Episode 128 - *Bonus* RIBA Exam Past Paper 2022 Analysis (Q1&2)

Hi and welcome to the part 3 with me podcast. The show that helps part 3 students jump start into their careers as qualified architects and also to provide refresher episodes for practicing architects. I am your host Maria Skudari. And this week as promised I will be running through an exam pass paper to give you a better insight of things to look out for and how you can start to answer the exam questions. So the paper I will be running through today is the RIBA examination paper from Autumn 2022 and I want to ensure that I capture as much detail as possible to provide you with the best guidance. So I will be covering questions one and two in today's episode and we'll follow up with the rest of the questions in a series of follow-up episodes capturing all 10 questions. So to give you the whole overview of a paper I will also run through the initial scenario where it gives you brief overviews of the projects that the questions will be based on before diving into the questions themselves. So starting with the scenario the practice you are told you will be working for which I'm sure a lot of you already know, is named NDG Architects and is an RIBA charted practice. It was established in 1998 and the practice has a wide range of design and development experience across a number of private sector and public sector areas including commercial retail, industrial education and healthcare. It is exclusively based in the Northwest of England and as confidence in the workload grows the practice is looking at opportunities to expand and develop their portfolio. A number of changes have been introduced to the structure and management of the office during the pandemic, principally the appointment of Sue Allen as a director and the promotion of Sven Berg to associate, to associate director with Renata, Wang and Thomas Heltness promoted to the position of senior architect. So there have been some changes to personnel in the last six months as a year after student has returned to start her part two studies and Michael Shoreland has successfully completed his part three exam and is now enjoying life as an architect within the practice. Wills the new part one and part two graduates have joined the practice as the office continues to deliver projects and market fresh initiatives to maintain workload in what have been very challenging times. So as a candidate for the autumn 2022 examination, you are required to assume that you are a salaried employee of NDG Architects and have been engaged at this practice for a period of 20 months, whilst preparing to sit the part three examination. And the company's house records now show that NDG Architects has three directors and one associate director. The company is also a limited company. So that's the overview of the practice itself. Now let's look at the different team members profiles that again will play a role in some of the responses to the exam questions. So starting with Belinda Carter, she is an architect and the managing director. Her role in marketing the practice continues with significant success this year and as a result, she's leading a further review to determine the potential for the practice to restructure and expand into new project sectors. As part of this review, she's eager to consider the views of all members of staff. Then we have Michael Hart, which is a conservation architect and director. He's an RWA specialist conservation architect and listed on the diocese schedule of approved architects and his reputation in this field has previously resulted in the practice being commissioned to carry out larger conservation projects, attracting lottery funding and Michael is also listed as a client design advisor on the RWA's CDA register. Then we have Sue Allen, which is an architect and director. She is an accredited sustainability expert and has completed an MS science course in advanced sustainability at the University of Manchester. Sue also acts as the company's quality manager and is responsible for the ongoing development and maintenance of the quality assurance system and manual. Then we have Sven Berg, which is an architect and associate director. He has exceptional technical skills and has taken on the role of principal designer within the practice to provide the service and to explore the practicalities of design risk management. His current interest is fire safety with focused attention on the ARB's strategic statement on fire and life safety. Then as part of the scenario, you are provided with the different employees' salaries and their charge rates. We will mention these a bit later on the feed question. The scenario also provides a brief overview of how the practice is coping after COVID and the practice has adapted to the restrictions imposed by the pandemic and there has been a successful return to office working this year with the office back to full capacity and options in place and maintained for flexible working. So undoubtedly the last three years have been challenging with projects being delayed, slowed, put on hold or even cancelled as clients sought greater confidence before committing to future investment. So happily the situation did improve over time and changed significantly towards the end of 2021 with projects again moving forward at pace and a healthy number of larger projects moving into construction. So NDG has also continued to attract new projects through focused marketing which is now reflected in a growing list of active projects that is providing confidence in the projected workload for the next 12 months. So the next information the paper provides is a brief snapshot of each project the questions will be based on. So this paper outlines five projects. The first one is the new science park in Manchester. So the practice has submitted an initial PQQ for the development of a master plan and the faced implementation of a new science park on a disused airfield outside Manchester. So very mind regarding this information which might be handy later on. So when you're reading through the paper I would say just highlight the key points you feel are relevant that you may need to refer back to when you're reading through the questions. So continuing with the new science park project so due to the size of the project there are two client stakeholders and insurance company funding the projects and the development company delivering the buildings and infrastructure. So I would suggest that this is a key item to highlight within this scenario. So the development company has appointed an employer's agent or project manager to manage the development and the selected practice will be appointed as the lead designer and architect with the design team at the initial stage of the project incorporating a cost