HKA becomes a beacon of hope on Mandela Day at the Othandweni Family Care Centre
24th July 2023
In remembrance of what the late global icon Nelson Mandela stood for, July 18 is observed and regarded as a day of service to our communities. Our South Africa team spent the day at the Othandweni Family Care Centre in Soweto, a township in Southern Johannesburg, South Africa.
More than 90 vulnerable children, ranging from infants to 18 years old, call the centre home. In recent years, this centre has become dear to our hearts, and we have remained committed to continuing to serve the needs and wellness of the children.
To celebrate Mandela Day, we purchased two washing machines and three kettles for the centre. These were delivered to the centre as our team—led by Lihle Ntshangase, Marketing Manager, Africa—was preparing lunch for the children while they were at school. In celebration of our donation, the caregivers burst into song as they had long wished for these appliances.
On July 6, another delegation with Kelly Whitehead, Partner, People Business Partnering, Asia Pacific and EMEA, and Pam Arries, People Manager, Africa, visited the centre with donations from the Middle East office, groceries, and baby walkers. The donations included soccer jerseys that gave the children hope and a sense of pride.
“Being present here and personally seeing the conditions these children live under makes me understand how much of a big difference HKA makes in their lives. We have great respect for their caregivers for just being there for them,” said Kelly Whitehead, Partner, People Business Partnering, Asia Pacific and EMEA.
Thank you to all those who supported and delivered our donations to help improve the lives of the young and vulnerable.
Discusión sobre las diferencias entre las metodologías de análisis de demora más utilizadas.
Un análisis de demora retrospectivo debería por lo menos producir lo siguiente:
Identificación de las actividades que realmente causaron demora en la ruta crítica; y
Cuantificación de la demora crítica causada por cada actividad.
En teoría, la cantidad de la demora crítica causada por una actividad debería ser algo objetivo. Sin embargo, bien se reconoce que consultores de lados opuestos en una disputa, generalmente (siempre) llegan a conclusiones muy distintas respecto a las actividades que causaron demora y la cantidad de demora causada por cada una.
Consultores tienen a su disposición varias metodologías para preparar/presentar un análisis de demora retrospectivo, pero hay que estar pendiente que algunas pueden producir resultados erróneos. Es importante estar consciente de esto al evaluar un análisis de demora preparado por otros. En este informe se comparan tres métodos de análisis de demora que se usan con frecuencia:
Plan impactado (en inglés – Impacted As-Planned1 o IAP);
Análisis del impacto al plazo (en inglés – Time Impact Analysis o TIA); y
Plan comparado a los acontecimientos reales en periodos (en inglés – Planned v. As-Built o PAB).
Para evitar confusión con respecto a la nomenclatura, abajo se definen las tres metodologías de acuerdo a como se utilizan en este informe:
1) Plan impactado (IAP):
Esta metodología consiste en insertar “fragnets” al cronograma base del proyecto para medir el cambio a la fecha de finalización del proyecto (o a ciertos hitos).
Un fragnet es un modelo que consiste de una o más actividades que representa un cambio u otros impactos que no eran parte del plan original del proyecto.
El cronograma base del proyecto (en inglés – Baseline Schedule), es el cronograma que incluye todas las actividades necesarias para ejecutar el contrato original (sin cambios, adendas u otros impactos). Para el análisis, es preferible usar el cronograma base aprobado. En caso que no exista un cronograma formalmente aprobado, se debería utilizar el cronograma (antes de actualizar) que fue usado por las partes (contratista, supervisor o dueño) contemporáneamente para la ejecución del proyecto.
Utilizando este método de análisis, si después de insertar un fragnet (o más de uno) la fecha de finalización del cronograma base cambia (se atrasa), se concluye que la causa de la demora (a la fecha de finalización) fue el cambio representado por el fragnet.
Consultores tienen a su disposición varias metodologías para preparar/presentar un análisis de demora retrospectivo, pero hay que estar pendiente que algunas pueden producir resultados erróneos.
2) Análisis del impacto al plazo (TIA):
La principal diferencia entre la TIA y el IAP es que en la TIA, el fragnet es insertado a un cronograma actualizado, preferiblemente uno cercano a la fecha de inicio del evento de demora representado por el fragnet. Como en el caso del análisis IAP, si la fecha de finalización del proyecto cambia (se atrasa) después de haber insertado un fragnet, se concluye que el cambio o impacto representado por el fragnet es la causa de la demora.
A continuación, se demuestra en forma gráfica, un ejemplo simple de las metodologías IAP y TIA.
Plan base (IAP)/Plan actualizado (TIA):
En este ejemplo, el cronograma del plan base/plan actualizado tiene una ruta crítica a través de las actividades A, B y D y un plazo de 20 días.
