Why Tendering Isn’t Always the Best Choice for Small Residential Projects – And What to Do Instead

When it comes to small residential construction projects, many homeowners assume that tendering is the best route to secure a fair price. But is it really? While tendering has its place, it often brings more challenges than benefits, especially for smaller projects. At Daedal, where we craft soulful, human-centered spaces, we believe in approaches that prioritize quality, trust, and collaboration.

The Downsides of Tendering Small Residential Projects

1. Time-Consuming and Costly

Tendering involves a lengthy process of preparing documents, gathering bids, and evaluating offers, causing weeks or months of delays. It also wastes time for contractors and subcontractors, who must recover the cost of unsuccessful bids by passing it on to successful projects, increasing costs for everyone. Additionally, clients and contractors incur costs in preparing detailed proposals, which can add up quickly.

2. Focus on Price, Not Quality

Competitive tendering often reduces the decision to cost alone, encouraging contractors to submit the lowest possible bid—sometimes cutting corners or using subpar materials to stay within budget. The result is a project that may fall short of expectations in quality or durability.

3. Missed Opportunities for Collaboration

When contractors are brought in only after the design phase, valuable insights on cost-efficient methods and materials are lost. Early collaboration often leads to better solutions and fewer costly changes later.

4. Potential for Disputes and Hidden Costs

Lowest bids often mean minimal allowances for unexpected challenges. When issues arise, contractors may charge extra for variations, leading to disputes and budget overruns.

5. Risk of Unqualified Contractors

Tendering may attract contractors skilled at winning bids but not necessarily experienced in the type of project you’re undertaking. Without a strong vetting process, homeowners risk hiring the wrong builder.

Better Alternatives to Tendering

At Daedal, we believe that alternatives to traditional tendering can lead to better outcomes. Here are two approaches that align with our commitment to human-centered, soulful design:

1. Negotiated Contracts – Build on Trust

A negotiated contract involves selecting a contractor based on experience, reputation, and compatibility with your vision. Pricing is discussed openly and fairly, allowing for transparency and value engineering from the start.

• Advantages:

  • Early collaboration leads to creative solutions.

  • Transparent pricing with fewer disputes.

  • Stronger relationship between client and contractor.

2. Design and Build Contracts – Simplify the Process

In a design and build contract, one company manages both the design and construction phases. This streamlined approach ensures continuity and reduces delays caused by communication gaps.

• Advantages:

  • One point of contact for the entire project.

  • Faster project timelines.

  • Seamless integration of design and construction.

Why These Alternatives Align with Daedal’s Values

At Daedal, our designs are about more than just buildings – they are about people, emotions, and experiences. Approaches like negotiated contracts and design-build partnerships foster the human-centered, collaborative spirit we value. They reduce friction, enhance creativity, and ensure that projects stay true to their soulful vision from concept to completion.

Conclusion

While tendering may seem like the traditional route, it is not always the best path for small residential projects. Alternatives such as negotiated contracts and design-build models often lead to better outcomes – aligning budget, vision, and values from the start. At Daedal, we champion approaches that are not only efficient but also meaningful, ensuring that every space we create resonates deeply with those who inhabit it.