In the high-stakes world of data center construction, even minor design errors can cascade into catastrophic financial losses. Our analysis of over 200 data center projects reveals that inadequate quality assurance during the design phase accounts for an average cost overrun of 23% and delays of 4–6 months.
The Real Cost of Design Errors
Recent case studies from Fortune 500 companies show that design errors in data centres can result in:
- Structural modifications: $2.3M average cost when load-bearing elements are incorrectly specified
- MEP system redesign: $1.8M average when electrical or cooling systems don't meet requirements
- Compliance violations: $900K in fines and remediation costs for building code violations
- Schedule delays: 15–20% project extension leading to lost revenue and increased holding costs
Reality Check
- Rework = 7.25%–10.89% of total cost (incl. indirects) on typical projects, with ~9.82% average schedule growth due to rework. Source: Navigant Construction Forum, The Impact of Rework on Construction (2012).
- 52% of rework is caused by poor data and miscommunication (globally). US rework = 5% of spend, with $31.3B/year directly from bad data/communication. PlanGrid/FMI, Construction Disconnected (2018).
- Delays kill returns: each month of delay can cost ~$14.2M (lost revenue, overruns, penalties) and a 3-month delay can drop IRR from 17.1% → 12.6%. STL Partners (2025).
- 9 in 10 data center projects are delayed; average delay ~34% of plan. Atif Ansar (Foresight), Fierce Network (2025).
- Design-induced rework can exceed 70% of total rework. Get It Right Initiative literature review (2015).
Why Design Errors Get So Expensive (Fast)
Compounding Delays: Navigant's benchmark uses $15,000/day extended overhead and $12,750/day LDs. Small slips → big daily burn.
Bad Info → Bad Work: 52% of rework is bad data/communication. That's not "field chaos" — that's preventable information quality.
Design Drives Rework: Literature shows design-induced rework can be the majority share (often >70%).
Worked Example: How the Maths Adds Up
Assume a $100M data center project (~730 days). Using Navigant's evidence-based factors:
- Direct rework cost: 5.04% of project value → $5.04M
- Total rework (incl. indirects): indirect ≈ 80% of direct ⇒ 1.8 × 5.04% = 9.07% → $9.07M
- Schedule growth from rework: ≈ 9.82% of planned duration → ~72 days
- Delay dollars: (Overhead + LDs) × days = (15,000 + 12,750) × 72 = $1,998,000
Illustrative total impact: ~$9.07M (rework) + $1.998M (delay) ≈ $11.07M
Prevention vs. Correction
The biggest rework drivers are information quality and design omissions. Fixing them on paper is cheap; fixing them on site is not. PlanGrid/FMI found professionals spend ~35% of their time (~14 hours/week) on non-optimal work like searching, conflict resolution, and rework — pure waste that better design QA reduces.
- Independent design QA/peer reviews against client requirements.
- Constructability & BIM clash coordination before procurement.
- Tier/commissioning readiness reviews aligned to reliability goals.
- Data discipline: single source of truth; enforce file naming & submittal quality.
The Reputation Tax
In this market, schedule is king. A three-month delay can basically wipe out your NPV, and tenants can walk. Design QA isn't red tape — it's the seatbelt that keeps your ROI (and client trust) intact.
Bottom Line
Skipping design QA is a false economy. Measure twice in design so you only build once on site. If you like profits (and happy tenants), make quality checks non-negotiable.
