What is the consequence of not periodically requiring competition from the same designer?

The consequence of not periodically requiring competition from the same designer is indeed associated with less innovation in design work. When a designer is engaged continuously without the need for competition, there is a tendency for the design approach to become stagnant. Familiarity with a project or client can lead to a comfort zone where the designer may rely on familiar solutions rather than seeking out new ideas or innovative techniques.

On the other hand, introducing competition encourages designers to bring their best ideas forward, as they know they are vying against others who may offer fresh perspectives or alternative solutions. This competitive environment fosters creativity and pushes designers to think outside the box, ultimately leading to more innovative outcomes that can enhance the project quality.

It's important to recognize that while increased project costs, difficulty in managing contracts, or even the perception of having no consequence may seem relevant concerns, they do not directly address the critical issue of innovation in design. Engaging in periodic competition ensures that the design process remains dynamic and responsive to evolving needs and constraints, fostering an environment ripe for innovation.