Monitoring, planning and tracking: Delay, disruption and legal risk management

Disputes may arise during and towards the end of projects over changes that have disrupted the works. Considerable reliance is placed on the evidence collected that demonstrates responsibility for the cause and the extent of the subsequent effect. An investigation into case law associated with delay and disruption claims shows that failing to identify the logical links between cause and consequence is a risky strategy, especially where it is difficult to attribute responsibility. If information on responsibility for cause and the subsequent effects are not collected and properly assembled the chances of sustaining a claim are substantially reduced. A small study was undertaken to determine the extent that project managers monitored the basic information that was considered fundamental to such claims. The results show that most of the project managers surveyed had a system for recording change and responsibility for change. Many of the respondents also attempted to predict the potential effects of change on the programme. The results are encouraging and suggest that the use of the basic change information collected and proactive approaches adopted by some project managers should reduced reliance on retrospective analysis and global claims. Those failing to manage change place themselves at risk of disputes and are collecting little evidence to assist them in the event of a claim.