consultant, a planning consultant, a structure engineer and an MEP engineer. So key item to highlight here is that you will be lead designer and architect. So the next project that the paper provides is the Manchester University and Manchester College which is for a joint international student centre. So Manchester University and College are equal to establish a single centre for the management of international student matters and also inquiries within both institutions. So the centre is to offer joint marketing, administrative and student support services and in terms of where it will be located there is a dilapidated three-story grade two-star listed late Georgian building, formerly the home of the Arc Deacon of Manchester and it sits within the campus of Manchester College and it has been identified in a recent master plan strategy as a significant heritage asset and a potential building that could be reutilised. However whilst the three stories adequately satisfy the principal accommodation needs there are access issues so this is something to highlight specifically the access issues. So NDG have been shortlisted for an interview and have been asked to bring along any initial thoughts regarding the threats and opportunities of the site and building and whilst Manchester University are happy with the location the use of an existing building has been questioned with preference expressed for something new and exciting. So this is something that might come up that you might need to come up with a strategy to replace the building or whether you would recommend to keep it. So the next project within the scenario is a new office development in the Manchester Centre. So Manchester Dreamworks is a longstanding client of NDG and they want to develop a five-story office building in the centre of the city. The selected site is not a particularly sensitive area in terms of development and from the initial feasibility, viability and concept work carried out by NDG. The building will consist of a simple rectangular block with two stair cores that's something to highlight and toilets, ancillary facilities located on each floor at alternative ends. So as noted a feasibility study has already been carried out so make note of that that feasibility has been done already and used to inform an initial pre-application submission that's another key point here. So meeting on site with a local authority has gone well and no major difficulties are anticipated in securing planning approval. So then the next and fourth project under the scenario is the highlights performing arts centre in Manchester. So the practice is halfway through a 12-month traditional contract for a new performing arts building located in South Manchester. It is a 12 million-pound project so make note of the cost that will provide dance, music and drama facilities and will incorporate 156 studio theatre with specialist acoustic practice rooms. So this might be something that comes up later again in the questions that it needs specialist input. So the specialist rooms are fabricated off-site, assembled, tested and disassembled for re-irection on site. So and they will be placed unprepared floating floors for final connection to the electrical mechanical services followed by fixtures and fittings. So for this project MDG architects have been appointed as architect, contract administrator and principal designer. So this is CD and principal designer because remember this is a 2022 paper and the project is progressing well and is on program and within budget. And then the last project they provide within the scenario is the spoke retail park. So the practice has designed a number of successful new buildings within the spoke retail park over the last few years and continue to be appointed on adjacent sites as the retail park expands. So the principal client which is known as hub developments has been buying redundant industrial land in the area, obtaining planning approval for the new buildings and selling the sites to high profile national retailers. So MDG has designed and implemented under traditional procurement that's something to know that it's traditional procurement. A few large industrial units for furniture and DIY stores as well as a large supermarket which are now all complete and operating successfully. So the success of the area means that the retail park is expanding and the practice is recently obtained for the planning consent for a covered courtyard development with 16 food outlets. For these works, MDG have been appointed as lead consultant and contract administrator, something to note that we will be doing both roles for the development which has a construction value of 4.2 million another item to note and an 18 month construction program. So the building contract is JCT standard building contract with quantities 2016 that's something to remember and the client has asked the quantities are ready to produce a bill of quantities as they felt this would give a better cost control and limited additional costs. So the budget is very tight as the client has new investors for food retail who are insisting on cost certainty. So budget will be key for this project. Therefore, a medium sized local contractor has won the tender to carry out the work and the contract has been agreed and signed and a work has been just started on site. So the pre-start planning conditions have been discharged and independent approved inspector has been appointed and the F10 has been submitted to the health and safety executive. So that concludes the overall scenarios of this project. So this is the outline of who you'll be working for, the different people that work in the practice and the different expertise and also the projects that the questions will be based on. So let's start by looking at question one. So you receive an email from Belinda regarding a potential new major project and recent staff recruitment. So this doesn't have anything to do with the projects that I just mentioned. This is more of a recruitment HR type of question. So she mentions that everyone agreed that the first applicant was by far the best and she has asked Sarah Jane to prepare an offer letter to send out later today. However, the applicant has just phoned having seen the front page of today's Manchester News and explained that because of their religious beliefs, they would be unable to work on a medical facility, which is what the new project would be. So that is the only issue that comes up with this candidate as the next stage in the bid for the science park is to provide an account of how we would resource the project. So NDG are up against the big practices but we understand that being local is to the practices advantage but we will have to be absolutely clear about our capabilities to deliver such a large