Progressive design-build, also known as phased design-build, has moved from the edge of the delivery conversation to its center.
That’s a good thing.
But it also raises the bar for everyone involved.
That’s my clear takeaway from serving on the ACEC Research Institute Steering Committee and discussing this work at both the Design-Build Institute of America’s Transportation Conference and American Council of Engineering Companies’ (ACEC) Annual Spring Convention.
The data reinforces the point. PDB use is accelerating, with 88% of firms reporting increased use of this delivery method and 79% expressing overall satisfaction. Projects are growing in size and complexity and performance on cost and schedule is holding up. Expectations are rising with it.
What’s at stake is not just delivery preference. It’s cost certainty, schedule confidence, public trust and ultimately better outcomes for the communities we serve.
The research confirms that PDB works. The harder question is whether we are set up to make it work consistently – across different owners, markets and levels of complexity.
At its core, PDB changes when decisions get made. Owners bring teams in earlier. The work shifts forward. The opportunity for alignment increases. But alignment is still a choice. It doesn’t happen automatically.
Phase 1 is Where Projects Either Get Stronger – or Get Stuck
The strongest projects treat Phase 1 as real work. Not a placeholder. Not a warm-up.
Teams actively manage risk, pressure-test assumptions, build credible schedules and make decisions that hold up when it’s time to commit. When that happens, Phase 2 becomes far more predictable. When it doesn’t, misalignment carries forward and becomes harder – and more expensive – to fix.
The research also reinforces something we see across our projects: collaboration without structure doesn’t hold. The best-performing teams back it up with structure – clear decision-making, defined accountability and continuity in key roles. Without that, even strong teams can lose alignment over time.
The study also reframes how we should think about off-ramps. Not every project moves into Phase 2. And that’s not always a failure. Sometimes it’s leadership – recognizing early that scope, funding or external conditions aren’t aligned.
That’s a better outcome than discovering those issues later, when the cost of correction is much higher.
Early PDB Success Across the Country
We see these dynamics play out across our work at STV.
On the North Carolina Department of Transportation’s Chimney Rock recovery project, PDB is allowing the team to move forward without a complete picture in place after a natural disaster. During Phase 1, we are working closely with the owner to segment the corridor, refine alignments and advance environmental approvals in parallel. That early flexibility creates a viable path forward in a highly uncertain environment.
At the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority’s (WMATA) Northern Bus Garage, the project shifted in a fundamental way – from a diesel facility to a fully electric one. The PDB process allows the team to evaluate technology, adjust scope and align on cost in real time with the owner. That kind of pivot is difficult under more rigid delivery models. Here, it was built into the process.
And on Utah Transit Authority’s FrontRunner 2X program, early coordination with railroad stakeholders is shaping the delivery strategy – improving constructability, reducing service disruptions and compressing the schedule. Those outcomes are driven by decisions made in Phase 1, not recovered later.
Across these projects, the pattern is consistent: early alignment, supported by structure, leads to better outcomes.
That approach is also aligned with how we think about delivery at STV. Infrastructure is local. Every project brings its own constraints, stakeholders and expectations. But when you pair local decision-making with national expertise and experience, you get better outcomes. That’s what we mean by Performance with Purpose – delivering in a way that builds trust with our clients and the communities they serve.
PDB works best when it supports that model – creating space to work through complexity early, while maintaining the discipline to make clear decisions.
The Industry Must Decide How to Execute PDB More Effectively
For owners, PDB requires intention. Selecting a design-build team is just the starting point. Success depends on setting clear governance, aligning commercial terms early and treating Phase 1 as a true decision phase.
For teams, the expectation is higher. Phase 1 isn’t conceptual – it’s where the project gets defined. That takes transparency, discipline, and a willingness to surface hard issues early.
And for the industry as a whole, the conversation has shifted. The question is no longer whether PDB belongs in the delivery toolbox. It does.
The responsibility now is to use it well.
That means treating Phase 1 as a decision phase. Being honest about risk. And being willing to make hard calls early – before they become harder later.
That’s what comes next.
STV CEO Greg Kelly is Vice Chair of the ACEC Research Institute
