Constructability: Reviewing Designs to Mitigate Construction Risks

By

Makenna Ryan

and James Hamilton

Reviewed by 

Janine Trinidad

, Nicholas Dunbar

, and Zoe Mullan

Last Updated Mar 2, 2026

By

Makenna Ryan

and James Hamilton

Reviewed By

Janine Trinidad

, Nicholas Dunbar

, and Zoe Mullan

From the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao to 8 Spruce Street in Manhattan, Frank Gehry's buildings are known for being distinctive and expensive – yet delivered on time and within budget. 

Achieving this on even the smallest projects is a significant challenge. Gehry's success stems largely from long, precise planning phases in which the team scrutinises every design decision before construction begins. These phases draw on input from clients and contractors to determine whether a design can be built, how best to execute it, and exactly how much it will cost. In other words, Gehry is assessing constructability.

Constructability is the extent to which teams can execute designs effectively and efficiently. Analysing for constructability means reviewing designs to assess their feasibility and risk, then finding solutions that better achieve project goals. This article explores what constructability involves, the common issues it addresses, and how constructability reviews work in practice.

What is Constructability?

In the UK construction sector, constructability – often referred to alongside "buildability" – describes the extent to which a design can be constructed efficiently. It forms a critical component of the RIBA Plan of Work stages.

Constructability is one of the most important considerations in preconstruction. Constructability analysis assesses whether a project is buildable and identifies how to minimise unforeseen events during construction that can cause delays or increased costs. Teams must consider logistical constraints, material availability, site conditions, and the efficacy of construction methods.

Constructability vs. Value Engineering

Constructability follows a similar process to value engineering. Both methods involve main contractors working with the design team to assess and refine construction plans. However, value engineering focuses specifically on increasing a project's value.

For example, a main contractor might evaluate a particularly expensive light fitting and identify a more affordable alternative. In contrast, a main contractor assessing that same fitting for constructability would confirm that it can actually be installed and will function as designed.

Procurement Considerations

The effectiveness of constructability often depends on the procurement route. Procurement strategies such as Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) and Two-Stage Tendering allow main contractors to contribute to the design phase far earlier than traditional lump-sum contracts permit. Contract suites such as NEC4, which can incorporate ECI as a secondary option (Option X22), further support this collaborative approach. They embed early contractor input within a structured contractual framework.

How Constructability Improves Efficiency

Many projects include formal constructability reviews. These are structured sessions in which architects, engineers, and contractors work together to evaluate and improve designs and plans. Everyone on a project team has a stake in constructability, as greater buildability typically leads to lower costs, shorter programmes, and improved quality.

Constructability is a particularly important consideration for main contractors. They are most likely to possess the Works Information, so they are directly invested in ensuring intended outcomes are achieved. That could mean confirming a skyscraper can support its own weight or verifying that there is sufficient space to install individual pipes.

Ideally, teams identify and resolve constructability concerns during preconstruction. In practice, however, they will arise throughout the build. As concerns emerge on site, main contractors may raise Technical Queries (TQs) or Requests for Information (RFIs). These clarify design intent and define solutions that better serve the outcome. A strong grasp of change management is equally important. This helps to keep projects on time and on budget as changes move through approval.

Why Constructability Matters

Constructability analysis assesses whether a project is buildable and determines how to minimise unforeseen events. These events might include logistical constraints, material shortages, difficult site conditions, or ineffective construction methods – that can cause delays or increased costs. Effective analysis produces solutions that improve project outcomes, which may include:

• Reducing cost
• Reducing the project programme
• Improving the quality of the finished project
• Improving Health, Safety and Wellbeing on the project
• Decreasing the environmental impact of the project
• Minimising rework and re-programming that needs to occur

Effective constructability analysis also addresses wider industry challenges. In the current UK climate, these include labour shortages, the adoption of Modern Methods of Construction (MMC), and meeting net-zero carbon targets.

Common Constructability Considerations

Constructability assessment is almost always about identifying where plans will fall short of their intended outcome and developing solutions. The nature of those concerns shifts depending on factors such as project type, the client's vision, local planning policy, and Building Regulations. Projects with tight timelines or budgets tend to resolve concerns more quickly and conservatively.

Constructability Principles

Several principles consistently help teams identify, and improve constructability across all project types:

Reducing Temporary Works & Site Access Complexity

A key focus of UK constructability reviews is reducing the complexity of temporary works. By applying Temporary Works Forum (TWf) guidance and simplifying structural designs, teams can design out high-risk activities and cut on site costs.

Constructability & UK Regulations

Constructability is intrinsically linked to the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015. Designers carry a statutory duty to eliminate foreseeable health and safety risks. Constructability reviews provide the evidence trail that teams have applied the Principles of Prevention.