project. So it is a big step for the practice but ultimately could secure our long-term future in an area that is relatively new to us. So the initial outlay however is going to be significant and so anything we can do to mitigate that risk will need to be considered. So then she goes on to ask you if we could perhaps subcontract the work overseas if we don't have enough resource in house and that she met someone at a networking event who was saying how cost effective and cost efficient it was working around the clock with the difference in time zones and with much lower staff costs. So would the staff be prepared to put in additional overtime with the prospect of a bonus when we are paid. Could we perhaps subcontract some of the work to another practice on the basis that they share the risk and then as you can see there is a lot to think about and Belinda would like your contribution to these queries coming up. So she's asking you to email through your thoughts on if we think we should offer the job to the first candidate as originally intended or given their reluctance to work on any medical facility which given the prospect of the science park could be a significant project within the practice offer the job to one of the other two applicants. Then the next query is from a professional and ethical standpoint what are your views on outsourcing some of the work overseas. Then the third query is do you consider it appropriate to suggest to staff that in return for their support and additional overtime they would receive a significant bonus once we are appointed beyond stage one. Then the fourth query is could we consider subcontracting some of the work to another practice on the understanding that they will take on part of the risk and then the fifth query is do you think that declaring any subcontract arrangement to the client would jeopardize our chances of winning and how should we approach this. So before you start answering each one of the questions you need to make sure that if there are any sub questions within the overall body of the question that you address those two not just the ones towards the end that are bullet pointed. So with this question if you saw the paper the final five that I mentioned are the ones that are outlined towards the end but if you remember it was also asking about the overseas element earlier on in the question. So although this is repeated in the other in the last five it's just important to highlight that there might be some sub questions within the main body of the question that the examiners would expect you to answer as well so make sure that you capture all queries within a question. So before starting to answer it when answering each question again also make sure that you refer to the scenario information and make reference to the material you use to answer quoting the book or article or website that you use within your answer and also noting the specific page to demonstrate your knowledge that you know where to refer to in order to answer the question. So make sure that when answering you refer back to the scenarios to make sure that you capture any information that might be relevant and make sure you clearly outline your resources and where you found your answers. So starting with the first query you should start by addressing the matter of the query with offering the job to the first candidate where Billinda asks you whether we should offer it to them or if we should go to the other two candidates. So although you could respond back that although you are in agreement that the first candidate presented the best skills and qualifications necessary for the project and would be a potential asset to the overall practice given their religious beliefs and that they won't be able to work on the medical facility project which is essentially the key project we will be hiring them for. We would need to consider before making a decision the equality diversity and inclusion policy that we might have in the practice. So this is where you can make an assumption that the practice has a policy in place whereby the practice must ensure that everybody has an equal opportunity and recognizes and respects differences between individuals and groups and aim to create a practice that recognizes respects values and embraces differences in line with the equality act 2010. So here you can also make reference to the RIBA Code of Professional Conduct standard 4.2 whereby members shall not discriminate unlawfully on the grounds of age, disability, gender, reassignment, marriage or civil partnership, pregnancy or maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation, nationality, culture or socio-economic background. So the issue would be that if the practice doesn't hire them because of their religious beliefs then this can be seen as grounds for discrimination and the company could be sued because religious discrimination is what is called a protected characteristic and the person could potentially sue them for this. So the queries you could impose back to Belinda is did HR not flag this as discrimination? Was the job description put together with HR and were they in the room when the interview took place? To avoid this situation next time we should specify the role, position and responsibilities with enough detail for the candidate to determine if they are qualified for the position and furthermore a detailed job description would avoid any misleading and misunderstanding regarding the position. So in advertising our services we must comply with all relevant legislation including the Architects Act 1997 and any job advertisement should be clear, decent and truthful. So to enable the candidate to be hired to avoid grounds for discrimination there is an option to reallocate them to another project so hire them but put them on something else and then bring another architect to work on the science part potentially as a route forward. So the other architect could either be someone internally so in that scenario we would be able to fulfill the needs for all projects. So now moving on to the second query regarding outsourcing work overseas and the ethical and professional complications in doing so. So principle 1.2 of the RIBA Code of Professional Conduct states that members must be able to provide the knowledge, the ability and the financial and technical resources appropriate for the work they undertake. So members shall realistically appraise their ability and resources to undertake and complete any proposed work. So it's evident that we don't present sufficient resources to carry out the works hence the option of outsourcing the project came into consideration. However we should carefully consider the implications of outsourcing projects overseas and you can also recommend that we need to contact our