Sarah Livingstone, Contracts, Growth & Partnerships Manager and Executive Director, Livingstone Building shares her opinion on why better construction outcomes start with a stronger brief, early collaboration and investing in the right decisions before a contract is signed.
If I could change one thing about how design and build is procured in New Zealand, it would be this: stop treating the brief as a box to tick and start treating it as an investment.
Bring the client-side project manager, quantity surveyor and architect to the table earlier. Spend more time defining the scope, challenging assumptions and agreeing what success actually looks like before committing to a contract.
It might sound like a small change. It isn’t. It could be the difference between a project that delivers on its promise and one that spends the rest of its life paying for decisions made too quickly at the start.
The problem isn’t the procurement model
Design and build has earned its place in New Zealand’s construction landscape. A single contract can offer a clear point of accountability, earlier contractor input and greater certainty around cost and programme. Early contractor involvement can also bring buildability, commercial and design considerations into the conversation sooner, while allowing the client to retain more control over design.
Neither model is inherently better. The question is whether the procurement approach fits the project, and whether the groundwork has been done to make it work.
Too often, the focus is on selecting the model and getting to contract, when the harder work is agreeing exactly what is being bought. An unclear scope, an unrealistic budget or competing expectations don’t disappear when a contract is signed. They simply become more expensive to resolve.
Design and build won’t rescue a bad brief. It can just move the consequences further down the line, where they are harder and costlier to fix.
Make the hard decisions before the expensive ones
A brief is more than a list of requirements. It needs to capture the client’s priorities, the project’s constraints, the budget, the programme and the trade-offs they are prepared to make. It also needs to establish who has decision-making authority, what is non-negotiable, and how quickly decisions can be made.
That takes more than a client and contractor sitting down together. It takes the right expertise in the room, early enough to influence the outcome.
A project manager brings the wider delivery picture into focus. A quantity surveyor tests the commercial assumptions. An architect protects the design intent and helps translate the client’s ambitions into something deliverable. The contractor adds a buildability lens. Together, they can identify gaps, expose risks and test whether the brief, budget and programme genuinely stack up.
At Livingstone, we see the value of bringing these perspectives together before problems become embedded in the design or contract. Our dedicated design management function reflects the fact that coordinating design is a specialist discipline, not simply an extension of site management.
The same principle applies to risk. Poorly coordinated documentation, undefined scope and untested assumptions need to be identified, quantified and allocated fairly. Hiding uncertainty inside a lump sum doesn’t make it go away. It just delays the conversation until the stakes are higher.
Better starts mean better choices
Investing upfront isn’t about adding process for process’s sake. It is about making better decisions while there is still room to change course.
It gives clients a more realistic view of what their budget can buy. It helps teams identify where expectations need to be reconciled before they become contractual disputes. And it creates a stronger foundation for managing design quality when cost pressures arrive and value management begins.
That last point matters. Design quality is often most vulnerable when a project moves from concept into pricing, procurement and construction. Without someone actively protecting the design intent, trade-offs can default to the cheapest available option rather than the one that best serves the project.
A thorough brief won’t eliminate every risk. Projects evolve, conditions change and difficult decisions are inevitable. But a shared understanding of the desired outcome gives the team a much better basis for navigating those moments.
It also makes it easier to decide when design and build isn’t the right fit. Sometimes early contractor involvement is the better route. Choosing the right procurement model matters; being willing to challenge the choice matters just as much.
The return starts before the contract
The industry is rightly focused on cost, programme, accountability and delivery. But those outcomes don’t begin on site, or even when the contract is signed. They begin with the quality of the decisions made before either happens.
If we want better project outcomes, we need to stop measuring progress by how quickly we get to contract and start measuring it by how well prepared we are to commit.
My change would be simple: invest more in the starting line. Get the right people around the table, make the assumptions visible, agree the priorities and settle as much of the scope as possible before the pressure to deliver takes over.
Because the most expensive time to discover you haven’t agreed on what you’re building is after you’ve started building it.
Author | Sarah Livingstone
Contracts, Growth & Partnerships Manager and Executive Director, Livingstone Building.Â
Sarah has 17 years’ experience in client-side construction project management and land development, spanning feasibility and planning through to design management, procurement, contract administration and risk management.
She joined Livingstone in 2023 as an Executive Director on the Board and Pre-Construction Manager, most recently serving as GM Pre-Construction & Design, where she led the company’s ECI and design and build opportunities.
In her new role, Sarah leads Livingstone’s growth strategy, client and partner relationships, contract management, tenders, marketing and sponsorship programme across its five regions.
Election 2026: Keeping property at the table
Seismic reform continues: MBIE seeks feedback on proposed guidance
Opinion | Stop undercooking the brief: why New Zealand needs to invest more before it builds
What residential developers can learn from the future of retail
MEMBER ONLY: Build to Rent, Built to Last Webinar