The Constructability Review

Many projects include formal constructability reviews. These are structured sessions in which key stakeholders evaluate design plans to confirm they can be built safely and efficiently. Reviews typically take place during the design phase, with architects and engineers sharing their designs with the construction team for feedback. They can run over multiple days and are often led by someone with deep knowledge of the project, such as a Design Manager or the Employer's Agent.

Constructability reviews can appear to extend the design phase. In practice, they make the engineering and construction phases smoother and shorter by bringing the construction team’s expertise into the process earlier.

Timing Matters

Reviews should take place once the design is developed enough that the construction team is not commenting on elements likely to change, but early enough that the design team can act on feedback without delaying the project. Most teams aim for RIBA Stage 3 (Spatial Coordination) or Stage 4 (Technical Design). Reviews that happen too late offer limited benefit and are often too costly to address. This may force the construction team to overlook operational or methodological problems that cannot practically be resolved in the time available.

During the review, stakeholders examine every detail of the designs and begin planning the construction sequence from first day to handover. The construction team assesses feasibility and applies its expertise to identify areas for improvement. The design team works to understand any concerns raised and seeks solutions that address them while preserving the original vision for the project.

Feedback can range from the strategic to the granular. A hospital project review, for example, might reveal that there is insufficient space for the required lorries and cranes. This then prompts a full reimagination of the site layout. Equally, contractors might propose small adjustments room by room – such as repositioning medical gas terminal units to simplify installation.

After the Review

Following the review, each stakeholder leaves with clear next steps:

• The design team implements the agreed suggestions into the drawings.
• Main contractors often begin key planning tasks, such as identifying the critical path.
• The site manager has a better basis for managing the site and may be in a position to begin discharging necessary planning conditions.

Where teams have not held a formal constructability review during preconstruction, constructability discussions may still arise during a technical submission review cycle.

Two Keys to Better Constructability

There is much to consider when assessing constructability – from dimensions and material selection to equipment placement and weather. However, two key factors consistently make it easier to identify concerns and develop effective solutions: experience and collaboration.

1. Experience

   Contractors and designers identify and address constructability issues more effectively with experience. For contractors, this comes through repeated time on site, building familiarity with which elements of a plan are likely to work and where common defects tend to emerge. Designers often need to make a more deliberate effort to gain this exposure. In some sectors, such as heavy industry, practices assign newer members of the design team to oversee specific parts of a project. This gives them direct experience of working with and interpreting construction drawings.

2. Collaboration

   Ultimately, constructability reviews and analysis bring the expertise of all project stakeholders together with a shared aim: improving the outcome. Creating deliberate space for the design team to understand how their ideas will be executed – and for the construction team to understand the intention behind what they are building – produces a better final product.

FAQs

What is the difference between constructability and buildability?

While the two terms are often used interchangeably, "buildability" (as defined by CIRIA) typically refers to the design aspect. "Constructability" is a broader management concept covering the entire project life cycle.

Written by

Makenna Ryan

Civil & Infrastructure Solutions Engineer | Procore

10 articles

Makenna Ryan is a Solutions Engineer at Procore. Prior to joining Procore, he spent seven years at McDermott International Inc. as a construction Manager and Senior Equipment Engineer. He also spent three years as a Project Engineer at Subsea7. Makenna received his B.S. in Mechanical Engineering and Technology from Texas Tech University. He is based in the Houston area.

View profile

James Hamilton

Writer & Producer

86 articles

James Hamilton is a writer based in Brooklyn, New York with experience in television, documentaries, journalism, comedy, and podcasts. His work has been featured on VICE TV and on The Moth. James was a writer and narrator for the show, VICE News Tonight, where he won an Emmy Award and was nominated for a Peabody Award.

View profile

Reviewed by

Janine Trinidad

Staff Trainer and Program Manager | Procore Technologies

26 articles

Janine Trinidad is a Construction Educational professional for Procore Technologies. In previous roles, Janine managed all phases of construction on hotel, mixed-use, and institutional projects in the San Francisco Bay area. She was responsible for negotiating contract budgets and change orders, managing RFIs and submittals, and overseeing quality control, among other duties. She is also a certified transformational coach with a focus on women-centered and trauma-informed methods. She is passionate about transforming the construction industry to be a healthier, more successful and welcoming place to work and believes technology and education are allies in doing so.

View profile

Nicholas Dunbar

Content Manager | Procore

65 articles

Nick Dunbar oversees the creation and management of UK and Ireland educational content at Procore. Previously, he worked as a sustainability writer at the Building Research Establishment and served as a sustainability consultant within the built environment sector. Nick holds degrees in industrial sustainability and environmental sciences and lives in Camden, London.

View profile

Zoe Mullan

27 articles

Zoe Mullan is an experienced content writer and editor with a background in marketing and communications in the e-learning sector. Zoe holds an MA in English Literature and History from the University of Glasgow and a PGDip in Journalism from the University of Strathclyde and lives in Northern Ireland.

View profile