PI insurer as this may have implications in our premiums and increase NDGs liabilities and potential claims as we will be liable for the overseas workers to deliver their services as promised. So also referring to the RIBA Code of Conduct standard 2.1 you are expected to be competent to carry out the professional work you undertake to do and if you engage others to do that work they should be competent and adequately supervised and also referring to standard 2.3 you are expected to ensure that the necessary communication skills and local knowledge are available to you to discharge your responsibilities. Therefore before considering subcontracting from an overseas practice we must take into account a consideration of the issues of their practice ethos their financial and technical resources do the overseas practice have the right resources in place is it a legitimate business what is their business structure and reputation do they comply with the modern slavery act 2015 and any similar legislation in the location of the practice and are their employee satisfied and do they work overtime and are they paid fairly so also referring to the advice given to Belinda at the networking event that overseas practices tend to be cost efficient due to them working around the clock and with much lower staff cost this could imply that employees are not fairly paid and work overtime. So NDG must comply with the modern slavery act 2015 and raise awareness of the issues of modern slavery and construction and should not support such practices. So if any issue is identified we should report abusive labor practices to proper and recognized authorities as described in the RBI Code of Conduct and you can therefore proceed to recommend that careful evaluation should be made and considered before considering outsourcing work from overseas. Then moving on to the third query in terms of suggesting to staff to work overtime and receive a bonus for their efforts this is definitely a red flag and something not to be supported it's not appropriate to make any misleading statements or bonus promises to staff in return to overtime. The RBI Code of Conduct Principles states that members must comply with good employment practices in their capacity as an employer and or employee and members shall have regard for the maximum weekly working hours and the 48 hour working week under the working time directive and should ensure that the hours worked by their employees are reasonable and allow for a healthy work life balance. So that's definitely something that we shouldn't promote and it's something that we shouldn't provide to the employees as overtime is generally not promoted. So then moving on to the next query regarding subcontracting some of the work to another practice and if they would take on part of the risk you could mention that although this seems to be a potential alternative to deliver such a large project we should bear in mind that not only profit will be shared but also risks losses and costs associated with it. It's equally important when considering how the contract will operate the preferred management structure how profiting risks are shared and also the responsibilities. So maybe subcontracting is on the right approach and they should instead consider collaborating with another practice if they will be using them for more than just one project they could form a cooperative or collaborative partnership as a limited company or as a cooperative to help each other on individual projects and therefore having clearer allocation of responsibilities and risks. So you can refer to the RIB Hamburg of Practice Management which mentions the type of companies that can be formed for this exact purpose. Additionally we need to satisfy ourselves that the subcontracted practice presents the knowledge ability on the financial resources and technical resources to be a suitable partner. We must also ensure that the subcontracting practice will perform the services only when they are sufficiently qualified by education and experience in the specific areas involved and have the necessary resources to satisfactorily complete those services and the contribution of the subcontracted practice shall be appropriately acknowledged. So I would recommend here also referring to the RIB Echo of Conduct and lastly regarding the last query is on whether we need to declare any subcontracting arrangement to the client and if this would jeopardize our chances of winning the project. So under the RIB Echo of Conduct Principle 2.4 members are expected to keep their clients informed and under the RIB Code of Conduct Standard 1 that members will act with honesty and integrity. But before doing so we need to satisfy ourselves that the people or practice will be subcontracting the work to will be up for the challenge. I generally don't see why would jeopardize NDG's chances of winning as it can simply demonstrate that NDG will be bringing in specialists to assist with the project although this may impact fees as NDG will probably increase their fees to cover the other practice unless if they are open to taking the work on at a loss in order to build the relationship with the client that will eventually lead to more work in the future. So that covers question 1. The key resources for this question I would recommend would have been the ARB and RIB Echoes of Conduct, the RIB Handbook of Practice Management, the ACAS website for HR matters and the Equality Act 2010. Now let's move on to question 2. So you receive another email from Belinda regarding the new five story building office in Matches the City Center this time. She mentions that the client Ray Sharp of Matches the Dreamworks is proposing a five-story office building in the center of the city following a feasibility study carried out by NDG. So Matches the Dreamworks is a long-standing developer client of the practice and has asked the practice to provide a percentage fee for the development and implementation of the project based on a construction budget of 6 million exclusive of VAT and full architectural services covering RIB work stages 1 to 6. So this is the key thing to note for this question is that you will need to put together a percentage fee and that it's based on a construction budget of 6 million and to cover RIB work stages 1 to 6. So this developer has tended to use traditional procurement with previous projects inviting tenders from four or five contractors who have a track record of delivering good quality work. This is not a particularly sensitive part of the city and from the feasibility study carried out the design will consist of a simple rectangular block with two stair cores and toilets on each floor at alternative ends of the building. So the contract will be administered by the cost consultant who will be