In my 20 years in business, I have tried to take a long-term approach, to build my business by creating happy customers, one at a time. That may sound like a cliché, but it is true, and it works. Sometimes this has meant that we didn’t make as much money on a job, but I always considered this a good trade-off if it left a happy customer. With this ideal as the core driver of decision making at my company, it has forced me, over time, to re-evaluate the bidding process and, in fact, the entire conceptual framework of the builder-client relationship. As time has gone on, I have developed a particular perspective on how we can structure this relationship so that both parties end up satisfied.

Where we normally start in this process is with an exchange of money for services. We negotiate (how much will it cost, what refrigerator will I get), and finally we agree on an exchange. However, the inherent distrust built into this system–the fear of not getting a fair shake–can drive a wedge between the parties. This fear is rooted in a basic premise and cultural standard that we have all learned to accept as part of our lives: that a business will always try to make as much as possible, regardless of the consequences, and that fairness, right, morality all take a back seat to profit. One need only recall the actions of the many financial-industry players in the recent economic calamity to see this at work, only to the tune of billions of dollars. Profit trumped all, and the phrase “It’s just business” served as a justification for any and all behavior.

This has led me to realize the importance of getting past the perception that the fact that money is changing hands inherently makes us adversaries. What we should be doing is working toward a unified goal, where each party has accepted the other’s parameters, put aside rancor and mistrust, and realized that they actually want the same thing: a beautiful job, well done, at a fair price.  If the contractor is making a reasonable profit that is acceptable to the homeowner, and will clearly state what he is doing in return, then the interests of all parties become one. It’s actually quite simple, and getting there is essential.

We need to define the two most relevant terms for this discussion: spec and bid. Understanding these, and how they fit into the “chain of trust” we need to create in order to get to a unified goal, is key to redefining the client-contractor relationship.

The basis of this trust is rooted in a well-defined spec—a thorough detailing of the work to be done. The knowledge that the job has been comprehensively spec’d out so that each side knows exactly what to expect creates trust between them. Homeowners know what they are getting, and builders know what they are providing. The bid is based on the spec, and is the builder’s way of translating the needs of the project into a monetary figure, so both homeowner and builder know and come to agreement about the project cost. With spec and bid in place, the client and the builder can now begin what should be a satisfying relationship, and work toward their shared goal of a successful project.

Just wanted to post a quick note about an amazing and cool company we have started doing business with, Green Demolitions.

If you click on the link you can read the story, but in a nutshell: A recovering addict, searching for a way to help others, came up with the idea of removing rather than destroying cabinets, countertops, and appliances that were being demolished as part of a home renovation project.

He sends a crew and truck to your job site and they take everything you are getting rid of, for free. They do all the removal work—they are careful and get it all out intact. Since Green Demolitions is a charitable organization, your contribution is tax deductible. They take the entire kitchen back to their showroom, reassemble it, and sell it to another homeowner who is rehabbing their house. Circle completed!

I have probably demolished 30 or 40 kitchens over the years that could have been recycled. This truly is a service that creates nothing but winners: The homeowner saves money on the demo, the charity gets something to sell, the landfill gets one less pile of demolished building material.

Green Demolitions has three locations in Connecticut, but will come to the Boston area to get good “junk.” Think about contacting them if you are considering removing quality items from your house that would otherwise end up in the landfill. You can send GD pictures of what you have, and they will decide whether it’s salable or not. If they think they can resell it, everybody wins!

As a remodeler in Winchester, Mass., I am regularly asked for bids by homeowners who are requesting estimates from multiple contractors, so they can find the least expensive option. This sounds like a sensible idea. However, in most cases competitive bidding does not result in valid, comparable estimates from builders, and most homeowners don’t know this.

Think of it this way: you have decided to undertake a complex renovation project and you know nothing about building. You need to communicate with people in a discipline you have no knowledge of, who are speaking a language you don’t understand. Some will even deliberately create confusing paperwork so they can get the job, intending to change things later. Some will produce no paperwork at all. If your plans and specifications are not totally clear, you will get different interpretations. You may not even know when—or which—aspects are being interpreted (and priced) differently. How accurate can this comparative process be? How do you do it well?

The biggest mistake people make is starting without complete plans and specifications. I have been involved in competitive estimating hundreds of times, and I can remember only three or four instances where the plans and specs were complete enough to accurately bid. That’s about 2%. I have never really understood this, but I do know that it is not the way to proceed. The design and specifications phase is when you need to take your time, for a few different reasons.

