The customer and the contractor both sign up to this. With single stage tenders there is normally a clear statement concerning risk allocation. Ultimately, however, the contract price can only be as robust as the quality of the design information provided. The single stage tender also seeks to avoid the adversarial behaviour that can develop around scope changes and interpretation of the technical brief. This is important for increasingly risk adverse funders. There is a single set of customer sourced documentation that relates to the contractor’s commercial offer. There is reduced scope for contractors to vary the price or make claims if they based their proposal on a detailed completed design. Risk management, particularly around cost, is one of the main motivators for customers to adopt the single stage approach. Single stage tenders seek to simplify the process by providing a completed design against which a range of potential contractors are asked to bid. With two stage tenders, contractors are normally bidding on the basis of incomplete design information, and the contractor is engaged early in the process to contribute to the development of the design within an agreed cost framework. For contractors and customers there are clear benefits in terms of faster decision making and greater certainty over the final price, but is it the right option? We have seen a growing trend in the construction market towards greater use of single stage tendering.