This setup usually happens in a complex project being done in phases. In this setup, the Construction Manager is the main man. He is the only one engaged with the OWNER. All other construction professionals involved in the project is under him or reports to him. He is the one making all the decisions including design issues, except for critical ones like aesthetic and structural impact which are consulted to the designing architect/engineer.
In most cases, there are several contractors in a project. There is a General Contractor, but his scope is usually limited to structural phase only. All other trades and specialty works are bid out to several contractors as the construction progresses.
ADVANTAGES:
1. The OWNER has less worries since the Construction Manager will be handling everything.
2. If managed properly, the OWNER can have big savings since every item of work will be given to the contractor with the best bid. Bids became usually low due to competition within the project.
3. There is no General Contract. If the OWNER decides to cancel the project, he has minimal obligations to settle.
4. If there is a contractor that does not perform well, the CM can easily replace him after his contract because his scope is probably just a small portion of the project at first. On the other hand, if the CM finds the contractor efficient, the CM can award him more works extending the amount of his contract.
DISADVANTAGES:
1. You only trust your CM. It would be hard for you to know if the CM is faithful to you. He may be receiving favors from some contractors in exchange to more contracts. Since he is the one evaluating the bids and contract, you are not sure if the evaluated cost is the cheapest cost you can have.
2. Warranty issues. Because there are several contractors in a project, there are often times confusion on who to claim warranty services. The CM should have managed this properly and documented everything for future references.
3. Contractors conflicts. Similar trade contractors in one projects usually finds themselves in a tight competition. Politics and work sabotage most likely happens. Also, if one contractor failed to do his part, other contractors that depends on his work will not be able to finish his works also. And if one contractor either intentionally or by accident, damaged the finished works of the other contractor, rectification works blows out to be a big issue. The blaming game now starts!
4. Conflicts on Temporary facilities. This is also related to contractors conflict. Because there are many contractors in a project, You should have an organized barracks and warehouse. It's like having a small temporary baranggay. You will need to address the issue of peace and order.
5. As the works are being done simultaneously by different contractors, the CM may need to hire additional inspectors to cope up with the speed of the progress.
Tuesday, September 16, 2014
Saturday, September 13, 2014
Contractor through the Architect
The Architect can actually directly recommend a contractor. But for the purpose of cost comparison and counter checking of estimates, several contractors are invited to bid by the architect. This is to show the client that he has options to choose. The OWNER can even recommend his bet contractor to participate in the bidding. You will not have to worry of finding and dealing with contractors since the architect will be the one handling the bidding.
After the project is awarded to the winning bidder, the setup or situation will most likely be the same as the previous setup. Basically the same advantages and disadvantages.
Some architectural firms are offering their in-house construction management where-in, they can assign a full time project architect that will monitor the contractor and manage progress of construction. You will then be paying monthly charges for this.
The following are in addition to the advantages and disadvantages mentioned in the previous setup:
ADVANTAGES:
1. You can request your Architect to do regular inspection or at least do checking on construction milestone. He can then help you in evaluating and advise you if your contractor's accomplishment claims are substantial or not. He or his representative can also do random material checking to make sure that the contractor is following the prepared specifications and not using substandard materials.
2. You can seek design related advise during construction. If you are in doubt of a certain detail or you promptly want to change something, you can directly tell the matter to the project architect. Replies would probably be faster and will not compromise construction schedule.
3. Because the contractor is recommended by the architect, there is a very good chance that the contractor is competent and reliable. He must have been proven his reputation already to the architect in his previous projects. So you will have less worries in the contractor's credibility.
4. You can expect that the contractor will also perform well because if not, the recommending architect might not give him projects anymore in the future.
5. Faster response on design revisions since the project architect has direct contact to the firm.
DISADVANTAGES:
1. You will pay extra cost for the construction management services of the Architect.
2. If the architect is the one checking the contractor, who is then checking the architect? We can not be 100% sure that the project architect can mange correctly and/or efficiently all the construction issues in the project. Often times, they tend to be bias and always thinks that everything should be in the architect's favor.
3. Sometimes, project architects tend to be too strict that even causes delays in schedule. Example, if a material in the specification is not available anymore or very hard to find, contractors find it hard to seek approval of alternative brands or specifications.
4. Contractor-Designer, conflict or connivance. Although this rarely happen nowadays, still problems like these may arise anytime during construction.
Engaging your architect to do management work will protect you from possible abuse by the contractor but will cost you additional expenses.
After the project is awarded to the winning bidder, the setup or situation will most likely be the same as the previous setup. Basically the same advantages and disadvantages.
Some architectural firms are offering their in-house construction management where-in, they can assign a full time project architect that will monitor the contractor and manage progress of construction. You will then be paying monthly charges for this.
The following are in addition to the advantages and disadvantages mentioned in the previous setup:
ADVANTAGES:
1. You can request your Architect to do regular inspection or at least do checking on construction milestone. He can then help you in evaluating and advise you if your contractor's accomplishment claims are substantial or not. He or his representative can also do random material checking to make sure that the contractor is following the prepared specifications and not using substandard materials.
2. You can seek design related advise during construction. If you are in doubt of a certain detail or you promptly want to change something, you can directly tell the matter to the project architect. Replies would probably be faster and will not compromise construction schedule.
3. Because the contractor is recommended by the architect, there is a very good chance that the contractor is competent and reliable. He must have been proven his reputation already to the architect in his previous projects. So you will have less worries in the contractor's credibility.
4. You can expect that the contractor will also perform well because if not, the recommending architect might not give him projects anymore in the future.
5. Faster response on design revisions since the project architect has direct contact to the firm.
DISADVANTAGES:
1. You will pay extra cost for the construction management services of the Architect.
2. If the architect is the one checking the contractor, who is then checking the architect? We can not be 100% sure that the project architect can mange correctly and/or efficiently all the construction issues in the project. Often times, they tend to be bias and always thinks that everything should be in the architect's favor.
3. Sometimes, project architects tend to be too strict that even causes delays in schedule. Example, if a material in the specification is not available anymore or very hard to find, contractors find it hard to seek approval of alternative brands or specifications.
4. Contractor-Designer, conflict or connivance. Although this rarely happen nowadays, still problems like these may arise anytime during construction.
Engaging your architect to do management work will protect you from possible abuse by the contractor but will cost you additional expenses.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)