Samer Skaik

Many construction lawyers tend to manage the full lifecycle of large matters intuitively without engaging any methodological approach to address core managerial processes such as scoping, estimation, planning, scheduling, monitoring and reporting. Legal project management does not only provide a framework for these processes but also can increase profitability and competitive advantage of the law firms. This paper provides a demonstration of how legal project management can be effectively applied. The implication of this paper is to establish a solid start point for educating construction law practitioners to be more responsive, agile and adaptive to cope with the evolving changes in the legal landscape.

Project delays have long been perceived as a regular occurrence in most construction projects worldwide. This study focuses on identifying common delay causes in high rise buildings in Dubai and the effective measures to mitigate those delays. To do so, an extensive literature review was conducted followed by a questionnaire survey. Sixty-eight responses received from professionals working on large high-rise projects in Dubai. The study concludes by ranking the common delay causes as well as the effective measures to mitigate them. The implication of this study is a better understanding and dealing with the challenges associated with the timely delivery of high rise buildings.

CONTEXT:
Students in higher education have diverse motivation levels which are underpinned by various factors. In particular, it is observed that many postgraduate international students, do not have the willingness to engage genuinely in their studies, due to other pressing priorities such as work and settlement in a new country. Unmotivated students are more vulnerable to engaging in academic misconduct activities, namely, contract cheating. Peer assessment has long been identified as a useful pedagogy to enhance student engagement, learning experience and attainment of learning outcomes (Gielen, Dochy and Onghena, 2011). Peer assessment can be a means through which students can be motivated to engage with one another’s academic work and learning (McGarrigle 2013). Well devised Self and Peer Assessment (SPA), in particular, can assist students in better understanding the assessment task and making them less inclined to outsource the work to third parties, thus negating contract cheating.
PURPOSE:
This paper aims to demonstrate a proposed framework for integrating SPA in the assessment design of a postgraduate unit (Research in Project Management – PPMP20015) offered within the Master of Project Management Course at CQUniversity with the aim of stimulating unmotivated students and therefore diminish perceived vulnerability to engage in contract cheating.
APPROACH:
An extensive literature review was carried out to examine the best practices in assessment design with the aim of informing the re-development process of the assessment design of Research in Project Management Unit in Term 1, 2018. The diverse motivation and achievement levels of students were considered in integrating the SPA within an authentic and resilient assessment design to diminish vulnerability to contract cheating.
RESULTS:
Different forms of SPA were integrated in the assessment design, aided by technology, to produce a more authentic and engaging assessment design. It was held that students who are more engaged in their learning and assessment would be less prone to engaging in contract cheating. The introduced assessment design includes two assignments which are both submitted in two stages (e.g. draft and final). Formative (non-graded) SPA was introduced for the draft submissions of assignment 1 while summative SPA was used for the draft submissions of assignment 2.
Results showed that implementing summative SPA within sequential assessment may relatively be more effective in diminishing contract cheating cases. A higher level of student engagement, motivation and peer interaction was observed. The majority of students, responded to the unit evaluation survey, highly regarded the introduction of SPA as a great deterrent of cheating and an effective tool for an enjoyable learning experience. The adopted approach enhanced not only students’ confidence in attaining the unit learning outcomes but also, their active engagement and entertainment during the learning journey. It also diminished vulnerability to “contract cheating” and procrastination by way of imposing two deadlines for the same work.
CONCLUSION:
Embedding summative self and peer assessment within sequential assessment tasks can attract a higher level of student engagement, motivation and peer interaction. This assessment design will increase students’ confidence in attaining the unit learning outcomes. It will also help diminish vulnerability to “contract cheating” and procrastination by way of imposing two deadlines for the same work. However, it must be noted that the study was limited in that it presented a novel conceptual framework of an effective assessment design. Further research is needed to investigate the effectiveness of such a framework in motivating students and diminishing vulnerability to engage in contract cheating. In addition, it may be worthwhile to adopt the proposed approach in other contexts and measuring its effectiveness, thus testing the developed model.

