When to Hire Your Contractor: The 3 Risk Profiles That Protect Your Project

[: 00:00:00

William Reid:

All right, welcome back to Your Home Building Coach. In our last episode, Episode 27, we wrapped up our comprehensive design process series by covering construction documents in detail. I wanted to cover even more in that episode, but I frankly just ran out of time.

We talked about what construction documents are, what your architect is doing behind the scenes, your role in reviewing them, and how to manage deferred specifications. Construction documents were the last step in creating a complete set of plans and specifications for your project. I try to cover as much detail as possible within these episodes, and down the road, I'm going to get into more specifics about plans. But I wanted to give you the big picture of the design process first.

At the end of that episode, I introduced a critical strategic decision—one that deserves its own focused conversation. This isn't just another step in the process. It's a decision point that will significantly impact your project timeline, your budget certainty, and your stress level over the next several months.

________________________________________

[: 00:01:00

William Reid:

Here's the question: Your construction documents are complete. You've reviewed them. You've approved them. Now what? When do you hire your contractor? When do you submit for building permits? And does the order matter?

For years, I've watched homeowners make this decision based on whoever shouts the loudest—whether that's the architect saying, "Let's submit for permits immediately," or their friends saying, "Never hire a contractor until the permits are in hand," or some internet forum saying something completely different, like our lovable Facebook groups.

But here's what almost nobody tells you: You have options. There are three distinct strategic approaches, each with different risk levels, different timelines, and different outcomes.

The right approach for you depends on your specific situation—your budget confidence, your financial flexibility, your project complexity, and your personal risk tolerance. There's no single correct answer. There's the correct answer for you.

Today, I'm going to give you the complete framework to make this decision strategically, not reactively.

________________________________________

[: 00:02:00

William Reid:

This episode is going to be different from most of what you hear in the homeowner advice space. I'm not going to tell you what you must do or what the only right way is. Instead, I'm going to present you with three approaches—I call them risk profiles. I'll explain exactly what each one involves, show you the trade-offs honestly, and give you a decision framework so you can choose the approach that matches your project and your comfort level.

By the end of this episode, you'll understand the strategic landscape, you'll know your options, and you'll be equipped to make an informed decision that protects your interests while moving your project forward.

Here's what we're going to cover:

• Why this decision matters so much

• Three risk profile approaches in detail

• A decision framework based on six key factors

• Specific action items based on whichever approach you choose

________________________________________

[: 00:03:00

William Reid:

Let's start with why this timing decision is so critical. Before I show you the three approaches, I want to make sure you understand what's actually at stake here. This isn't just about paperwork and scheduling. This decision affects some of the most important aspects of your entire project.

Let me break down what you're really deciding.

Point One: Timing to Breaking Ground

First, and most obviously, how long until you actually break ground and start construction? The three approaches have dramatically different timelines. We're talking about potentially eight to ten weeks of difference between the fastest and slowest approaches. If timeline matters to you—and for most people it does—this decision directly determines when your project becomes a reality.

Point Two: Budget Certainty

Second, and this is huge, when will you know your final real cost? One approach gives you complete cost certainty before you've spent a penny on permits. Another approach has you finding out final costs while permits are being reviewed. And the third approach means you don't find out final costs until after your permits are approved.

Think about what that means for your stress level and your financial planning.

Point Three: Financial Risk

What happens if your contractor bids come in 15% or 20% higher than you were expecting? In one approach, you'll find that out early and you can adjust before committing to anything. In another approach, you've already committed to permit fees and timeline. And in the third approach, you might have waited months for permits only to discover the project isn't financially viable.

These are very different risk scenarios.

Point Four: Flexibility to Make Changes

How much room do you have to make changes if pricing isn't what you expected? One approach gives you maximum flexibility to value engineer before any major commitments. Another approach requires quick decisions during a compressed timeline. And the third approach might require going back to revise permitted plans, which adds significant time and cost.

Point Five: Construction Readiness

How quickly can you actually mobilize and start building once permits are approved? In one approach, your contractor is signed, committed, and has materials on order the day permits arrive. In another approach, you're starting the contractor selection process from scratch after permits are approved, which adds weeks or months before breaking ground.