Inserción del fragnet: Fragnet X (3 días) representa el cambio que tardo 3 días y que fue ejecutado después de la actividad B y antes de la actividad D.
En este ejemplo, la fecha de finalización se atrasó 3 días. La causa de la demora es el cambio o impacto generado por el Fragnet X.
3) Plan comparado a los acontecimientos reales – en periodos (PAB):
El método de análisis PAB compara el progreso que se tenía previsto según el cronograma con el progreso real, evaluando todos los cambios a la ruta crítica (la ruta crítica siendo algo dinámico) en forma cronológica y cumulativa. Como en el caso de la IAP/TIA, es preferible usar un cronograma aprobado, pero si tal no existe, entonces se debería usar el cronograma usado para ejecutar la construcción.
El progreso real se puede establecer usando varios documentos incluyendo: los cronogramas actualizados, informes diarios/semanales/mensuales, y correspondencias. Cuando se introducen cambios significativos en el plan de ejecución que se incluyen en el cronograma actualizado (todo cambio significativo en el plan de ejecución se debe incluir en el cronograma actualizado), se debe empezar la comparación de nuevo – así dividiendo el análisis total en distintos periodos de análisis. Es necesario comparar el progreso real con el plan contemporáneo.
Hay variaciones en los métodos descritos anteriormente.
AACE INTERNATIONAL – RECOMMENDED PRACTICE NO. 29R03, FORENSIC SCHEDULE ANALYSIS (RP 29R-03):
El RP 29R-03 separa las metodologías de análisis de retraso retrospectivo en dos categorías, (1) Observacional y (2) Modelos (Aditiva y Sustractiva). Los métodos Observacionales son variaciones del PAB y los Modelos Aditivos son variaciones del IAP y el TIA. El método Modelo Sustractivo no se utiliza con frecuencia.
El RP 29R-03 no recomienda el uso de un método sobre otro – solamente describe los distintos métodos.
SOCIETY OF CONSTRUCTION LAW DELAY AND DISRUPTION PROTOCOL – 2A EDITION (PROTOCOLO SCL):
El Protocolo SCL identifica 6 métodos de análisis. Los tres métodos incluidos en este documento se identifican y describen en el Protocolo SCL.
La 1A Edición del Protocolo SCL recomendaba el uso de cierto método de análisis para situaciones retrospectivas, pero tal recomendación no existe en la 2ª Edición (corriente).
Problemas con los métodos modelados (IAP and TIA):
Hay dos situaciones en las que los métodos de análisis que usan modelos, el IAP y la TIA, pueden producir resultados erróneos:
Estado real al comienzo del impacto – La diferencia entre el progreso planeado y el real en el plazo entre la fecha de comienzo del cronograma base o de la actualización en la que se insertó el fragnet y el comienzo del impacto (evento que representa el fragnet) no se considera en los métodos modelados, y
El progreso real durante la ejecución del fragnet no se considera en los métodos modelados.
1) Estado real al comienzo del impacto:
Los análisis en que se usan fragnets, el IAP o la TIA, pueden producir resultados inexactos si no se toma en cuenta el estado de construcción al comienzo del evento de demora. En el tiempo transcurrido entre la fecha de comienzo del cronograma base (IAP) o de la actualización (TIA) y el inicio del evento de demora, es muy probable que la construcción no ha progresado precisamente como predecía el cronograma base (IAP) o el cronograma actualizado (TIA).
El RP 29R-03 reconoce esta deficiencia cuando indica que “[a]cuarcy of the duration of the critical path impact for any given delay event degrades in proportion to the cronological distance of the delay event from the data date of the Schedule” (traducción: precisión del plazo del impacto a la ruta crítica para cualquier evento de demora disminuye en proporción a la distancia cronológica del evento de demora a la fecha de corte del cronograma). No solo la precisión del plazo se disminuye, sino que también podría resultar atribuyendo una demora crítica a una actividad que no es crítica en el momento del evento de la demora.
Este concepto se puede demostrar con el ejemplo del IAP y la TIA utilizado anteriormente:
Plan base (IAP) / Plan Actualizado (TIA)
Considere el impacto del fragnet si todo el trabajo se realizó como estaba previsto, excepto por la actividad C que comenzó 6 días tarde.
Estado en el día 15:
En este caso (en el día 15 después de la fecha del comienzo del cronograma) la inserción del Fragnet X no tendría impacto a la fecha de finalización:
La demora crítica en este caso sería de 4 días debido al retraso de 6 días en el inicio de la actividad C (2 días de holgura).
Fragnet X no tiene impacto – solamente consume la holgura creada por la demora en el inicio de la actividad C.