A project schedule is the output of detailed planning that represents specifically how the project will be delivered to achieve the desired outcome. The benefits of project scheduling can be enhanced through training. The current literature suggests that training comes in many different forms, with varying levels of effectiveness and outcomes for participants. Training is one of the most universally used techniques to promote increased knowledge and capability amongst employees. Research indicates that a lack of training is a major contributor to project practitioners running additional software systems in parallel. This study aims to identify current training practices for project managers in the area of project scheduling and examine the impact of current training practices in road infrastructure projects in Queensland. An online survey was sent to 151 managers, who were directly involved in project delivery and/or management of road infrastructure works in Queensland. 77 participants responded to the survey with a response rate of 51%. The results of this study indicate that the current training methodology and delivery approach is working. The findings suggest that training methodology and delivery approach can be improved to better engage with participants and increase project outcomes, when measured in the long term. The key performance indicator of return on revenue used in the survey indicates that 79.22% of all projects have a higher than 5% return which appears to be acceptable. The results contained herein are a launching platform for further research into project scheduling, the training methods, and the impacts on the road infrastructure industry.

The number of complex projects within the Australian mining industry is continually increasing. A great concern within this industry is the disconnection between the diverse groups of project management practitioners (PMPs). Maintenance projects within this industry are of great concern and require PMPs to meet these developing challenges. Emotional Intelligence (EI) is believed to create a healthier and more productive work environment. EI is the ability for oneself to be aware of, understand, utilise and manage emotions in oneself and others. This research endeavours to engage PMPs within the various maintenance functions onsite wherein a hard copy survey was disseminated to them to measure the understanding of EI as well as help identify PMPs with EI. 43 respondents from various functions undertook a survey using a Likert scale to represent PMPs attitude towards the topic. The data collected from the survey was analysed by descriptive statistics. The study revealed that around 50% of project managers surveyed comprehended positive sentiments of EI. The results show 84% of respondents have a good to strong level of EI, and 16% of respondents have a below average level of EI. The results suggest that conducting EI training and educating project managers will help improve their self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy and social skills. Understanding these elements will help improve project manager and project worker relationships and provide better project outcomes.

Discusses South Africa's proposed introduction, under the draft Prompt Payment Regulations, of a statutory adjudication regime to resolve disputes in construction projects. Compares the proposals with adjudication regimes operating in the UK and Australia, and examines guidelines issued by South Africa's Construction Industry Development Board, and the arguments for and against adjudication. Considers how South Africa's proposals may be improved.

In recent years, courts have been more willing to intervene in adjudication process due to poor quality of adjudication outcome. This situation has encouraged aggrieved parties to challenge adjudication determinations by way of judicial review resulting in numerous judicial review applications. This has eroded the original object of the security of payment legislation. The aim of this paper is to review experts’ views about the need of introducing review mechanism, essential features and potential barriers. The paper adopts “expert interviews” as a method to collect empirical data where 23 experts, involved in adjudication, were interviewed from Australia and Singapore.  The paper concludes with a set of proposed guidelines for introducing effective review mechanisms into statutory adjudication. The guidelines are devised to counter potential barriers addressed in the empirical study and they can be adopted in any jurisdiction operating the SOP legislation.

Purpose-Statutory adjudication was introduced into the security of payment (SOP) legislation as a fast-track payment dispute resolution process with an express object to facilitate cash flow within the construction contractual chain. After more than a decade of the operation of the regime in Australia and Singapore, it becomes apparent that there are many operational problems that jeopardise the intended object of the legislation, particularly in adjudicating complex payment disputes. The aim of this paper is to explore views of the industry stakeholders regarding some operational problems of statutory adjudication of as well as possible solutions. Design/methodology/approach-"Expert interviews" method is adopted to collect the empirical data, involving interviews with 23 practitioners from Australia and Singapore. Findings-The study identified many operational problems jeopardising the attainment of the object of the SOP legislation such as bias of authorised nominating authorities, short adjudication timeframes, inadequate regulations of adjudicators, jurisdictional challenges, involvement of courts and lawyers and complex drafting of the legislation. The study also analysed the views of industry experts with regard to the opportunities for improvement in the operation of the SOP legislation such as following the Queensland model as amended, and introducing a legislative review mechanism and establishing a peer review process. It also suggested specific amendments to make the legislation a more user-friendly. Practical implications-The implication of this study is a better understanding of the most critical problems inherent in statutory adjudication that need serious consideration by the legislatures and policymakers. In addition, the study also provides some practical measures as suggested by the industry practitioners for each identified problem which may stand as a reliable reference for potential reform in the SOP laws. Originality/value-There is inadequate empirical research conducted to investigate problems in the operation of statutory adjudication. The study provides original empirical findings which become much necessary nowadays in light of the dynamic moves towards law reform in SOP laws, particularly in Australia. The study provides some practical measures as suggested by the industry practitioners for each identified problem which may stand as a reliable reference for potential reform in the SOP laws.

