CMAR vs DBB in the Process

To see how the Construction Management at Risk (CMAR) delivery model compares to Design-Bid-Build (DBB), you have to look at the architectural phases of the project starting with programming.

D. Brown Management Profile Picture
Share

Construction Management at Risk (CMAR) and Design-Bid-Build (DBB).

CM at Risk: Project Delivery Comparison - Design-Bid-Build vs CMAR.

All projects must go through the same stages. The difference with CMAR is that the GC and CM roles are combined, with the contractor being selected based on qualifications and brought into the project early, often near the last part of the programming phase.  

This allows a more accurate feasibility estimate to be completed at the end of the schematic phase with continuous value engineering (VE) throughout the design development phase.  

While this takes longer than the DBB method, time is quickly made up because bid packages for early construction work can get created quickly and work started. 

For the DBB method, the GCs and subs won’t see the bid packages until after the construction document phase is completed. With no involvement in the design, the VE process is rushed and drawing revisions are often poorly coordinated.  

While competitive bidding often leads to an initial low price, studies show that DBB projects frequently have cost and schedule overruns.  

Managed effectively, the CMAR is one of the best delivery methods for many different project types.


CM at Risk
The preferred project delivery method. There is a reason 100 of ENR's Top 400 General Contractors use CMAR as the project delivery method for over 75% of their work. Leverage CMAR as part of your growth strategy....

CM at Risk
The preferred project delivery method. There is a reason 100 of ENR's Top 400 General Contractors use CMAR as the project delivery method for over 75% of their work. Leverage CMAR as part of your growth strategy....

Leading vs Lagging
Clearly defining the outcome you want in clearly measurable terms is critically important so that you and everyone else knows exactly what winning looks like. As challenging as defining clear measurable outcomes is; that is the easiest part.
Succession Fact #3: Trust Between Parties
Succession Fact #3: No exit strategy or deal structure will work without trust between all major stakeholder groups. Whether it is a large and complex project or a business ownership transition, there will never be a “perfect” set of documents or plan.
Issue 7 of 9: Growth Strategy
Construction Ownership Transition Issue 7 of 9: In general, with all other key factors including cash flow, profitability, and customer satisfaction being equal, a contractor that is growing will be able to better handle an ownership transition.