________________________________________

[: 00:06:00

William Reid:

I must emphasize that the more emphasis we put on budget checkpoints in the design process—if you remember, Budget Checkpoint One and Budget Checkpoint Two, estimating during schematic design and design development—the better you can manage the risk we're about to talk about.

But as we move forward into construction documents, things do change, and we need to be very aware of that as we make these final decisions.

________________________________________

[: 00:07:00

William Reid:

Understanding the trade-offs—not the problems—here's the reality: There's a fundamental tension between speed and certainty.

Generally speaking, the faster you want to potentially break ground, the less cost certainty you have before committing to permits. And the more cost certainty you want before permits, the longer your total timeline becomes. I hope you're following here. This is a trade-off, not a problem to solve.

Similarly, there's a tension between risk and timeline. Lower financial risk approaches typically have longer timelines to breaking ground. Approaches that might get you to breaking ground faster carry higher financial risk if costs come in higher than expected.

And finally, flexibility versus momentum. Approaches that give you maximum flexibility also mean more decision points and potential delays. Approaches that maintain strong momentum can feel like you're locked into a path with less room to pivot.

The key here is understanding that you're choosing between trade-offs. There's no perfect solution that gives you maximum speed, zero risk, complete flexibility, and instant construction readiness. You're choosing which factors matter most for your situation.

These are key points because a lot of homeowners go into a project wanting all of that, thinking they're going to get it, and it's impossible to pull all of that together. It ties directly to your personal risk tolerance.

________________________________________

[: 00:08:00

William Reid:

There are six factors that influence your choice. What is the right approach for you?

Factor One: Budget Confidence

How certain are you about costs after Budget Checkpoint Two? If you did thorough budget checkpoints during design development and your estimates have been consistently accurate, you have high budget confidence. If estimates have varied significantly, or if you have a complex project with many unknowns, you have lower budget confidence.

This single factor has more influence on your decision than anything else.

I want to say that the budget checkpoint process I've talked about in these episodes—specifically within the design process—is not something that normally happens in the world of residential design and construction. In fact, it's often that people just gloss over the budget and never really address it until it's too late.

Keep in mind that my process, the one I've been talking about, mitigates a lot of these potential problems or hard choices coming up. Those budget checkpoints and preliminary estimating get you out of that corner you could get backed into.

Factor Two: Financial Flexibility

Can you absorb cost surprises, or are you at your absolute maximum budget? If you're financing the project and the lender has approved a specific amount, you have low flexibility. If you have a healthy cushion—say 15% to 20% above your expected costs—you have higher flexibility.

Factor Three: Plan Completeness

Are your specifications 95% finalized with minimal deferrals, or are you still figuring out significant elements of the project? The more complete your plans and specifications, the more confidence you can have in contractor pricing accuracy.

This goes all the way back to how well the project has been designed—all the way back into schematic design and design development. How well you focused, how well you directed your design team, how well your design team listened, how well it all got documented.

This can come down to almost a gut instinct. If you really feel like your plans and specs are dialed in, you are mitigating this risk.

Factor Four: Timeline Pressure

How urgent is it really to break ground? Are you living in temporary housing, burning through money? Do you have a specific date you need to be in the home, or is it just a nice-to-have with flexible timing?

This is something that people tie their emotions to. They really want to get started so fast because they're so excited. But you can really pull the rug out from underneath yourself if you don't have all these other factors considered, especially the plan completeness.

Factor Five: Project Complexity

Is this a straightforward kitchen remodel with predictable costs, or a complex custom home on a hillside with multiple systems and engineering challenges? Complexity directly correlates with cost uncertainty.

Factor Six: Experience Level

Have you managed construction projects before? Are you comfortable making quick decisions under pressure, or is this your first major project where you want maximum protection and time to think through decisions?

________________________________________

[: 00:12:00

William Reid:

So those are the stakes. This decision affects your timeline, your budget certainty, your financial risk, your flexibility, and your construction readiness. And the right choice depends on six key factors: budget confidence, financial flexibility, plan completeness, timeline pressure, project complexity, and experience level.

Understanding these factors is critical because they form the foundation of the decision framework I'm about to give you.

________________________________________

[: 00:13:00

William Reid:

Let's walk through the three risk profile approaches. I'm going to explain each one in detail—what it involves, how the timeline works, why you'd choose it, what the trade-offs are, and who it's best for.