Recientemente, en un arbitraje del ICC, un consultor presentó un análisis IAP en el que concluía que el reemplazo de un equipo importante en una planta se había demorado 6 meses (hito con penalidades) porque el dueño de la planta no permitió el paro del equipo existente para permitir el reemplazo. Debido a que la planta estaba funcionando, el dueño tenía que minimizar el tiempo de inactividad (desde el paro del equipo existente hasta la puesta en marcha del equipo nuevo). Las actividades relacionadas a este equipo se habían programado iniciar en junio lo cual incluía fundaciones, otras obras civiles y actividades mecánicas preliminares que debían completarse antes del paro del equipo existente lo cual estaba programado para noviembre – un plazo de 5 meses (junio a noviembre). En el análisis, el fragnet que representaba el paro del equipo existente fue insertado con una fecha de inicio en mayo del siguiente año, lo cual resultó en un retraso crítico de aproximadamente 6 meses (noviembre a mayo del año siguiente). Los 6 meses de retraso fueron atribuidos al dueño por demorar el paro.
Lo que el análisis no toma en cuenta es lo ocurrido entre junio (comienzo planeado) y mayo del año siguiente. Recién en abril fue que el dueño permitió que se iniciara el paro en el mes de mayo porque no fue hasta entonces que el contratista estaba por terminar los trabajos preliminares que tenían que haberse terminado antes del paro. Las actualizaciones mensuales del cronograma mostraban que los trabajos preliminares se demoraban por causas no atribuibles al dueño.
El dueño no causó la demora crítica de 6 meses. Sin embargo, la cantidad de páginas con terminología técnica y gráficos con barras y flechas creadas con programas electrónicos sofisticados describiendo y defendiendo la metodología IAP que estaba incluida en los “procedimientos recomendados” (Recomended Practice…) de la AACE Internacional resultaría en confundir a los árbitros.
En este caso la aplicación de la metodología fue correcta, pero los resultados no acertaban con la causa real de la demora crítica. El problema fue que no se tomó en cuenta lo que ocurrió entre la fecha del inicio de las actividades del cronograma base (fecha de corte) y el inicio del fragnet (modelo).
2) El Modelo:
En análisis retrospectivos, deberían existir los datos de los acontecimientos reales. Si estos existen, ¿cuál es el propósito de crear un modelo?
Esto es análogo a una situación típica en la que el contratista entrega una propuesta para costos de trabajos extra (no incluidos en el alcance original) que no se habían realizado al presentar la propuesta. La propuesta del contratista representa un plan o modelo de lo que él piensa que va a tomar para ejecutar el trabajo. Por ejemplo, si el contratista piensa que el cambio requiere 10 trabajadores por 10 días entonces prepara su propuesta a base de ese modelo. Si el dueño acepta la propuesta, y se ejecuta una orden de cambio, entonces no importa si el trabajo en realidad requirió 8 trabajadores por 8 días o 12 trabajadores por 12 días: se aplicará la orden de cambio ejecutada.
Por otro lado, si no hubo un acuerdo antes de haberse ejecutado el trabajo, no tiene sentido volver a la propuesta o crear un modelo. Si se conocen los datos reales, entonces la cantidad real de trabajadores y el plazo que realmente trabajaron en el cambio se debe usar para el costo del cambio y el tiempo.
Problemas con el método Observacional (PAB):
El principal problema con el método de análisis PAB es que generalmente consume más tiempo que los métodos modelados. Mientras más detalle se considera en el análisis, más preciso va a ser el análisis.
RECOMENDACIONES
El protocolo SCL describe el TIA (análisis de fragnet) como el “procedimiento recomendado” (recommended procedure) que debe seguirse para un “análisis contemporáneo de demora” (contemporaneous analysis of delay). Ni el protocolo SCL ni el AACEi recomiendan el TIA como el método preferido en situaciones retrospectivas. El protocolo de SCL indica “después de la finalización de las obras” (after the completion of the Works) el TIA “puede no ser apropiado” (may no longer be appropriate).
Hay dos situaciones en las que los métodos de análisis que usan modelos, el IAP y la TIA pueden producir resultados erróneos:
Estado real al comienzo del impacto – La diferencia entre el progreso planeado y el real en el plazo entre la fecha de comienzo del cronograma base o de la actualización en la que se insertó el fragnet y el comienzo del impacto (evento que representa el fragnet) no se considera en los métodos modelados, y
El progreso real durante la ejecución del fragnet no se considera en los métodos modelados.
Para remediar la primera situación hay que considerar los acontecimientos reales durante el plazo del comienzo del cronograma (base para el IAP y actualizado para el TIA) hasta el comienzo del fragnet (evento de demora).
Para remediar la segunda situación se debe considerar los acontecimientos reales durante la ejecución de las actividades del fragnet y las otras actividades que se ejecutan contemporáneamente.
