With the traditional procurement route, design risks, costs risks and many other risks basically lie with the client; an aspect which makes the traditional procurement route disadvantageous. In addition, the construction performance risk lies with the contractor. Other advantages of the traditional route is that it has competitive fairness, relatively low tender preparation costs, it has high levels of satisfactory public accountability, procedures of the traditional procurement route are well known since every step is made public and in the advent of any alterations, they are easy to implement (Arai et al 2006).
On the flipside, traditional procurement process has a record of being very slow to commence and they are open to abuse when the design is incomplete. Traditional procurement processes are marred with poor build ability as the contractor is not involved in the design. They are not consulted in the designing process as the designing is done by another team or entity. They have the potential for adversarial relationships. It creates a leeway for design risks, as the same lies with the client (Arai et al 2006).