This is the inexpensive stage. No matter how expensive design is, it is dwarfed by the cost of construction. Adding one month to the design phase costs comparatively little. Adding one month to the building phase can be extremely expensive.

Lack of clarity in the plans and specs = higher prices. This is just a version of the risk/reward relationship: If there is a lack of clarity, the builder is then risking underbidding something they don’t understand. Taking risk needs to be rewarded, so the price for this lack of clarity will be higher.

This is the clean stage. No dust, no mess in the house, you can make all these decisions from the comfort of your warm, clean home. Why would you want to do this under the gun during construction?

All this points to the need to approach requesting competitive bids with open eyes and realistic expectations, and to prepare yourself to do it as well as possible. Here are some hints for getting the best apples-to-apples comparison.

Present the same detailed and complete plans and specifications to all bidders. Don’t get them almost done, get them completely done. Don’t let yourself start until you have them.

Don’t deviate from these plans during the process. If someone comes up with a great idea, have them price it as a separate item, not in the original bid. You will never be able to remember all the possible changes you made with different builders.

Have each bidder present his or her own bid, in person. Read it carefully and ask all the questions you want. If something doesn’t make sense to you, it probably doesn’t make sense, period. Don’t be intimidated by your lack of knowledge—keep questioning.

Don’t bother asking bidders to fill out uniform bid sheets to try and corral the process. You actually want to see how they normally present themselves on paper, as this can be a good indication of how they will work.

With luck, you will be able figure out what you want, get it down on paper, and get useful bids that allow you to make a sound decision. This is the best beginning to your journey.

As the owner of a Design Build firm working in the Boston and Cambridge area, I meet people in all stages of home renovation—from no plans and no ideas, to fully drawn and ready to go. My company has spec’d out hundreds of jobs over the years. After watching people drown in the “decision tsunami” countless times, we have developed a simple mantra we work hard to enforce on our projects: “Plan, select, price, spec.” My experience remodeling homes for the last 20 years has shown over and over that the number one cause of changes, cost issues, and stress is making decisions late in the process—under stress and duress, and rife with decision fatigue.

Using the design/build model, we are able to give clients a schedule and a price both we and they can count on. When you don’t “plan, select, price, and spec,” you can’t do this. The seamlessness and continuity of our process allows for an organic flow from one phase to the next. This helps busy people ride the wave of the decision tsunami with confidence, and prevents delays and overruns.

Planning is the inexpensive part of the design/build process—taking more time at this stage costs little or nothing. In the middle of construction, with multiple tradespeople working, stopping or slowing down can be very costly. Not starting until you know exactly what you are doing seems sensible and logical, but in residential modeling this kind of thorough planning is so often—sometimes disastrously—overlooked. Our advice: Take a deep breath, slow down, figure it out, then start. You will usually end up happy if you start right!

As a designer/builder of kitchen, bath and family room additions, I am often asked for design advice: “Where should the stove go?” “How many windows should we use?” Etc. I think many times people are a step or two ahead of themselves in the process when they ask these questions. Before we get to design, the questions I ask them are, “How do you want to live?” “How is this space going to affect your family life?” “How do you want the space to affect your family life?” This is where the conversation should begin; the cooktop will end up in the right place if you start with your family’s needs.

Common living space should be designed and built to maximize family and social interaction. We might want to make it easier for our children to work on their homework around us while we cook, for example. The headwinds pulling families apart these days can be tremendous—longer working hours, both parents working, rampant social media use by younger and younger children—and one way to fight back is to create a comfortable space for living together.

We do this by asking about your family, looking at your existing space, and finding out what’s working and what isn’t. Once we understand what you are about and where you want to go, we design to that. Every family has different needs, and the existing space will often suggest a direction which, when melded with your family’s needs, will lead us to the most beautiful, efficient, and functional space design.

If you have ever renovated a house and used separate architects and builders, you may have wondered: Why can’t they all just get along? The bickering and finger pointing that can develop can be tiresome and, at its worst, extremely unproductive, working against job progress. Why does this happen? Aren’t we all intelligent adults? Don’t we all want the same thing?

As a builder of high-end renovations in the Boston area, I have been involved in this process hundreds of times and have come to a few conclusions. Once you get below the name-calling (all architects are ivory tower eggheads who don’t know a nail from a screw, all builders are ignorant slobs who drive around in their dirty trucks all day drinking coffee), a few real differences become apparent. Understanding these is extremely important to a successful renovation using the architect/builder model.