Si la forma de remediar las posibles deficiencias de los métodos modelados, el IAP y el TIA, es considerar los datos reales antes y durante el período del fragnet, entonces es preferible usar el método PAB.
En la mayoría de los casos, el aumento de precisión del PAB justificaría el tiempo adicional requerido en relación a los métodos modelados.
Cualquiera de los tres métodos, IAP, TIA, PAB (1) identifican las actividades que realmente causaron la demora a la ruta crítica, y (2) cuantifican la demora crítica causada por cada una de las actividades, con tal que los datos reales se usen para complementar el IAP y la TIA.
Sobre el autor
John H. McTyre tiene más de 35 años de experiencia en proyectos de construcción.
Durante los primeros 10 años, John ha trabajado en proyectos con empresas de construcción sirviendo de superintendente y gerente de obras. También ha sido representante del dueño en otros proyectos. Los siguientes 25 años ha preparado y analizado reclamos incluyendo reclamos de demoras, costos de demoras, costos relacionados al detrimento de productividad y evaluación/costo de trabajos adicionales. Ha trabajado en plantas eléctricas (hidroeléctricas, parques eólicos, de hidrocarburos, etc.); infraestructuras (carreteras, puentes, aeropuertos, puertos, metros, líneas de transmisión, etc.); petróleo y gas (plantas de distribución/licuefacción/regasificación de gas, cañería, refinadoras, etc.); edificios (oficinas, estadios, residencias, teatros, universidades, etc.); centros de datos; industriales (plantas de bioetanol, producción de papel, plásticos, etc.).
Los clientes incluyen contratistas, dueños, subcontratistas, ingenieros, etc.
El Sr. McTyre ha hecho presentaciones de perito en arbitrajes (ICC, AAA, y CCL), cortes (federales, de las fuerzas armadas, estatales) y en mediaciones. Ha hecho presentaciones de perito en inglés y español.
Footnotes
1 Plan impactado (IAP) es usado con mucha frecuencia en Latino América.
HKA was delighted to welcome our newest colleagues to our diverse global team in April and May 2023
21st June 2023
Thank you for choosing to join our HKA global team. HKA is a great place for our brilliant people to work, grow and play. Your diversity, experience, and skills will make our company even better as we continuously collaborate and improve HKA together. Our culture is collaborative, honest, transparent, and high performing – we are one global team.
Joining a new company is a challenging and exciting time. Please look after your mental and physical health. Protecting your health is HKA’s number one priority and we are here to support you. We embrace hybrid working, we are enjoying meeting up in our offices together again and reaping the benefits of in-person time – looking forward to seeing you in one of our offices soon.
We hope you enjoy working with us in our global team and have time to develop as well as laugh together too.
Kate Wood, Partner, Chief People Officer
Jean-Philippe Andanson, Senior Contract Manager Paris, France
Jean-Philippe has a Bachelor’s Degree in Civil Engineering and has 15 years of experience in the preparation, negotiation and management of contracts in the energy, gas, transportation and mining industries. He has been involved in the early engineering phases of projects through to the closing of contracts and any associated disputes, and also has extensive experience in contract management and dispute avoidance. He supports and guides engineers in contract management, maintaining overall consistency and ensuring the success of projects.
Yousef Benghalia, Managing Consultant Glasgow, UK
Yousef is an experienced quantity surveyor with 10 years of experience in the construction industry and has acted as a senior quantity surveyor on a range of projects on behalf of various main contractors. Working across oil & gas, nuclear, and rail sectors, Yousef has developed a command of pre and post-contract commercial management through assignments to significant projects in highly regulated industries and possesses master’s level education to bring theory and practice together. Able to take charge of complex commercial workloads, he has also demonstrated good financial acumen in the management of projects.
Wintress Cloud, Senior Associate Consultant Houston, TX, USA
Wintress has 7 years of collective construction industry experience. Her background includes dissecting the scope of complex capital projects utilizing advanced work packaging methodologies and project controls. Over the years, she has interfaced directly with the project team and site personnel during field assignments. She enjoys getting exposure to multiple projects, excels in collaborative work environments, and is receptive to development opportunities.
Terry Feng, Managing Consultant Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Terry has 10 years of project control and delivery experience in the construction industry, working on many large-scale projects.
His experience includes a vast number of high-profile construction projects in the UAE, focusing on buildings, access roads, and bridges. Terry has a BEng in civil engineering and an MSc in Commercial Management and Quantity Surveying. In addition, he also holds a Level-One Constructor Certificate issued by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of China (MOHURD).
Likaa Ghaddar, Managing Consultant Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Likaa Ghaddar is a skilled planning engineer with eleven years of experience in project planning and forensic delay analysis within the engineering and construction industries.
Likaa has been engaged in many Middle East projects across the residential, oil and gas and commercial sectors, specialising in baseline program development, progress updates and monitoring, resource and cost loading, and delay analysis.
