I've had a lot of experience on one of the rungs of the commercial construction ladder. There are multiple reasons (of course), but there's an interesting correlation (in my experience) with the advent of higher technology.
CAD software, and now the various BIM tools, make it more likely rather than less likely to go into cost/timeline overruns.
Way back in the olden times, drawing plans was extremely labor intensive. Draftsmen using pencil and pen are many, many times slower than drawing on the computer. Because of this strict and unforgiving hard limit, a lot more time was spent in the planning stage. Architect and owner would work for a long time to get all of the details and requirements together before anybody touched a sheet of mylar. Any changes needed to be minor, because erasing and redrawing was expensive and difficult.
Because of the manual drafting restriction, details depended very much on using knowledgeable and experienced tradesmen. This also applied to specifications. Specifications were a lot more general, and were heavily reused between projects, because retyping 200 pages on an IBM Selectric is also time consuming and expensive.
This selects for a high level of competency across the board.
Now, because it's so easy to make massive changes at the last minute, everybody is pushing things down the road. "We'll catch it in addendums," is the rule, not the exception. And one of the biggest problems is the interface between architect and owner. The owner has ALWAYS been slow to get their people together and make decisions. So you end up with a project out to bid, and they're just now making calls on AV equipment and the like.
And the professionals, the architects and engineers, tend to put more on the drawings, and more in the specs. And because of this, a lot will get missed, or overlooked, or ignored. The general contractor sprays their sub-contractors with the drawings and specs, and the attending billion addendums, and so things get lost.
Plus, nowadays, J. Random Guy with a truck and good patter is now a licensed plumbing sub-contractor, who gets the job because he underbid. So he is now deeply incentivized to interpret the drawings and specs in a way that what should have been caught in the bidding phase is now considered a change order, which the owner has to pay for.
TL;DR: the ability to work fast in the design phase does not necessarily translate to better results in the construction phase.
(This works for software as well. We're still using software that was hand-chiseled into clay hard drives by the Great Beards Of Yore, while software that was programmed with amazing syntax-highlighting IDEs with built-in AI is riddled with obscure bugs.)
This sounds much like the same malady that has befallen movie production, and to some extent illustration and music.
The kind of artistic result achieved with true "do everything in triplicate" drafting and capturing one good performance, has fallen by the wayside when everything changes at the last moment. Movie budgets have become dominated with post-production, even when they make the effort to record in-camera scenes and effects.
And what I've noticed about illustration is the rise of a cargo cult of "the blind leading the blind" online akin to programmers who have only learned Bob Martin, driven by young people want to learn drawing digital-first, for some legitimate reasons, but also because of the gadgetry and because they want to cling to the undo button and use layers. But it's the same thing: most of the knowledge of drawing, like with every other trade, is tacit, motor-skills heavy and needs to be trained into muscle memory. Being very bad at getting the line you want and mashing undo to force your way through just means every project is frustrating.
And once you do cross that threshold and train it, having the undo and layers are nice additions, but predispose you to not do as much planning. Thus, much of digital illustration tends to have a formulaic quality to it: the artist could configure things all sorts of ways, but the overwhelming tendency is to drive towards excessive detail and excessive rendering, because the medium is an enabler for that and doesn't require you to think it through.
CAD software, and now the various BIM tools, make it more likely rather than less likely to go into cost/timeline overruns.
Way back in the olden times, drawing plans was extremely labor intensive. Draftsmen using pencil and pen are many, many times slower than drawing on the computer. Because of this strict and unforgiving hard limit, a lot more time was spent in the planning stage. Architect and owner would work for a long time to get all of the details and requirements together before anybody touched a sheet of mylar. Any changes needed to be minor, because erasing and redrawing was expensive and difficult.
Because of the manual drafting restriction, details depended very much on using knowledgeable and experienced tradesmen. This also applied to specifications. Specifications were a lot more general, and were heavily reused between projects, because retyping 200 pages on an IBM Selectric is also time consuming and expensive.
This selects for a high level of competency across the board.
Now, because it's so easy to make massive changes at the last minute, everybody is pushing things down the road. "We'll catch it in addendums," is the rule, not the exception. And one of the biggest problems is the interface between architect and owner. The owner has ALWAYS been slow to get their people together and make decisions. So you end up with a project out to bid, and they're just now making calls on AV equipment and the like.
And the professionals, the architects and engineers, tend to put more on the drawings, and more in the specs. And because of this, a lot will get missed, or overlooked, or ignored. The general contractor sprays their sub-contractors with the drawings and specs, and the attending billion addendums, and so things get lost.
Plus, nowadays, J. Random Guy with a truck and good patter is now a licensed plumbing sub-contractor, who gets the job because he underbid. So he is now deeply incentivized to interpret the drawings and specs in a way that what should have been caught in the bidding phase is now considered a change order, which the owner has to pay for.
TL;DR: the ability to work fast in the design phase does not necessarily translate to better results in the construction phase.
(This works for software as well. We're still using software that was hand-chiseled into clay hard drives by the Great Beards Of Yore, while software that was programmed with amazing syntax-highlighting IDEs with built-in AI is riddled with obscure bugs.)