Why Project Delivery Methods Matter on the ARE
Project delivery method questions appear throughout PcM and PjM because the chosen method determines contractual relationships, risk allocation, and the sequence in which design and construction occur. Understanding the mechanics of each method - and being able to recommend one for a given scenario - is a recurring ARE 5.0 skill.
Design-Bid-Build (DBB)
DBB is the traditional linear method: the architect completes construction documents, the owner competitively bids the project, and a general contractor is selected, typically on low bid. The owner holds two separate contracts - one with the architect (AIA B101) and one with the contractor (AIA A101/A201). Because design is complete before construction begins, DBB offers the owner the most control over design but the longest overall schedule and no contractor input during design.
Design-Build (DB)
In DB, the owner contracts with a single entity that holds responsibility for both design and construction (AIA A141 or C401 for the architect as consultant). This single point of responsibility can compress schedule through fast-tracking and reduces the owner's exposure to design-construction disputes, but it reduces the owner's direct control over design decisions.
Construction Manager at Risk (CMc or CMr)
The CM is brought on early to provide preconstruction services - cost estimating, constructability review, scheduling - and later converts to the role of general contractor, typically under a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP). This allows overlapping design and construction (fast-tracking) while preserving some owner control, since the architect still contracts directly with the owner.
Construction Manager as Advisor (CMa)
Here the CM acts purely as the owner's agent and never holds the construction contract; trade contractors hold separate agreements with the owner. This maximizes owner control and transparency but requires significant owner administrative capacity.
Integrated Project Delivery (IPD)
IPD uses a single multi-party contract binding owner, architect, and contractor into a shared-risk, shared-reward arrangement from early design through completion. It aligns incentives and encourages early collaboration but requires a high level of trust and is less common than the other methods.
Selection Criteria
- Schedule: DB and CMc/CMr support fast-tracking; DBB does not.
- Owner control: Highest in CMa and DBB; lowest in DB.
- Risk allocation: DB and CMc/CMr shift more risk to the design-builder/CM; DBB and CMa keep more risk with the owner.
- Cost certainty: GMP-based CMc/CMr and lump-sum DBB offer more price certainty than CMa's open-book approach.
- Owner sophistication: Experienced owners often prefer CMa or IPD; less experienced owners often prefer DB or DBB for reduced administrative burden.
Comparison Table
| Method | Contracts | Fast-Track? | Owner Control |
|---|---|---|---|
| DBB | Architect + Contractor (separate) | No | High |
| DB | Single design-builder | Yes | Low |
| CMc/CMr | Architect + CM (converts to GC) | Yes | Medium |
| CMa | Architect + CM (agent) + trades | Possible | Highest |
| IPD | Single multi-party agreement | Yes | Shared |
For deeper contract-document detail, see Contract Types, and for how delivery method affects risk transfer, see Risk Management. Test your recall with the Project Delivery Cheat Sheet.
Study these concepts further in the PcM division guide and PjM division guide. Sign up free to access mini-exams and flashcards for every division.