Likaa holds an MSc in engineering management and a BE in industrial engineering and CST credentials from AACE International.
Rosalie Hollands, Associate Director London, UK
Rosalie is a Chartered Quantity Surveyor with over 10 years of experience in the construction industry. Rosalie has supported clients on national and international projects, from minor public realm works to new builds and major conversations with budgets exceeding £170 million. She has extensive experience in collaborative working with large client and construction teams. She has been responsible for administering and reporting project progress from conception to handover, ensuring key deadlines are met. In addition to her professional role, Rosalie is undertaking an MSc in Construction Law & Dispute Resolution at King’s College London, with completion expected in September 2024.
Rosalie has worked alongside experts, assisting with the quantum analysis, evaluation of losses, and preparing and drafting reports. She has experience in various forms of dispute resolution, including mediation, domestic UK adjudication and international arbitration.
Pamela Kahwajy joins HKA as a consultant with a civil engineering and project management background. During her studies, she worked as a structural design engineer but began her career in infrastructure advisory. Prior to joining HKA, Pamela gained experience in the private and public sectors. She has experience in risk management and strategic risk advisory across both the water and transport infrastructure sectors.
Melissa Kiser, Implementation Consultant Las Vegas, NV, USA
Melissa Kiser has 10 years of experience in the aviation industry. Most of her career has been spent administering project control systems, specifically PCM, P6, and PMWeb. She is an avid volleyball player, a travel enthusiast, and an animal lover. She joins the Las Vegas office as Implementation Consultant.
Morgan Kung, Consultant Hong Kong, China
Morgan Kung is a Consultant within the Quantum team based in our Hong Kong office with over 5 years of experience in the construction industry. She has a bachelor’s degree in quantity surveying from the University of Reading, UK. Morgan specialises in quantum analysis and has worked alongside experts to provide quantum assistance in preparing expert witness reports as well as audit services to various institutions. She has been involved in numerous projects that required a broad range of experience, such as pre-contract tendering, procurement, tender analysis, cost control and management and post-contract administration.
Cathy Le, Executive Assistant Philadelphia, PA, USA
Cathy is a Philadelphia native who graduated from Temple University. Her career background is quite diverse; she is a Pennsylvania licensed realtor, and she gained extensive administrative experience as a Senior Administrator/Executive Assistant at URBN Inc. for over 10 years before moving over to a Post-Production Supply Chain Senior Coordinator role where she spent over 5 years learning the ins and outs of the retail supply chain business. Prior to her start at HKA, her most recent position was with a home furnishings manufacturer in Delaware as a Finished Goods/Raw Materials Import Buyer. She joins the Philadelphia office as Executive Assistant.
Lukas Leuthold, Manager San Francisco, CA, USA
Lukas joins HKA’s San Francisco office after a sabbatical exploring the American West by road, from the Arctic Ocean to the Sonoran Desert. He previously worked in external financial audit and in managing and accounting for construction and information systems projects in California, Switzerland and Uganda. Lukas studied at Haverford College and Santa Clara University. He leads the SF chapter of the ACFE.
Alexia has 5 years of experience in the construction industry. She is rejoining HKA as a full-time employee after an internship last fall. She joins HKA in the Montreal office.
Anton Ma, Lead Consultant Sydney, NSW, Australia
With over 20 years’ of experience in the Construction Industry, Anton joins HKA as a Lead Consultant in the IPS team. As a Chartered Professional Engineer, he has undertaken various roles in mechanical contracting, including engineering design, estimating, commissioning, project management and BIM coordination. During the past 8 years, his role focused on estimating and cost management within an extensive range of sectors including infrastructure, defense, hospitals, retail complexes, data centers, commercial and residential towers.
Erin Sheth, Senior Associate Consultant New York, NY, USA
Erin has over seven years of experience in forensic accounting and litigation consulting. She has worked on a number of matters, including business interruption, fraud investigations, and FCPA investigations. She began her litigation consulting career in insurance archaeology and complex insurance claims cases. Erin enjoys conducting both data analysis and investigative research to provide support to a variety of projects.
Saif Sohail, Consultant Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Saif has three years of experience as a forensic accountant, specialising in conducting investigations and working on disputes for clients primarily in the Middle East. Saif’s professional experience includes professional services and start-ups, and he has worked across a diverse range of sectors, including retail, FMCG, energy, utilities, oil & gas, NGO, fintech, and health-tech.
Saif holds an MSc in Finance and Accounting from Imperial College London and is currently finishing his accounting qualifications.
Nitheesh Valappil, Managing Consultant Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Nitheesh is a qualified accountant with over seven years of professional consulting experience, predominantly in forensics.