The first misconception is that builders and architects are working toward the same goal. More precisely, while our overall goal is very similar (a beautiful job), our routes to that goal are vastly different. Consider the roles of each, and where in the project we do most of our work.

Architects are with the client from the beginning, and are charged with conceptualizing a beautiful way to synthesize the homeowners needs with the traditions of the architectural craft that they have spent years studying. They are not particularly concerned about how long this process takes; they have time to reflect on and develop ideas, put them to paper, and discuss them with the client. This is all done in clean, nicely heated offices or homes. Everything looks great on paper.

Then the builder starts. The porta potty arrives in the front yard. Dust is everywhere. Every day at 7 am, 10 tradesmen show up in their trucks and start working. Any detail that looked great in two dimensions on paper, but which was not fully understood in the three dimensions of the real world, needs to be resolved—right now. So the builder calls the architect, who needs to fit a site visit into his already booked day and then wants to go back to the office to draw it up and look at it. This time frame does not work for the builder and, ultimately, for the homeowner, who wants the job moving forward, on schedule, so they can get the porta potty out of the front yard ASAP. And so it begins: the builder needs to stay on schedule, and after a few unsuccessful tries at getting an answer from the architect in a timely fashion, he decides he is just going to do what he wants. The architect shows up for his weekly meeting (worthless, by the way, but that is for another blog post), sees what the builder did, and the finger pointing begins.

So we are back to the question: Why can’t we all get along? And how can this self-destructive corkscrew of a process during a renovation be prevented?

Unfortunately, it is extremely difficult. While the stereotypical descriptions of builder and architect above are caricatures, they are reality based. Many architects are more concerned with how it looks than how it works. Many don’t understand basic concepts of residential framing and trim. Many builders are slobs, who just want to get it done now, whatever it takes. They don’t appreciate the finer points of design, and often don’t understand (or care) what an architect is trying to do. Even being a builder who cares and wants to do the right thing, we find ourselves forging ahead on jobs sometimes because we just can’t wait anymore.

The most basic remedy lies in integrating builders and designers early on, and in insisting that drawings and specifications be completely done before the job begins. Starting this way is the first step toward alleviating the problems discussed above. Too bad it doesn’t happen more often.

Why are some renovations smooth sailing, while others flounder on the rocks? This is a question my partner and I have been considering as we watch the progress, or lack thereof, on various jobs. It is puzzling, but we do have a few ideas.

We can start with the premise that we are the control—that, by and large, we deliver the same type and quality of service to every client. So if we accept this (and even if it is not completely accurate, it is a good starting point), we are left with:

• The client
• The plans and specs
• The architect

Keep in mind, we do design/build and we also build from plans done by others, so we have a good sense for both of these approaches. We analyzed our last 100 jobs of all sizes and rated them for a number of metrics: how complete the plans were, how available the homeowner was, how decisive the homeowner was in dealing with the “decision tsunami,” how well we managed our end, how well we maintained the schedule, how available the architect was, how profitable the job was. We made some interesting discoveries that are shaping our process going forward.

The long and the short of it is this: When we are able to plan and specify at least 90% of the project before we start building, the job always goes better. By better, we mean

• Less stressed-out homeowner
• Easier to keep the job on schedule
• Fewer “cost surprises” for the client during the job
• Easier for the builder to make a reasonable profit

I’m amazed at how the simple, basic concept of planning gets repeatedly ignored. And if a job starts way behind on the decision curve, the homeowners almost never catch up—they are chronically dealing with decisions at the last minute, which is the worst time to make them. Decisions about the space you live in need careful thought; as with any creative activity, such thoughts need to reside in your conciousness for a period of time. You may even need to let yourself come to these important decisions from an angle you hadn’t considered before. All of this requires time.

The next most important factor in creating a smooth renovation is the availability of the owner and the architect. If we can meet with the homeowner two or three times a week, during normal business hours, we can help ride the wave of the decision tsunami, in real time. But if the homeowner is regularly unavailable, progress grinds to a halt. The same is true of the architect’s availability. If there is a problem with the plans and the architect cannot meet for two days, and then needs two more to redraw, all scheduling gets thrown out the window. Our experience has shown that most architects are not equipped to deal with construction issues in real time. I have never been able to fully grasp why this is, but it is what we have seen, time and time again.

So whatever you do, and whichever model you use, start early, and don’t underestimate the requirements of each stage of the project. A good partnership is not hard to create, but it requires the homeowner to commit to a process with the builder. And that process doesn’t end when the plans are done; it continues until the last punch list item is crossed off.