I'm going to present these three approaches as risk profiles: low risk, moderate risk, and high risk. These aren't judgments. They're descriptions of the financial risk exposure you're accepting within each approach.

Remember, higher risk doesn't mean wrong. It means you're accepting more uncertainty in exchange for other benefits. Lower risk doesn't mean overcautious. It means you're prioritizing certainty and protection.

Think of these as three different paths across a stream. They all get you to the other side—breaking ground—but they take different routes with different challenges.

Let me walk through all three with you.

________________________________________

[: 00:14:00

William Reid:

Let's talk about the low risk approach. I call it "Certainty First."

The Core Strategy

The low risk approach means get final contractor pricing, select your contractor, and sign a contract before submitting for building permits. You do all your contractor selection work first, then submit for permits.

Here's the Sequence:

1. You send bid packages to three to five pre-screened contractors. Hopefully, you've already been speaking with contractors during the whole design process, or at least towards the end of the process, so you already have some in mind—maybe even some that already helped you with your budget checkpoints and you've already vetted them out. This can take two to four weeks to get bids back from your contractors.

2. You evaluate the bids, interview your top candidates, and then select a contractor. That's another one to two weeks.

3. You negotiate terms and sign a construction contract—another one to two weeks.

At this point, you now have a signed contract with final pricing locked in.

4. Only then do you submit for building permits. Now permits go into review, which typically takes as little as four weeks and as much as 16 weeks, depending on your jurisdiction and the complexity of the project.

5. During that review period, your contractor uses the time productively. They're finalizing subcontractor schedules, ordering long-lead materials, doing pre-construction planning.

6. When permits are approved, you break ground immediately.

Total time from construction documents complete to breaking ground: Approximately 12 to 24 weeks.

One Risk with This Approach

There is one risk with this approach: if you submit the plans to the city and they get rejected, or they have a tremendous amount of comments and revisions that could affect the project's scope and therefore cost.

This is important for you to know because this is a fundamental thing that should have already been dealt with by your design team early on—all the way back in the schematic design process, making sure we can build what we want to build, and in the design development process where more details were vetted out and they were visiting the planning and building department.

This is something we can't really control other than keeping our eye on the ball during the design process. It's a pretty low risk if you've hired a professional designer and architect. If you've hired an inexperienced or mediocre draftsperson to do your project who doesn't work with your city or county that much, you're probably in deep trouble. So don't do that.

Why You'd Choose This Approach

This approach is powerful. You know your exact costs before committing to anything, such as the permitting. If bids come in higher than your budget, you haven't wasted time or money on permits. You can pause, work with your architect to value engineer, revise specifications, and then move forward with permits knowing you're within budget.

Your contract is signed, which means your contractor is committed when permits arrive. They can't get cold feet or take other jobs during the permit review period. And because they've been preparing during the permit review, they're ready to mobilize immediately when permits arrive.

Most importantly, there's practically zero financial risk from unexpected pricing. You've eliminated the nightmare scenario of waiting months for permits only to discover the project isn't affordable.

The Trade-Offs

This is the longest timeline to breaking ground. You're adding four to eight weeks, maybe even more, before permits are even submitted. That delay matters if you're in temporary housing or have other time pressures.

There's also a risk that your contractor might have schedule conflicts by the time permits are approved several months later, though a well-written contract protects against this.

Some contractors don't like committing without seeing permit-approved plans, so your candidate pool might be slightly smaller. You can have a particular clause in your contract or an understanding with your contractor that if there are changes from the city that could affect scope and cost, then a revision can be made to the contract.

This Approach Is Best For:

• Homeowners at or near their maximum budget with zero financial flexibility. If you can't absorb cost surprises, you need this approach.

• First-time builders who want maximum control and protection

• Projects with many deferred specifications that might affect pricing

• Anyone financing the project where the lender needs final cost before releasing funds

Red Flags That Suggest You Use This Approach:

Here are some signs:

• Your financing and your lender require final contractor costs

• Budget Checkpoint Two had significant variance from expectations

• Your specifications are less than 90% complete

• You absolutely cannot afford surprises

If any of these describe you, low risk is probably your best choice.

________________________________________

[: 00:19:00

William Reid:

All right, let's move into Approach Two, moderate risk, which I call "The Parallel Process."