During this time, he has contributed to numerous dispute resolution cases, providing critical assistance to experts in litigation and arbitration matters. Nitheesh has a BCom degree in International Business and is a member of The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand, and the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners
Tracy Doyle is a Partner based out of our Philadelphia office. She recounted her background and path into the construction industry before starting at HKA 15 years ago, what inspires her, and her typical day in her role, as well as voicing her support for the growing number of women in the industry.
Tell me about your background.
When I graduated college with a degree in economics, I had virtually no experience or connection with the construction industry. The learning curve was quite steep – challenging but always interesting.
I’ve always had a business development focus, though I have had the chance to work on claims, provide input on client advisory matters as well as partnering and training.
In my previous firm, I wore many hats as the firm was quite small, so I had the chance to lead various aspects of BD such as marketing, proposals, negotiating contracts, PR, as well as face-to-face client development. During that time, our small BD team grew to a team of 6.
I have had a focus in claims and expert consulting services, and have worked in many market sectors including infrastructure, energy, and government contracting. I have held positions in several industry associations including the American Bar Association, American Road and Transportation Builders Association, and the International Bar Association.
What inspires you in your role?
There are lots of things that inspire me, so in no order or fashion:
The people that I work with. This is probably the standard answer, but it is true because it is what I sell. If you do not have top talent who are motivated, smart, like-minded people to work with, it makes your job harder to do. My job is easy in the sense that we have the top talent in the business.
My second motivating factor is the Business of Construction. I am always fascinated with how construction impacts the world we live and work in. Travelling a lot with work has enabled me to see how the world is changing and how the work we do every day can have an impact on the world we live in.
Every client project we chase is different and everything from the project to the city to the stakeholders involved is different. I believe you need to constantly challenge yourself so as not to become complacent.
Starting in the construction industry in the 1980’s inspired me to set a positive image for the growing number of women in the business. I did not see the fact that there were so few women in construction as a roadblock; rather I saw it as an opportunity to stand out amongst the crowd. I continue to be inspired by the growing number of brilliant women in HKA and our industry.
Describe a typical day in your role.
There is no such thing as a typical day in my job and I really like that. I believe to do this job well, you need to be able to juggle a lot of balls. With Frank [Giunta] and Toby [Hunt]’s guidance, there is now a more focused and organized approach to achieving the objectives we set out for global, regional, and local initiatives.
I lead the global rail and rolling stock initiative. My team is based on several continents, we meet monthly, and strategize to pursue and win work in the global rail, transit and rolling stock market.
I also lead our business development efforts to continue to grow our business in Canada. This has been an extremely rewarding few years. When I assumed a Canada focus four years ago, we had less than 8 people in one office. Today we number more than 45 in four offices. HKA is known as a leading consultancy in Canada. This year, we achieved Platinum Status at the Top Projects Awards Dinner, indicating our work on many of Canada’s Top Infrastructure projects in country.
I also participate in the International Arbitration initiative, led by Howard Gendler. This is important to me as I am regularly fielding requests for experts on international arbitration matters requiring Spanish speakers in Latin America.
What do you think has been the reason for your success?
I enjoy my job and work hard to be successful. As I have previously stated, my key motivator is the team I work with. As we move forward with our new owner, PAI Partners, I remain motivated to drive success for the team at HKA as I deeply value what the HKA brand stands for.
In Business Development, it goes without saying that you do a lot of traveling. What city has been your favorite to travel to and why?
London, I love the multi-cultural aspect and the history of the city. It’s an easy city to navigate and enjoy all that it has to offer.
You have been with Hill International, and now HKA, for over 15 years in total. What has kept you with the organization for so long?
The people (especially Frank Giunta, who I directly report to), the challenges, and the chance to help build the best brand in the business.
Getting to know you. What are your interests outside of work?
I am a passionate sports and Chelsea football fan. I had always wanted to see a Chelsea game at home. So, in the fall pre-Covid, I took my sister, a die-hard Liverpool fan, to the Chelsea v. Liverpool game. Though we lost 1-0, it was a sporting highlight for me!
As first published in the Commercial Dispute Resolution Magazine as a part of their Expert View series.
Peter Caillard asks why road construction projects suffer from the same disputes time and time again, and what can be done to straighten out the bends?
Building roads for the betterment of transportation links remains a cornerstone of the economic growth strategies of many developed and developing nations. Road construction can be a complicated endeavour and every project is unique, but with thousands of years of experience it might be expected that the construction industry would have perfected its technique by now. However, disputes continue to plague the process at all stages from concept to completion and, moreover, it appears to be the same issues that repeatedly lead the parties into disagreement.