Some jurisdictions allow for an express limited right of aggrieved parties to apply for adjudication review as a way to remedy injustice caused by the speedy adjudication process. The aim of this paper is to examine the effectiveness of the existing review mechanisms and identify whether the notion of review mechanisms is a good idea. The paper adopts a combination of doctrinal legal research (black-letter law) and socio-legal research (empirical research) The empirical research involves interviews with 23 industry experts practicing in different jurisdictions in the area of statutory adjudication. The paper analyses the views of experts regarding the operation of review mechanisms in their jurisdictions and investigates the factors influencing their effectiveness. The paper concludes that if an effective review mechanism is devised to counter the barriers of cost and time, the arguments in support of the need of review mechanism would outweigh opposing arguments. 

Paying parties often rely upon jurisdictional objections as a delaying tactic, in order to “frustrate” adjudication process, which may undermine the attainment of the legislative intent of the security of payment legislation. Encouraging adjudicators (who are not required to be legally trained) to determine questions relating to their jurisdiction is only the tip of the iceberg. This article explores, not only the hidden complexities associated with the jurisdiction of adjudicators, but also the unhealthy practices adopted by stakeholders as an inevitable result of lack of legislative direction and inconsistent case law on dealing with jurisdictional issues. Moving forward, the article proposes a roadmap with six identified hold points to address the problem towards necessary reform in the security of payment legislation. The proposed roadmap stands as an alternative path to the introduction of review mechanisms within the SOP legislation and it is devised to suit any jurisdiction operating SOP legislation.

Statutory adjudication was introduced into the Security of Payment (SOP) legislation as a fast-track payment dispute resolution process aiming to achieve the object of the legislation to facilitate cash flow within the construction contractual chain. However, there have been numerous judicial review applications with respect to adjudicators’ determinations, particularly in Australia, which have eroded the original object of the SOP legislation. The mission has been compromised particularly in ensuring that subcontractors are paid quickly for the work they do on an interim basis. This article reviews the evolving tension between the object of the legislation and judicial intervention and addresses the shortcoming of the main available approaches to diminish judicial intervention. The article then introduces a pragmatic proposal to address the problem going forward. The proposal calls for separating jurisdictional challenges from the merits in adjudication and establishing a legislative review tribunal to deal with jurisdictional challenges. This proposal may be applicable to many other jurisdictions having the SOP legislation.

In Australia, a supreme court has a supervisory role over the statutory adjudication process that has been established within the security of payment legislation. In this role, the courts have quashed many adjudication determinations on the grounds of jurisdictional error in recent years. This is a problem as the courts' involvement in statutory adjudication is contrary to the object of the legislation. When reviewing adjudication determinations, the courts have adopted different approaches with respect to determining the role of adjudicators and the essential jurisdictional facts that must exist in order for an adjudicator to have jurisdiction to hear a referred disputed matter. This diversification of judicial interpretation with respect to jurisdictional error is confusing, not only to construction professionals, but also to many lawyers. Via a desktop study– where the evidence is mainly garnered from case law, governmental reports and commentaries – this paper reviews the legal complexities involved in diagnosing jurisdictional errors. In doing so, the paper aims to answer the question as to why the adjudication process has become bogged down in the quagmire of judicial review. The paper concludes that the evolving inconsistency of case law in relation to statutory adjudication is a crucial factor contributing to the erosion of the object of the security of payment legislation in Australia. Moving forward, the paper argues that establishing a legislative review mechanism of jurisdictional challenges may be sufficient to address this problem.