The Core Strategy

Submit for building permits and conduct contractor selection simultaneously. You're running both processes in parallel.

How This Timeline Works:

Construction documents are complete. In the same week, you do two things: Your architect submits for building permits, and you send bid packages to contractor candidates. Now both processes are running at the same time.

During the eight to 16 weeks that permits are being reviewed, you are actively working on contractor selection:

• Weeks two to four: Contractors review plans and submit bids

• Week five to six: You evaluate bids and select your contractor

• Week six to eight: You negotiate and sign the contract

• Remainder of permit review period: Your contractor prepares—scheduling, ordering materials, coordinating subs

When permits are approved, you're ready to break ground immediately because your contractor is selected, signed, and prepared.

Total time from construction documents complete to breaking ground: Approximately eight to 16 weeks—essentially the same as the permit review timeline. You've saved four to eight weeks compared to the low risk approach.

Why You'd Choose This Approach

This is the fastest path to breaking ground if everything goes smoothly. You're using permit review time productively instead of just waiting. Your contractor selection is complete when permits arrive, so you can mobilize immediately.

If pricing comes in acceptable, you're in great shape. You still have some flexibility during the process. If costs are slightly high in week four, you have a few weeks to make minor adjustments before the permits are approved.

This approach balances speed with safety. You're not flying completely blind, but you're also not adding unnecessary delays.

The Trade-Offs

There's moderate financial risk here. If bids come in significantly higher than expected, you've already committed to the permit fees and the timeline.

Don't forget that once a permit is issued, there is a timeline before you are required to get your first inspection. Otherwise, your permit will expire and you may have to try and renew it.

Permits might be approved before you're fully ready if the contractor selection gets delayed for any reason. If you need major value engineering, you're under time pressure to make decisions quickly. You might need to revise permits after approval, which adds time and cost. In fact, doing that can actually double the time of permit processing if you have to resubmit because you've made modifications to the design after a permit is issued.

You're essentially betting that your budget estimates are reasonably accurate. You're going to have to make a judgment on all the previous steps you've taken in your budget checkpoints to decide if this is a reasonable risk to take.

Who Is This Approach Best For?

• Homeowners with moderate to high budget confidence from thorough budget checkpoints

• Projects with 90% or more specifications complete

• Experienced homeowners who have managed projects before and are comfortable making decisions under time pressure

• Projects with some budget cushion—10% to 15% flexibility

• Homeowners who want to balance speed with reasonable protection

To Use This Approach Successfully, You Need:

• A comprehensive Budget Checkpoint Two, or even better, an actual construction estimate because your plans are that thorough. That will give you confidence.

• Highly completed specifications with minimal deferrals so you don't get financial surprises

• A cushion for modest cost increases

• Comfort with some uncertainty during the permit review period

• The ability to make quick decisions if value engineering becomes necessary

You can see that we're striking a balance here, and you're leveraging that permitting time by running parallel with your contractor selection.

________________________________________

[: 00:24:00

William Reid:

Approach Three is what I call the high risk approach: "Permits First."

The Core Strategy

This high risk approach means you submit for building permits immediately, then conduct contractor selection after permits are approved.

How the Timeline Works:

1. Construction documents are complete, and you immediately submit for building permits so you don't have any delays in that process, because that process can be a lengthy process depending on the nature of your project.

2. Permits go into review—eight to 16 weeks. During this time, you might be pre-screening contractors, but you're not formally bidding or committing.

3. Permits are approved. Now you send bid packages to contractors—that takes two to four weeks.

4. You evaluate bids and select your contractor—another one to two weeks.

5. You negotiate and sign a contract—another one to two weeks.

6. Then you break ground.

Total time from construction documents complete to breaking ground: Approximately 13 to 24 weeks, potentially longer than the low risk approach despite submitting for permits first.

Why Would You Choose This Approach?

Here's the rationale: You get the permit process started immediately with no delays whatsoever. Your contractor sees fully permitted, building department-approved plans, which can increase their confidence and potentially result in better pricing.

You have no risk of contractor schedule conflicts during the permit review because they're not locked in yet. And you maintain maximum flexibility during permit review to make minor revisions if needed without any contractor involvement or impact.

But Here Are the Serious Trade-Offs:

High financial risk. You could wait months for permits, then discover the project isn't affordable.

