Preliminary design via the architect and then tendering?

Hello everyone,
we are facing exactly the same problem as described by "Bauen1899". Can someone once again comment on what makes more sense for a bid comparison, preliminary design (you save the costs of the detailed design) or detailed design? Do the construction companies take this into account in the price if you already bring the detailed design? Do some construction companies perhaps drop out because they may not want or be able to build as planned in the detailed design of an architect?

Thank you very much

Is the construction method decided? Or does everyone do it according to their own taste....?

There is a development plan that must be adhered to.

we are facing exactly the same problem as described by "Bauen1899".

"Exactly the same problem" of the mentioned original poster was, 1. to build a wooden house, 3. to have an architect only for service phases 1 to 3, and 2. unfortunately not to respond to follow-up questions anymore. Do all three of these points really apply to you as well?

Can someone comment on what makes sense for a price comparison, preliminary design (you save the costs of the execution planning) or execution planning?

I will still try to answer, although I don’t fully understand the question – especially not where one would save the costs of execution planning by doing a preliminary design. That means I answer as if the question had only been what makes sense for a price comparison:
You must never request “fruit” in an undetermined way, otherwise the answers will always refer to “apples” or “pears,” which cannot be compared with each other to a happy conclusion.

Do construction companies take it into account in their price if you bring the execution planning already? Might some construction companies possibly drop out because they may not want or be able to build as specified in the architect’s execution planning?

Perhaps first explain what you plan to do: with an execution planning from the architect (meaning service phases 1 to 5) then letting someone else carry out the tendering and going hunting yourself for a willing construction company without the architect?
Execution planning is the architect’s most fee-intensive service phase (the most expensive only if you then don’t use it). If you are willing to pay only to not use it, you might as well leave it out entirely and approach your builder with the building permit planning or (cheaper for wooden houses) even only the preliminary design.

I can tell you right away that “saving” on the planning will cost a lot of money (and quality) during execution.

First of all, thank you very much for the detailed response. "Exactly the same problem" was somewhat general wording; what I meant was that we are also currently wondering how to carry out a comparison of offers to find the cheapest construction company that can build our single-family house (not a wooden house).

By "Can someone once again comment on what makes sense for a comparison of offers, preliminary design (saves the costs of the detailed design) or detailed design?" I meant that you save the service phase 5 of the HOAI if you only use a preliminary design for the comparison of offers. This would be the case if the preliminary design is sufficiently precise to find the cheapest provider. But if I understood you correctly, this is not advisable because then you are comparing apples with oranges.

"Maybe you first explain what you are planning: commissioning a detailed design from the architect (that is service phases 1 to 5) and then having the tender done without the architect as well, going on the hunt for a willing construction company yourself?" What information do you need?

I interpret your penultimate paragraph as recommending commissioning the architect up to service phase 7, correct?

By "Can anyone once again comment on what makes sense for comparing offers, design planning (you save the costs of execution planning) or execution planning?" I meant that you would save service phase 5 of the HOAI if you only use design planning for the offer comparison. This would be the case if the design planning is sufficiently precise to find the cheapest provider.

But this case never applies: even the building application planning (service phase 4) does not meet the requirement of sufficient accuracy. The design planning (service phase 3) is even further away from the building application planning by at least the drainage planning (as well as the heat load calculation, ventilation concept, and the like). Simply put, at the end of service phase 4 you only have "the house from Nikola__", and at the end of service phase 3 even only "the house from Niko____".

But if I understood you correctly, this is not sensible because you then compare apples and oranges.

Sort of. For comparing offers, you already need execution planning / detailed planning (service phase 5) as a basis. But even with this, it would still be a comparison of apples and oranges if one (which regularly applies to laypeople) does not understand and master the difference between request for proposal and tender. So even with the execution planning (which also includes the construction and scope of services description, it’s by far not just about drawings) "alone," one would still be hopelessly ill-equipped to go hunting for suitable affordable bidders.

I interpret your penultimate paragraph as recommending to commission the architect up to service phase 7, right?

I even recommend commissioning the architect up to and including service phase 8; see "A house-building roadmap also for you: the HOAI phase model!" in the process "Module A - Dough resting with setting the course - Module B - Module C". Ideally, service phases 5 to 7 belong together, although as explained in the house-building roadmap, service phase 5 still belongs to Module B and service phases 6 and 7 to Module C. As my mnemonic "3+5=8" already says, the designer, detail planner, and construction manager are best the same person. Service phase 5 should be performed by the originator or at least someone significantly involved in service phase 3, because here "raising a stranger’s child" is a task of the highest penalty quality. However, developing service phases 6 and 7 from service phase 5 can also be done by an independent construction consultant (or another architect).

"Maybe you first explain what you are planning: with execution planning from the architect (i.e. service phases 1 to 5) then without the architect also doing the tender yourself to hunt for a willing construction company?" What information do you need?

First of all, what do you actually have: design planning (service phases 1-3) or approval planning (service phases 1-4), and did you take the dough rest and set the course before service phase 3?
You apparently do not have the detailed planning yet, if you are just now asking how dispensable we would consider it.