Top 16 causes of disputes according to HKA’s CRUX Insight Reports since 2018
HKA has been monitoring the causes of disputes through its CRUX programme since 2018. CRUX is an integrated research programme which provides insights into dispute causation on major engineering and construction capital projects around the world. Year-by-year data shows the common causal patterns in disputes across a wide range of disciplines and industries. Interrogation of this data helps us to understand which dispute issues are the most prevalent.
Using CRUX, the top 16 issues ranked by the number of cases in which each issue was cited as a matter of dispute in a highways project were as follows:
Rank
Issue
Proportion of disputes where this issue was a cause
1
Change in scope
42%
2
Unforeseen conditions
32%
3
Design incorrect
29%
4
Access late or restricted
26%
5
Contract interpretation issues
24%
6
Design incomplete
23%
7
Contract management/administration
21%
8
Design issued late
19%
9
Sub-contractor/supplier management issues
18%
10
Cashflow and payment issues
16%
11
Spurious claims
16%
12
Adverse weather conditions
16%
13
Tender or estimating errors
14%
14
Late approvals
14%
15
Skills and experience issues
14%
16
Deficient workmanship
13%
It is notable that three of the top eight causal issues relate to design and, if combined, they would top the table. In all cases these issues led to claims for additional time or cost.
These figures represent accumulated data, but a year-by-year breakdown shows a consistent pattern over time, with the same issues continuing to dominate the rankings.
“I have given further consideration to the top five issues to identify why they remain so prevalent and to review what actions might be taken either to avoid their occurrence or mitigate their impact.”
Key triggers in Change in Scope
A change in scope can be triggered by many factors including change of strategy or priorities by the owner, unexpected conditions encountered on site, value engineering initiatives, and so on. Scope changes require careful management as even a seemingly minor change may impact upon other parts of the design, construction or construction sequencing. Revised designs must be prepared, checked, approved, priced and issued against a ticking clock but, all too frequently, changes are rushed to avoid delays.
Disputes sometimes arise through scope growth as much as an actual change. On a design-build project, this may result from amendments made between a preliminary design (perhaps at a ‘Request for Proposal’ (RFP) stage) and a final design (the ‘Issued for Construction’ (IFC) stage). If a contractor has agreed a price at RFP stage, its ability to recover additional costs for subsequent changes may be contractually restricted, leading to dispute with either the owner or the contractor’s designer (based on the scope growth being arguably beyond what might be reasonably be considered normal design development). Equally, arguments around change of scope between a contractor and its designer may focus on whether the designer’s RFP designs contained sufficient detail for the constructor to price with reasonable accuracy. It is in all the parties’ interests to have fully defined from the outset what is to be expected in design packages at each stage of submission. From the designer’s perspective, the best preventative approach is to apply thorough checking procedures to minimise the risk of errors and omissions.
Unforeseen changes in road construction projects
Usually relating to conditions beneath ground, unforeseen conditions can encompass both natural geology and man-made obstructions or contamination. These continue to bedevil construction projects. The expansive nature of a linear transportation project such as a road or railway, potentially extending for tens of kilometres or more, requires accurate information about soils and geology on a completely different magnitude to a discrete building project on an isolated footprint. For roads, ground investigation tends to focus on investigatory boreholes at the locations of bridges and other structures to facilitate foundation design, with a reduced intensity of survey in between being sufficient to determine soil type for earthworks, understand groundwater regimes, and so on. This requires some interpolation between locations, but where the conditions are intensely variable, interpolation between boreholes may be insufficiently accurate for design purposes. If the ground conditions actually encountered during construction differ from those predicted, resulting in delays and extra costs, a claim may well follow.
Investment in early site investigation is rarely wasted. For most road schemes it represents just a tiny fraction of the overall project cost. Without good knowledge of the sub-soils, the designer is blind.
Owners and contractors can and do undertake risk analyses through which the chances and consequences of unforeseen conditions can be priced. But there is no substitute for thorough understanding of what lies beneath your feet.
Responsibility for establishing ground conditions should be clear under the contract. Assigning responsibility (and risk) to the contractor for such matters might sound like a smart move to an owner eager to get to site quickly and cheaply, but it is likely that the contractor’s tender prices will be inflated to cover the risk it thereby assumes. Minimising that risk by conducting comprehensive pre-tender surveys (or indeed, participating in risk-sharing), will encourage much keener pricing.
Road design errors and responsibilities
Design errors may be attributed to numerous factors: simple calculation mistakes, use of incorrect design codes, misinterpretation of the brief, inaccurate or insufficient site investigation data, inadequate change control, lack of technical understanding, poor project interfaces, inadequate checking procedures, inaccurate mapping, poor knowledge of site constraints, and several other factors. The list is long, which might explain why design issues are so prevalent in the CRUX dispute causation rankings.
