In step with a growing national trend, Tamarack Country Club’s committee members decided to hire a construction manager (CM) instead of a general contractor (GC) when it embarked on its clubhouse project two years ago.

While GCs are usually hired by an architect through a bidding process, a CM seldom participates in a competitive-bid scenario, where a lump-sum price is offered to complete the project. Instead, the CM negotiates a fee—often a percentage above the project’s direct cost. This structure eliminates the possibility of cost-cutting measures being used to keep the job under budget.

Peter Ciccone, Tamarack President, thinks that an arrangement with a GC can be adversarial because the bidding process, while it may keep overall costs lower, can cause bad blood between the general contractor and the client as the contractor takes responsibility to meet that bid. A construction manager, on the other hand, gives a guaranteed maximum price.

In this way, the CM acts as more of a fiduciary agent to the club and remains responsible for all phases of construction. If the project exceeds the budget, the manager eats the difference; but if it comes in lower, the CM shares the benefit through an earned bonus. “It’s a friendly arrangement,” says Ciccone, who’s very happy with how it worked out for Tamarack.

Hiring a construction manager, rather than a general contractor, was critical for pulling off a lengthy and complicated project like this one, says Chris McCagg, Associate Partner of Butler Rogers Baskett, the architectural firm that led the Tamarack Country Club project (see related story, “Stealing the Scene”). “They kept things on time and on budget, and were especially important for logistics surrounding the coordination of site utilities,” he reports.

Project Architect Tony Panza agrees. “It’s very difficult to go about the design process, which could take three years, with a general contractor."