If you need significant value engineering, you're looking at revising permitted plans and resubmitting—another six to ten weeks plus resubmittal fees.

If the project isn't financially viable, you've wasted permit fees—typically $3,000 to $10,000. I've seen permits cost $100,000 in some jurisdictions for high-end custom homes.

Counterintuitively, this can be the longest timeline to breaking ground because you're adding five to eight weeks of contractor selection after the permits are approved.

Perhaps most significantly, you have no contractor input during the permit review period. If the building department requires changes that affect constructability or cost, you have no contractor perspective until after permits are approved.

You can see that this extends the timeline, increases the financial risk, and it is the highest risk from a financial standpoint because you could go through all of this effort and then come to find out that it's not even close to what you wanted to spend on the project.

This happens a lot. And the reason this happens a lot is because no due diligence was done during the design process to understand what the project might cost. They just keep plugging along. Everybody's saying, "Yeah, it's great. Yeah, we'll probably be pretty close to your budget." Who knows? Who knows until you really get the real numbers back?

Who This High Risk Approach Might Work For:

• Homeowners with very high budget confidence and significant financial cushion—we're talking 20% or more flexibility

• Those who have a really good understanding of what the project's going to cost and can get the plans in as fast as possible to the city and then work out contractor selection during that whole timeline (sort of like the parallel process, but not really—you're emphasizing the plans and getting everything submitted quickly)

• Very simple, straightforward projects like basic kitchen remodels where costs are highly predictable

• Projects where speed to permit submittal matters more than speed to breaking ground (maybe there's a permitting deadline or changing regulations you need to beat, or you know it's an extremely long timeline to get permits from your city)

• Situations where contractor availability is highly uncertain and you want permitted plans in hand before committing to a contractor search

Contractors definitely respond differently when they know that the permits have been issued and the date of breaking ground is near. That can affect them mentally when they go to price out the project—knowing it could potentially start in a month as opposed to six months out. There are some benefits there.

Red Flags Against This Approach:

These are signs you should NOT use this approach:

• Tight budgets with no cushion. This is dangerous if you can't absorb surprises because you are way deep into the permitting process. You've got permits, and now you're going to get costs.

• Complex projects with cost uncertainty. That certainly widens the margin for surprises.

• You haven't done a good job picking out your project specifications and you have a lot of allowances and uncertainty in the budget.

• Budget Checkpoint Two had significant variances or was inconclusive.

• You're financing and need cost certainty. You're going to need that earlier in the process.

• You're a first-time builder without experience managing unexpected issues.

________________________________________

[: 00:30:00

William Reid:

There you have them—the three approaches with very different characteristics:

Low Risk: Get pricing and sign a contract before permits. Longest timeline, but maximum cost certainty and zero financial risk.

Moderate Risk: Run permits and contractor selection in parallel. Fastest path to breaking ground. Balanced protection requires some budget confidence.

High Risk: Submit for permits first just because you want to get in that hopper and timeline. Then get pricing after approval. This can work for simple projects with high budget confidence but carries significant financial risk and can actually be slower than the other approaches.

Now the question is, which one is right for you? That's what we're covering next.

________________________________________

[: 00:31:00

William Reid:

All right, so now you understand the three approaches. You know what they involve, how the timelines work, and what the trade-offs are. Now I'm going to give you a systematic decision framework to help you determine which approach makes the most sense for your specific situation.

I'm going to walk you through six key factors. For each factor, I'll tell you how your specific circumstances point towards one approach or another. At the end, you'll have a clear picture of which approach aligns with your project reality.

Factor One: Budget Confidence

Factor number one is the most important factor in your decision.

If you have low budget confidence—meaning your estimates have varied significantly, you have many unknowns, or your project is complex with custom elements—you should probably choose the low risk approach. Don't mess around with higher risk approaches when you're not confident about costs.

If you have moderate budget confidence—you did thorough Budget Checkpoint Two, you have 90% of your specs complete, your preliminary estimates have been consistent—you can safely choose the moderate risk approach. You have enough confidence to run things in parallel.

If you have high budget confidence—simple project, complete specs, previous checkpoints were spot-on accurate, you've done this before—then moderate or high risk approaches are both acceptable depending on your other factors.

