← Construction & Evaluation

Sheet G-147
PjM PcMCE

Schedulinginsight

Fast-track scheduling: overlapping design and construction via phased bid packages

One-line orientation

Fast-track compresses the project schedule by overlapping design and construction through phased bid packages, but it trades schedule savings for higher change risk — and it is a scheduling strategy, not a delivery method.

Key points

  • Definition: fast-track = overlapping design phases with construction by issuing early bid packages for portions of the work (foundation, structural steel, envelope) before the overall design is complete.
  • How it works: the project is broken into sequential bid packages. Package 1 (e.g., sitework/foundation) is designed and bid first; construction on that package starts while design continues on Package 2, and so on.
  • Schedule impact: total project duration is compressed because design and construction proceed in parallel rather than in series.
  • Risk profile:
    • Change risk rises — decisions made in later design packages may conflict with already-built work, forcing costly changes or rework.
    • Coordination gap risk — incomplete design integration between packages can create conflicts at interfaces (structure vs. MEP, envelope vs. interior).
    • The team should consider added contingency for fast-track uncertainty; the amount and where it is held depend on the project and contract.
  • Scheduling tool: The Critical Path Method (CPM) is useful for tracking dependencies and the critical path among overlapping packages, but it is not required for every fast-track project.
  • Delivery method pairing: fast-track is most common with CMc (Construction Manager as Constructor) delivery — the CM is involved early in design to advise on phasing, sequencing, and package content. It can also pair with Design-Build.
  • Not a delivery method: fast-track describes schedule structure, not the contractual relationship between parties.

Fast-track: a series of bid packages, each its own design–bid–build

Each bid package runs its own design → bid → construction, released in sequence so early construction overlaps the design of later packages.

View diagram Hide diagram

Scroll horizontally to explore

Traditional linear schedule versus fast-track phased-package schedule Two Gantt-style schedules share one time axis. The traditional schedule runs design, bid, and construction in series. The fast-track schedule overlaps separate design, bid, and construction packages, which may shorten total time while increasing coordination, change, and rework risk. CPM can help track dependencies, while the scheduling method and contingency are project decisions. Traditional(linear)DesignBidConstructionoverlap → change / rework riskFast-track(overlapped)designbidbuilddesignbidbuilddesignbidbuildPkg 1FoundationPkg 2Pkg 3time savedProject startFast-track finishTraditional finish
  • Design
  • Bid
  • Construction

Fast-track is a scheduling strategy, not a delivery method. CPM is useful for tracking dependencies, but the scheduling method is a project decision.

Overlap raises coordination, change, and rework risk; the project team decides the scheduling method and appropriate contingency.

Confusions / comparison

Traditional (linear)Fast-track (overlapped)
ScheduleLonger — phases in seriesShorter — design and construction overlap
Cost certaintyHigher — full design before bidLower — incomplete design at construction start
Change / rework riskLowerHigher
Scheduling approachOften simple to show on a Gantt chartCPM is useful for complex dependencies; project team selects the method
Common delivery pairingDesign-bid-buildCMc, Design-Build

→ pp-scheduling-methods-cpm (this module): how CPM can track fast-track dependencies · pp-construction-payment-basis (this module): fast-track commonly pairs with GMP/CMc payment structure · ProPractice — project delivery methods: CMc delivery (AIA A133/B133) is a common fast-track vehicle.

Spotted an issue with this card? Tell us →