What is the Difference Between CMAR and PDB?

In the construction industry, selecting the right project delivery method is crucial for success. Among the numerous options, two prominent methods stand out: Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) and Progressive Design-Build (PDB). Both construction approaches have their unique advantages and challenges. Understanding their differences is essential for stakeholders to make informed decisions. Let’s dive into the details and explore these two methods thoroughly.

Understanding CMAR (Construction Manager at Risk)

Under the Construction Manager at Risk(CMAR) method of project delivery, the construction manager guarantees that the project will be completed within a guaranteed maximum price (GMP). This method integrates the construction manager early in the design phase, ensuring their expertise influences project planning and cost estimation.

Early Involvement of the Construction Manager

In CMAR, the construction manager is involved early in the project. This early engagement allows for better planning, accurate budgeting, and effective risk management.

Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)

One of the critical features of CMAR is the Guaranteed Maximum Price. The construction manager provides a GMP, which is the maximum amount the owner will pay. Any cost overruns beyond this price are the responsibility of the construction manager, ensuring financial predictability for the owner.

Risk Allocation

CMAR allocates risk between the owner and the construction manager. While the construction manager takes on the risk of cost overruns, the owner retains control over the design and significant decisions, creating a balanced risk distribution.

Grasping the Concept of PDB (Progressive Design-Build)

Progressive Design-Build, or PDB, is an innovative delivery method that fosters collaboration from the project’s inception. In this approach, the owner selects a design-build team based on qualifications, and the team works progressively through the design and construction phases. This method emphasizes flexibility, allowing adjustments as the project evolves.

Qualifications-Based Selection

In PDB, the design-build team is chosen based on qualifications rather than just price. This selection process ensures that the team has the necessary expertise and experience to handle the project efficiently.

Collaborative Approach

PDB promotes a collaborative environment where the owner, designer, and builder work together from the start. This collaboration leads to innovative solutions, streamlined communication, and a unified vision for the project.

Flexibility in Design and Construction

One of the standout features of PDB is its flexibility. The design and construction phases progress concurrently, allowing for adjustments and refinements as new information and insights emerge. This adaptability often results in better outcomes and fewer change orders.

CMAR VS. PDB

When comparing CMAR and PDB, several aspects come into play:

Project Timeline

The project timeline in CMAR can be more predictable due to early involvement and detailed planning. However, the separate design and construction phases can sometimes lead to longer durations. PDB, on the other hand, typically offers a more streamlined timeline since design and construction phases overlap. The continuous collaboration can accelerate project completion.

Cost Management

With a GMP, CMAR provides cost certainty. The construction manager bears the risk of cost overruns, incentivizing efficient cost management. PDB’s flexible approach can initially seem less predictable in terms of cost. However, the collaborative process often identifies cost-saving opportunities early, potentially leading to lower overall costs.

Risk Management

In CMAR, risk is shared, with the construction manager taking on financial risks and the owner maintaining design control. The collaborative nature of PDB distributes risk among all parties, encouraging shared responsibility and proactive problem-solving.

Design Control

In CMAR, the owner retains significant control over the design, ensuring their vision is realized. While the owner is still involved in PDB, the design-build team has more influence, potentially leading to innovative and optimized design solutions.

Case Studies and Real-World Examples

To understand how CMAR and PDB work in real-life scenarios, let’s look at some notable projects that utilized these methods.

CMAR in Practice

A notable example of CMAR is the Boston Harbor Cleanup project. The project was kept within budget and in compliance with environmental regulations thanks to the construction manager’s early engagement and the GMP.

PDB in Action

The Salt Lake City Airport Redevelopment is a prime example of PDB. The collaborative approach allowed for continuous adjustments and improvements, leading to a state-of-the-art facility delivered on time.

Choosing Between CMAR and PDB

When choosing between CMAR and PDB, consider the specific requirements of your project. If cost certainty and detailed planning are priorities, CMAR might be the better choice. For projects requiring flexibility and rapid completion, PDB could be more suitable.

Understand the preferences and working styles of all stakeholders. Successful implementation of either method relies heavily on effective collaboration and communication.

FAQs