Here's a gut check question: If contractor bids came in 15% to 20% higher than your expectations, would you be: okay? Stressed but manageable? Or completely devastated?

If the answer is devastated, you must use the low risk option. If it's stressed but manageable, moderate risk could be appropriate. If it's okay, any approach works.

Factor Two: Financial Flexibility

How much cushion do you have?

If you have zero cushion—you're at your absolute maximum budget, can't borrow more, can't adjust—you must use the low risk approach. This isn't negotiable. You cannot accept financial risk when you have no flexibility.

If you have some cushion—10% to 15% available for variances—the moderate risk approach is appropriate. You can handle modest cost increases.

If you have significant cushion—20% or more available, flexible on budget, comfortable with variances—any approach is acceptable from a financial standpoint.

Factor Three: Specification Completeness

If your specifications are 70% to 85% complete with many deferrals, allowances, and TBDs, choose the low risk. Too much uncertainty for contractors won't get you accurate pricing.

If your specifications are 90% to 95% complete with minimal deferrals and most specs locked in, moderate risk is appropriate. Contractors can price reasonably accurately.

If your specifications are 95% to 100% complete with nearly everything specified, any approach is acceptable based on your other factors.

Factor Four: Timeline Priority

If speed is critical—you need to break ground ASAP, you're in temporary housing burning money, you have time constraints—the moderate risk approach is your fastest path to groundbreaking. It compresses the timeline maximally while still maintaining reasonable protection.

If you have balanced priority—you want to move forward but aren't in a rush—low or moderate risk both work. Choose based on your budget confidence and financial flexibility.

If certainty matters more than speed—you'd rather take longer and know you're protected—choose the low risk approach. Peace of mind is worth the extra weeks.

Factor Five: Project Complexity

If you have a simple project—straightforward remodel, no structural changes, predictable costs, standard materials—moderate or even high risk approaches can work if your other factors align.

If you have moderate complexity—additions, multiple systems, some custom elements, engineering required—the moderate risk approach is your sweet spot. Enough confidence to run parallel, but not so simple you can skip the parallel safety net.

If you have high complexity—custom home, hillside lot, extensive structural work, unusual design, many engineering consultants—choose the low risk. The complexity creates too much cost uncertainty for higher risk approaches.

Factor Six: Experience Level

If you're a first-time builder—you've never managed a construction project—choose low risk to protect yourself. You don't have the experience to navigate problems quickly under pressure.

If you have some experience—you've done smaller projects, you understand the process, you're comfortable making decisions—moderate risk is appropriate. You can handle the parallel process demands.

If you're an experienced homeowner or builder—you've done this multiple times, you know what to expect, you're comfortable with uncertainty—you can use any approach based on your specific project factors.

________________________________________

[: 00:37:00

William Reid:

Now let me give you the simplest decision test of all. Ask yourself this one question:

If contractor bids come in 15% to 20% higher than I'm expecting, can I afford it, or does my project fall apart?

If your honest answer is, "My project falls apart," you must use the low risk approach. No exceptions. You cannot accept financial risk when you have no safety net.

If your answer is, "I can handle it, but I'd prefer not to, and I'd need to make some adjustments," moderate risk is appropriate. You have enough cushion to absorb modest variances.

If your answer is, "No problem, I have significant flexibility and can absorb cost increases," then any approach works, and you should choose based on your timeline priorities and other factors.

That one question cuts through all the complexity and gets to the heart of the decision.

________________________________________

[: 00:38:00

William Reid:

You can see that there are three different avenues you can take. And you can also see that all three paths are directly related to how well the design process went, how well the budgeting checkpoints went (if they happened at all), how detailed and specified your project is.

If you position yourself by orchestrating and coordinating all of the steps of design—all the way back to my discovery stage in my early episodes, and then working your way through the design process—you're going to be in a position to make any of these decisions and choose any of these paths.

But the people that are on two ends of the spectrum—who have mediocre plans, inadequate specs, but select the high risk model—are the ones that get really burned. And I've got to tell you, it's a lot of people out there that do that.

________________________________________

[: 00:39:00

William Reid:

Let's put this all together. Here's how to use it:

Step One: Rate yourself honestly on each of these six factors. Write it down. Don't just think about it.

Step Two: If you scored low risk on factors one or two—budget confidence or financial flexibility—that's your answer. Use the low risk model. Those two factors override everything else.

