PjM NCARB Practice Exam - Question 4 Answer
Hi, I'm reviewing the answers from the PjM NCARB Practice Exam and need some help understanding the rationale behind this answer.
To start, I was pretty certain on the Geotech and Preservationist, but a little unsure between GC and CM. I wanted to go with CM at first due to the fact this is before SD, but realizing the exams would be pretty by the book, and IPD always said Owner, Architect and Contractor, I selected GC instead. Seeing that it's still in design, I ruled out commissioning, which left me with Lighting Designer, which sort of made sense given some of the scope.
Apparently the answer was GC, Geotech, Preservationist, and CM though, I'm still scratching my head on why both a GC and CM is needed in this scenario. Any insights would greatly appreciated, thanks!
-
There are three flavors of CM: -advisor, -agent, and -constructor …and only in the last option is the CM also the builder…in all three, the CM comes into the project early and assists the architect and owner in issues related to budget, scheduling, bidding, and buildability…with CM as advisor and CM as agent delivery, there is both a construction manager and a separate
-
Hi Michael, thanks for your input. It looks like perhaps you didn't finish your thought there; I assume you were going to say "and a separate GC?"
I understand the CM advisor would make sense and I was actually leaning towards that option at first until I reread the question and saw that it mentioned IPD, in which case a GC would be hired at the onset of design to assist the A and O; so I eliminated the CM option based on that.
I guess I'm just overall a little frustrated by the wording on a question like this, and this might be more of a question to NCARB, but what sort of reasoning would one need in order to get to the answer where both a GC and CM should be hired based on the available information? The rationale given under the "correct responses" section is even written exactly the same for both GC and CM.
I hope the actual exam would be more clear cut as people have noted in other posts.
-
Hi Yifan -
This question is a little off in my opinion, and I think that your thought process is spot on. That's what's most important - that you're thinking about these questions correctly to give yourself the best chance to get them correct. You don't need 100% to pass! Let's break down the question.
Firstly, you're right that with IPD, the three parties are going to be Owner, Architect, and Contractor, not CM (see AHPP fig. 9.1 & page 532). In my opinion, having a CM in addition to the contractor sort of undermines the goals of IPD - the OAC team is supposed to work together with mutual respect and trust, collaboration, clear communication, so why do we need an outside CM to add to the mix?
Anyway, the key phrase here that the question writer included to make CM a correct answer is 'the work is to be executed in multiple phases'. On the ARE, whenever you see 'multiple phases', think CM - it's as simple as that. It's possible to have an IPD project with a CM-advisor / CM-agent, although as I said earlier I think it's a bit odd.
Good luck on your next exam!!
Chris Hopstock RA
Black Spectacles
ARE Community -
I got this this correct on my first try by eliminating the two wrong answers. A lighting designer does not need to be hired prior to SD and there is no mention of the need for a Commissioning Agent in the brief.
While I agree that the CM seems redundant in an IPD arrangement, they are not without use, and if you were to hire them you would want to do so at the beginning of the project.
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
8 comments