In Australia, statutory construction adjudication is a fast payment dispute resolution process designed to keep the cash flowing down the hierarchical contractual chain in construction projects. Its rapid, highly regulatory and temporarily binding nature have led to it being often described as a 'quick and dirty' process that delivers 'rough and ready' justice. Adjudicators often have to grapple with complex legal issues related to jurisdictional facts and interpretation of contract provisions, though the majority of them are not legally trained. This has often led to a poor quality of adjudication outcome for large and complex payment claims which has, in turn, led to a mounting dissatisfaction due to the many judicial challenges to adjudicators' determinations seen in recent years. The evolving tension between the object of the security of payment legislation and excessive involvement of the courts has often been the subject of comment by the judiciary. This paper aims to examine the legislative and judicial approaches to support the object of the security of payment legislation to ease cash flow. The paper adopts a desktop study approach whereby evidence is gathered from three primary sources – judicial decisions, academic publications and governmental reports. The paper concludes that there is a need to adopt other measures which can provide more convenient relief to aggrieved parties to an adjudication process, such that the adjudication process is kept away from the courts as far as is possible. Specifically, it is proposed that a well-designed expanded legislative review scheme of allegedly flawed adjudication, based on that provided in the Western Australian legislation, might stand as a promising remedy to eliminate the evolving tension.

Statutory adjudication was introduced in the security of payment legislation to quickly and fairly resolve payment disputes in the construction industry. One of the interesting features in some legislation is the availability of an express limited right of aggrieved parties to apply for review against erroneous adjudication decisions. In Singapore, the legislation has no equivalent elsewhere in that it provides for a full review mechanism of erroneous determinations considering the fact that adjudicators often have to grapple with complex issues and sheer volume of documents within a very tight timeframe. This paper discusses the various review mechanisms of erroneous adjudication determinations then asks the question as to whether an appropriately devised legislative review mechanism on the merits, should be an essential characteristic of any effective statutory adjudication scheme. The paper concludes by making the case that an appropriately designed review mechanism as proposed in the paper could be the most pragmatic and effective measure to improve the quality of adjudication outcome and increase the disputants' confi dence in statutory adjudication.

Many researchers consider disputes as part of the project lifecycle. Although preventative actions exist, it is not utterly possible to avoid them. Once the disputes arise, an appropriate resolution technique should be adopted. Common perception is referring to a resolution method either internally or via a third party; which may also be binding by law. The resolution process requires attention to the disputed claims. Hence, deep investigation of the claims and choosing the appropriate method is crucial for the successful project delivery and reputation of the industry. Preparation of disputed claims and resolution process also faces many debates. Conducting To effective dispute resolution requires attention to proper preparation and presentation of the incurred events. All the required information should be acquired to estimate and present the claim, for a smooth settlement. As an integrated digital model of the project, BIM, stores all the information of the projects in detail. Re...

Since its introduction in to Australia fifteen years ago, statutory adjudication has become increasingly used by parties seeking to recover payment claims which are large in amount and technically and legally complex in nature. This has inevitably led to the formalisation of the adjudication process with parties often submitting, amongst other documents, expert witness reports to support their arguments. The increase in documentation that an adjudicator must consider poses a threat to the integrity of the adjudicator’s determination. This paper adopts a ‘black letter’ approach to distil the law concerning the way in which adjudicators should deal with expert reports, and reveals there are many pitfalls that an adjudicator should be aware of. Moving forward, this paper seeks to inform the PhD study of the lead author which eventually aims to formulate a roadmap with recommendations that may be applied to help optimise the various Australian adjudication schemes for the determination of large and/or complex payment claims.

In complex high rise projects, employers tend to fast track works where construction can begin while design is still incomplete following three main phases of procurement. Shoring system and piling are firstly procured and awarded to an enabling contractor. Upon completion of enabling works, main design and traditional tendering of the second phase can be concluded in order for main construction works to commence on site. While main work is progressing, design of specialist packages will be completed and nominated subcontractors are appointed in a timely manner shaping the third phase of procurement. Such common phased construction usually results in substantial time saving in project life cycle. However, many fast track projects suffer time and cost overruns due to inherent risks of fast tracking such as design deficiencies and ambiguities in risk allocation between involved parties. This paper aims to investigate pros and cons of fast track procurement approach for complex high rise projects and examine how relevant risks are allocated among enabling contractors, main contractors, nominated subcontractors and project consultants in theory and practice.

The paper will demonstrate an interesting case study of a fast track overseas super high rise building. The case study will demonstrate real problems associated with using fast tracking delivery method and involving sequential contractors. It will will discuss the taken measures by the project management team to redress problems and mitigate risks during construction. In conclusion, lessons learnt from the case study will be summarized with recommendations to have better practice of fast tracking approach in complex high rise buildings.