Step Three: If you scored moderate or high on factors one and two, look at factors three through six. If the majority point toward moderate, that's your answer. If they're split, err towards moderate. Remember, that's the parallel balanced approach—the middle ground.

Step Four: Only consider high risk if you've scored high on factors one, two, and three—budget confidence, financial flexibility, and specification completeness—and you have a compelling reason, like a regulatory deadline or, on the other side of the spectrum, an extremely simple project.

Step Five: Trust your gut. If an approach makes you anxious after you've scored the factors, that anxiety is data. Choose the approach that lets you sleep at night.

That's your decision framework. I know it was a lot, but I'm trying to get a framework built so that homeowners—so that you—can understand the predicament you could put yourself in, both in a positive and a negative way, and how you can control that during the stages before these decisions come to light.

________________________________________

[: 00:41:00

William Reid:

Remember, there is no right universal answer. There's only the right answer for your budget confidence, your financial flexibility, your project complexity, your timeline needs, and your personal comfort level.

________________________________________

[: 00:42:00

William Reid:

Depending on your risk tolerance—whether it's low, medium, or high—there are specific action items you can take. That's a strategic plan for engaging with your architect, your designers, your financial planners, and your contractors. I have a list for each of them prepared.

I'm out of time on this episode, so I'm going to have these available to whoever contacts me, and I can provide this list directly. I would welcome you to join the Awakened Homeowner Community. If you sign up or shoot me an email, I can get you this list. I'll also try to post it in the show notes.

These will be your action items organized by your risk profile. You'll follow the guidance for your chosen approach, stay organized, communicate clearly, and trust your decision.

Remember, the fact that you're using a strategic framework to make this decision already puts you ahead of 90% of the homeowners who just do whatever someone tells them without understanding why.

________________________________________

[: 00:43:00

William Reid:

That's it. You now have the complete strategic framework for timing your contractor selection relative to your permit submittal. This happens around the construction documents and permitting stage.

You understand the three risk profiles. You have a decision framework based on six key factors. And you have specific action items for whichever approach you've chosen, which I'm going to post since I don't have time to talk about them.

This isn't the last word on contractors—not even close. In upcoming episodes, we're going to dive deep into how to select contractors, how to find qualified candidates, how to screen them, what to look for in bids, how to read contracts, how to structure payments, and how to manage the relationship during construction.

But all of that comes after you've made this strategic timing decision.

Make your decision, document it, communicate it, and then move forward with confidence.

________________________________________

[: 00:44:00

William Reid:

Let's recap this episode. This is how I've wrapped up this design process series, and you can see we're getting more and more involved.

Here's what we've covered today:

You have three strategic approaches for timing contractor selection relative to permit submittal after your construction documents have been completed.

You now know that you can position yourself during the design process—way back in schematic design, even way back in discovery when you were trying to gain focus—through design development so you can position yourself to choose whatever decision you want. And now you know you need to make that decision as opposed to going in blindly.

You had the low risk: Get pricing and sign a contract before permits.

You had the moderate risk: Run the process in parallel, which is your fastest to breaking ground.

You had the high risk: Permits first, then pricing, because you wanted to get the permitting process going as fast as possible. This is the highest financial risk.

Your choice should be based on the six factors: budget confidence, financial flexibility, specification completeness, timeline priority, project complexity, and your experience level.

Use the decision framework, be honest about your situation, and choose the approach that lets you sleep at night.

________________________________________

[: 00:46:00

William Reid:

This episode bridges our design process series, which we completed in Episode 27, and our upcoming contractor selection series. We probably won't go there quite yet because what I'm going to do next is we're going to pause and go back to how you come to an agreement with your design team and the different ways you can come to agreements with your design team.

You've now understood the design professionals. You now understand the design process. And you understand this big milestone of where to go after your drawings are done and what risk level to take.

Now we're going to go back and learn all about the things you should know before you even hire that designer. That's the goal right now. We're still in the world of design—big series with all these little mini-series within the world of design, and that's where we're going.

I really hope I helped you. These are the things that I see all the time, and I know homeowners, if they knew this stuff, would make a lot better, a lot smarter, informed decisions.

I'm Bill Reid, your home building coach from the Awakened Homeowner, and I will see you in the next series.