A common starting point for an interior fit-out project sounds perfectly reasonable: “Can you give us a quotation?” Sometimes it is. But sometimes it is the wrong question at the wrong stage of the project.
When a project has not been sufficiently defined, asking several contractors to quote does not necessarily give a client three prices for the same project. Quite often, it gives them three prices for three different interpretations of the project.
One contractor may assume standard finishes, while another allows for premium finishes. One may include electrical modifications, data infrastructure, testing and commissioning, while another prices only what is clearly visible on the drawings. One contractor may recognise difficult landlord requirements, restricted working hours or challenging site logistics, while another discovers those constraints only after appointment.
The resulting quotations can differ dramatically. At that point, comparing the totals alone can become misleading. The problem may not be that one contractor is expensive and another is cheap. The problem may simply be that they have not priced the same thing.
A quotation is only as reliable as the information behind it
Every quotation contains assumptions. The less information provided to the bidder, the more assumptions they have to make.
Imagine asking three contractors to price a new office fit-out using only a basic floor plan and a few reference images. The first contractor looks at the information and assumes painted gypsum partitions. The second assumes glazed partitions around several meeting rooms. The third notices enclosed executive offices in the reference images and allows for an acoustic-rated partition system.
All three may submit legitimate quotations. All three may also be pricing different projects. The same thing happens with ceilings, flooring, joinery, lighting, power, data, air-conditioning, fire systems, signage, furniture and virtually every other element of a commercial fit-out.
This creates what we might call an assumption gap. And assumption gaps eventually become commercial gaps. The client experiences those gaps later as variations, exclusions, substitutions, programme delays or uncomfortable conversations about what was — and was not — included in the original price.
The cheapest quotation may simply contain the most unanswered questions
This is where procurement becomes particularly interesting. Suppose three quotations come back. Contractor A is at KES 14.8 million. Contractor B is at KES 17.2 million. Contractor C is at KES 19.1 million. It is tempting to conclude immediately that Contractor A offers the best value. But the totals alone tell us very little.
What if Contractor A excluded structured cabling? What if Contractor B included upgraded acoustic treatment? What if Contractor C included statutory approvals, night working, protection of common areas and reinstatement obligations required by the landlord? Suddenly, those three numbers mean something very different.
Before deciding which quotation represents value, the first question should therefore be: are these contractors pricing substantially the same scope? If the answer is no, comparing their bottom-line figures is not yet a meaningful commercial comparison.
This is one of the reasons office fit-out quotations in Kenya can sometimes differ by millions even when contractors appear to be pricing the same project. And it is also why the cheapest quotation on the first day can sometimes become the most expensive project by the end.
So what needs to happen before serious pricing begins?
The answer depends on the size and complexity of the project. A small refurbishment may need relatively modest documentation. A corporate headquarters, laboratory, healthcare facility, hospitality project or technically demanding commercial interior will naturally require substantially more definition.
But whatever the project, the contractor needs enough information to understand not just what the space might look like, but what they are actually being asked to deliver. That starts with the brief. What is the client trying to achieve? How many people will occupy the space? What departments, functions and adjacencies are required? What level of finish is expected? What operational, brand, technology, security or specialist requirements must the project accommodate? Without a clear brief, even a beautifully drawn project can still be commercially underdefined.
The proposed space also needs to be tested. A layout should demonstrate that the client's requirements can reasonably fit within the available premises. For businesses evaluating office premises in Nairobi, this work can ideally begin before the lease is signed. A test fit can expose inefficient floorplates, inadequate meeting space, poor circulation, limited service capacity or expensive technical constraints before those problems become contractual commitments.
Then there is the question of scope. Who is responsible for the air-conditioning modifications? Is the landlord retaining responsibility for the fire alarm system? Are loose furniture and workstations included? What about structured cabling, access control, audiovisual systems, branding, statutory approvals and professional fees? A surprising amount of cost uncertainty comes not from expensive materials, but from simple questions of who is responsible for what.
The technical design should then develop far enough for contractors to understand the physical work. Depending on the project, that may include partition layouts, reflected ceiling plans, flooring layouts, electrical layouts, lighting intent, joinery details, mechanical requirements and coordinated service information. The objective is not documentation for documentation's sake. It is to progressively remove ambiguity.
The specification matters for exactly the same reason. A floor finish might mean a basic commercial carpet tile or a premium imported product. A partition might mean ordinary gypsum board or an acoustic system designed to meet a particular performance requirement. A worktop could be laminate, compact laminate, engineered stone or solid surface. These may all perform similar basic functions, but commercially they are very different propositions. If important materials and performance expectations remain undefined, bidders will inevitably fill the gaps themselves.
And once the scope is sufficiently developed, a structured pricing schedule or Bill of Quantities becomes extremely useful. Instead of receiving three completely different quotation formats, the client gives bidders a common commercial framework against which to price the work. The real value of a Bill of Quantities is therefore not simply that it contains numbers. It creates a common commercial language for the project.
Design is also a commercial risk-management tool
Good design is usually discussed in terms of aesthetics, functionality and user experience. Those things matter enormously. But design performs another role that is sometimes underestimated: design reduces commercial ambiguity.
Every resolved decision removes an unknown. Every coordinated drawing reduces interpretation. Every properly defined specification narrows the range of assumptions available to a bidder. Every clarified scope boundary reduces the possibility of disagreement later. In that sense, design is not simply about deciding how a space should look. It is also a risk-reduction tool.