appointed directly by the client. The project manager will be newly appointed addition to the in-house developer team and NDG will be appointed as architect and lead consultant and will be required to carry out weekly site inspections to monitor quality and suicide queries provide any additional information to the contractor and attend monthly site progress meetings. So bear in mind these key items when considering the fee. So this client requires the architects fee to be expressed as a percentage of the construction cost but as you know the practice prefers to calculate the fee based on an assessment of office resources or in person days that will be needed to deliver the project. So she mentions that she would expect the practice to take approximately two months to reach the end of work stage three and submit the planning application with a further three months to complete work stage four technical information. Then invite tenders and select the contractor. She estimates that the project will take approximately 18 months to complete on-site and as she is a bit tied up over the next few days she would be grateful if you could provide a calculation of the fee from the resources needed to deliver the project converted to a percentage fee based on a six million pound construction cost. Then she asks you to suggest a suitable RWA professional services contract as the form of appointment and set out our schedule of services in bullet point format and then provide a list of caveats and qualifications to explain the basis upon which the fee has been calculated and the scope of service proposed. So before we start looking at the response let's refresh our memories on the scenario information which mentions that this project is a simple development with two stair cores and facilities located on each floor at each end. The initial feasibility was used for a pre-application submission and it's anticipated to not face any major issues with planning. So looking at the first point where it requires us to calculate a fee from the resources required to deliver the project and then convert it into a percentage fee. It states that the construction budget is for six million. So when we start to calculate we already know that stage three will take two months. We're assuming that stages zero to one were completed during the feasibility stage and then in the question states that stage four would take three months. Our overall program is 18 months so if you remove the five months for stages two three and four we have 13 remaining so assuming 12 months are four stage five and one month for stage six then you will start breaking down the resources for each stage. So for stages two to three you can assume that Belinda will spend some time on the job for meetings. Her costs are £90 per hour then you will probably have a senior architect on the job that would spend about 50 to 75% of their time on the project and their costs are £60 per hour and then you would have some input from Sven regarding CDM matters. Remember that this paper is pre BSA so you wouldn't factor BSA in for this paper but you would of course for the current exam papers post 2023 you would consider this and lastly you as a part two would be on the job as 100% of your time and your costs are £40 per hour. Then you would do the same for stage four assuming that an architectural technologist will also come on board and their costs are £45 per hour and then for stage five you will need to factor in the people and the amount of site visits you will be undertaking. The question also mentions they need NDG to carry out weekly site inspections on top of answering queries providing additional information to the contractor and attending site progress meetings so all these need to be considered when calculating the stage five fee and for stage six it will only be very minor input from NDG just from the senior architect and potentially you as a part two in which case the fee shouldn't be too high only about a week's maximum workload I would suggest. You will then add all the stages together and divide it by the construction budget to give you the percentage. So now moving on to the separate part of the question where it asks you to suggest a suitable RBA professional services contract for the appointment and set out the schedule of services. So given the size and complexity of this project it seems that the RBA standard professional services contract will be the most appropriate then in terms of the scope of services you can use some of the services listed within the RBA standard professional services contract itself for each RBA stage for architect and lead consultant roles and then you would add any additional services you feel are missing such as putting more emphasis on the sustainability strategy and mentioning the amount of site inspections expected to be undertaken at stage five. I would recommend referring to the RBA standard professional services contract and review the scope of services listed for the different roles architects may be expected to undertake on a project and then as part of the final query in the question you should make a list of caveats on what is excluded from the fee which is a VAT travel expenses surveys statutory fees such as planning building regulations and so on it also excludes other consultant fees I would say. So the question doesn't mention if NDG will be undertaking CDM or contract administration duties so you can assume that these fees are excluded as well and fees are only based on NDG undertaking and architect and lead consultant role only also assume that the fee is excluding stages zero to one and that this was previously undertaken and payment has already been made for those stages and assuming no major changes will need to be made to the design following a successful response from the local planning authority post pre-app feedback if any changes are required from pre-app these will be subject to additional fees so you should make that clear in your exclusions and clarifications. So your key resources for this question would have been the RBI standard professional services contract and I would probably say the good practice guide on fees so that covers question 1 and question 2 of paper autumn 2022 joining next week to run through questions 3 4 and 5 and that concludes today's episode if you would like to get in contact with me please feel free to email me on the address provided in the show notes. Thank you for listening this is an educational show aimed at supporting the future generation of architects the information opinions and recommendations presented in this podcast are for general information only and any reliance on the information provided in this podcast is done at your own risk. Please join me next week for some more part 3 with me time.