contractor selection. A reference list closes the paper.
Introduction to Go/No-Go Decision Making
As the general contractor of a medium-sized firm, one of the most important decision points in construction is the go/no-go decision. Go/no-go decisions have become common in the modern construction industry because of the changing marketplace, which has in turn generated complex procurement choices. In light of this changing marketplace, construction companies face new challenges in identifying the most suitable project proposals to adopt and in developing vetting measures that help make the appropriate go/no-go decision (Illia & Rubin, 2014). Despite the complexities of such decisions, go/no-go decisions remain crucial choices in this sector because of their significance in weighing costs for the most appropriate project fit.
Contractors need to conduct a go/no-go analysis in order to determine the best project fit depending on project specifications and needs. The analysis serves several purposes, including acting as a process for researching and collecting information when there is insufficient data to make the most suitable decision. Additionally, a go/no-go analysis helps in exploring different approaches to the project, examining the project's impact on resources, relationships, and other factors, and identifying significant opportunities and risks relating to project implementation.
Go/No-Go Analysis in Design-Bid-Build Projects
The go/no-go decision-making process is also crucial in Design-Bid-Build construction projects, which are commonly used by many building owners. These projects are preferred because they utilize different companies for the design and construction segments of a building project (Bryan Construction Inc., n.d.). Notably, these types of projects consist of three major phases: design, bid, and build.
In the first phase — the design stage — building owners collaborate with the architect to determine the specifications of the design. Upon completion, the architect provides bid documents that include technical details and drawings of the building. These documents are used during the second phase to identify contractors by reviewing proposals from different firms. After a contractor is identified, the construction process commences according to the initial bid documents and specifications.
Key Decision Points for the Auburn Office Building Project
For a Design-Bid-Build office building project in Auburn, Alabama, a go/no-go decision is important in ensuring that each of the three phases is carried out effectively and in a manner that meets initial specifications and needs. This process requires considering several decision points through a go/no-go analysis.
The first decision point is whether the technical specifications and drawings provided by the architect are suitable for an office building. The process of creating design specifications is typically completed by the architect in collaboration with the building owner. While the contractor is not involved in the first phase of the project, evaluating whether the design specifications are appropriate for an office building is an important decision point. During this process, the design specifications will be evaluated against the regulations that govern the development of office buildings in Alabama. This is an important consideration because states have slightly different regulations for different types of construction. Compliance with Alabama's Building Code during the design phase is a critical issue to assess before proceeding, in order to avoid legal hurdles that could arise if the office building does not meet the provisions of this Code.
The second decision point is whether there are adequate resources and time for completion of the project as required. Once a review of the design specifications is completed, identifying the necessary resources and timeline for project completion becomes important. One of the vital aspects of a go/no-go decision is weighing costs for the best project fit through a rigorous process that includes identifying the necessary resources and time for construction. As a medium-sized general contractor, determining resource requirements and timelines is vital to avoid premature termination of the project once construction begins.
The third consideration is whether the company has the expertise to complete the project if its proposal or bid is accepted. As noted, the second phase of Design-Bid-Build projects involves bidding, where different companies submit proposals based on bid documents provided by the architect and building owner. Therefore, examining whether there is sufficient expertise to complete the office building based on the design specifications is significant in determining whether to proceed. This evaluation also entails determining whether the company can successfully compete with the other candidates bidding for the project.
The final consideration in the go/no-go decision for this project is evaluating whether the cost is worth the probable fee (Rudy, 2014). Some project bids involve certain bidding costs or fees that must be evaluated before committing to a bid. This is an important consideration carried out as part of the initial evaluation of internal factors before committing to a construction project. If the cost is not worth the potential fee, it will be inappropriate for the contractor to commit to the project, and vice versa. This evaluation also helps in avoiding bids for inappropriate projects that could result in financial loss, unnecessary consumption of time and resources, and eventual financial failure (Bagies & Fortune, 2006).
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.