This does not mean a project must be 100% designed before anybody discusses cost. Quite the opposite. Cost conversations should begin early and continue throughout the design process. But there is an important difference between cost planning and premature fixed pricing.
Early cost planning asks: “Given what we currently know, what budget should we reasonably expect?” Later competitive pricing asks: “Given this defined scope, what will you undertake the work for?” Those are related questions, but they are not the same question. Trying to turn the first question into the second too early creates false certainty.
In Nairobi, the building itself can change the price
This distinction becomes particularly important in the Nairobi commercial office market. Two offices of similar size can require very different fit-out expenditure depending on the building, landlord provisions and condition of the premises.
A space in Westlands may present very different constraints from one in Upper Hill, the CBD, Kilimani or another commercial district. Floor area alone tells you very little about the condition of the mechanical systems, available electrical capacity, fire and life-safety requirements, landlord approval procedures, goods-lift restrictions, working-hour limitations, ceiling conditions or reinstatement obligations.
That is why Curzey's approach to commercial interior design and office fit-out in Nairobi places considerable emphasis on understanding the building before finalising the project scope. A seemingly inexpensive office can become considerably less attractive once its technical limitations are understood.
The sequence should therefore not simply be: find space, get quotations, appoint contractor. It is far healthier to understand the space, define the brief, develop the design, establish the scope, test the cost, price the work, interrogate the quotations and only then appoint. That process does not eliminate every surprise, but it removes many avoidable ones.
In Mombasa and the Kenya Coast, pricing also needs to understand place
The same principle becomes even more important when a project moves beyond Nairobi. For commercial, hospitality and workplace projects in Mombasa and across the Kenya Coast, the design and pricing process needs to respond to a very different environmental and logistical context.
Humidity, salt-laden air, ventilation, corrosion exposure, material durability, transport logistics, specialist labour availability and procurement lead times can all influence design decisions — and therefore project cost. A material specification that performs perfectly well in Nairobi may require reconsideration at the coast.
Metal finishes, ironmongery, electrical accessories, external elements, adhesives, boards, coatings and mechanical equipment may all need to be selected with their operating environment in mind. A contractor pricing the project without understanding those conditions may produce an attractive number, but that number may not reflect what the project actually needs.
Likewise, a quotation prepared without properly considering transportation, delivery sequencing or procurement lead times may underestimate the real cost of executing the work. For projects in Mombasa, Kilifi, Vipingo, Watamu, Malindi and the wider Kenyan coast, designing before pricing also means designing for place. And that matters because the cheapest specification on paper is not necessarily the cheapest specification over the life of the project.
Good procurement is really about comparing like with like
Once the project is sufficiently defined, competitive procurement becomes much more useful. Contractors can still propose different rates. They can still identify more efficient construction methods. They can negotiate differently with suppliers. They can have different overhead structures and different commercial strategies.
Those are legitimate differences — and they are exactly the kinds of differences a competitive procurement exercise should reveal. The difference is that everyone is now responding to substantially the same scope.
That changes the conversation from: “Why is Contractor A KES 4 million cheaper?” to: “Where exactly is the KES 4 million difference coming from?” That is a much more useful question.
Perhaps one contractor has stronger supplier relationships. Perhaps another has allowed excessive contingency. Perhaps one has identified a genuinely more efficient construction method. Perhaps there are legitimate differences in overhead and margin. Or perhaps an important scope item is simply missing. A proper bid comparison allows those differences to be interrogated before appointment rather than discovered halfway through construction.
What actually happens when you price too early?
Premature pricing creates an illusion of certainty. A number appears on a quotation and, psychologically, the project suddenly feels financially defined. But a quotation cannot make an undefined project defined. It can only put numbers against the assumptions available at the time.
As the design develops, those assumptions gradually get replaced by actual decisions. The ceiling changes. The lighting requirement becomes clearer. The joinery gets developed. The landlord comments. The mechanical engineer identifies additional work. The client requests better acoustic separation. The electrical capacity needs upgrading. Then come the variations.
Not necessarily because somebody behaved badly. Sometimes the project simply received a price before it had earned the right to have a reliable price.
No serious project team should pretend that every decision can be frozen before construction begins. Clients evolve. Site conditions reveal themselves. Products become unavailable. Technical coordination produces new information. Changes will happen.
The objective is therefore not to eliminate change. It is to distinguish between necessary change and avoidable change created by inadequate definition. Avoidable changes cost more than money. They consume programme. They absorb management attention. They disrupt procurement. They create pressure on project teams. And, perhaps most damagingly, they can erode trust between client, consultant and contractor.
Design, test, price, then interrogate
At Curzey, we believe good commercial decisions begin with good information. So before asking “Who is cheapest?”, it is worth asking a few more fundamental questions. What exactly are we buying? Has the design developed far enough for the price to mean something? Are all bidders working from the same information? What has been included, excluded or assumed? And what risks are still sitting quietly between the lines?
Then, when the quotations arrive, interrogate them. Look beyond the grand total. Understand the scope behind the number. Understand the quantities, specifications, exclusions, programme, commercial conditions and assumptions that produced it.
Because the objective of procurement should never simply be to obtain the lowest number. It should be to obtain enough commercial clarity to make a well-informed project decision.
And sometimes the most effective way to control the price of an interior project is not to ask for the price sooner. It is to design before you price.