Responsibility for design will vary depending on the selected procurement route. With traditional design-bid-build the owner and its consultant will generally be responsible for the project design, but in design-build, the contractor may inherit an outline design which it is responsible for developing and detailing, in which case responsibility may be shared. In design-build, the contractor may sub-contract these duties to an independent designer. If design responsibility is clear and properly managed, this can work well. If not, disputes are highly likely.
In construction it is generally accepted that the earlier that a mistake is identified, the lower the cost of rectification. If, for example, a bridge foundation design includes errors in its piling calculations, but the problem is successfully identified during the design check, the situation is recoverable with limited effort and damage. However, should the mistake pass unidentified until after contract award (when construction has commenced and materials are arriving on site) abortive costs and delays are highly probable. Should the error not be identified until the bridge is erected, it may be necessary to demolish the bridge.
Perhaps this is an extreme example but, as a general principle, investment in ‘right-first-time’ design will almost certainly reduce costs in the longer term.
The introduction of Building Information Modelling (BIM) has huge potential to reduce errors in design, and therefore reduce the number of disputes. Through the creation of 3-D or 4-D models, with links to supporting documentation, the parties can view their project through all stages of development and can collaborate, communicate, and share information and project records. Potential clashes between different elements of the design (roadworks, structures, drainage, utilities) will be identified at an early stage (if not avoided altogether) and alternative design scenarios may be explored in the confidence that their impact on the wider project is properly understood.
Delayed or restricted access to the site can lead to significant challenges
Late or obstructed access to a site can cause considerable difficulties – either at the planning stage when access is required for ground investigations and for topographical or other surveys – or at the construction stage where timely access is essential if the contractor is to deliver to schedule.
Once construction starts, delayed access can result in plant lying idle and labour left under-utilised. For linear transportation projects such as roads, a site fragmented by parcels of unavailable land can introduce significant logistical issues, especially if the traditional earthworks haul route running the length of the site is obstructed. Particularly for long linear sites the number of interests crossed or intercepted along the route (land, utilities, etc) may be substantial.
Securing and making available the site is normally performed by the owner prior to construction. Where land possession cannot be guaranteed from the outset, phased land release can be written into the contract at tender stage. By so doing the contractor is at least aware of the limitations and can plan around them. If it is necessary to expedite the start of the works, responsibility for arranging temporary access or permits will sometimes be delegated to the contractor.
Security of land or access rights should be a key priority during the planning stages, especially given that planning and land acquisition procedures may take years to resolve.
Contract interpretation issues
The interpretation of contract clauses continues to be a significant factor in construction disputes, affecting almost a quarter of the projects where HKA has been engaged in the resolution process. Typically, such disputes are more prevalent in bespoke contracts than those employing standard forms, but they are also common where additional, substitute or amended clauses have been introduced, perhaps with poor drafting skill or with insufficient consideration of whether the changed clauses contradict other clauses in the contract. At dispute hearings, a poorly drafted contract will often work against the interests of its author –typically the owner – who had the opportunity to get it right but did not.
Appropriate allocation of risk will reduce disputes. It is often stated that risk should rest with the party best placed to manage it. Yet sometimes risks may be passed from an owner to a contractor through clause amendments with insufficient deference to this principle. This may be dictated by time constraints – for example, no ground investigation data available at tender, making the contractor responsible for ground conditions. Of course, the contractor can price for undertaking its own investigations, but within a fixed tender period, will this be sufficiently comprehensive? Here, short term gain may mean longer term pain.
Regardless, time spent wording clauses correctly is time well spent. Drafters should employ fresh eyes to review not just the words employed, but their intended consequences, and to robustly challenge both their soundness and fairness.
Every effort should be made to maximise clarity of the clause wording, especially with regard to the responsibilities of the parties, and all elements of the contract, including drawings and specifications, should be mutually compatible and free of contradictions. Where there is a chance of surprises (for example, ground conditions), contract drafters should expect the unexpected and prepare accordingly, but it should always be crystal clear where responsibilities lie.
Will we ever stop disputes in road construction?
Probably not, but much can be done to reduce the prevalence of the issues which lead to disputes and the significant sums expended annually on their resolution. In particular, for the matters which CRUX identifies as the most prevalent, industry practitioners should:
Recognise the extensive linear nature of a road scheme as opposed to a discrete site and invest in both the quality and quantity of ground investigation. Money spent at this stage is rarely wasted.
Ensure robust checking procedures for all aspects of the highway design (not just those where they are obligatory, such as with structures). Engage an experienced reviewer independent of the original design to ensure that the whole design package is coordinated and consistent.
Document everything thoroughly at all stages, as if anticipating a dispute. Clear supporting documentation is as important for avoiding disputes as it is for satisfactory evidence when they occur. If a formal dispute process is embarked upon, the party with the best records stands the best chance of winning.
Ensure that a robust process exists for the management of change. Disputes often focus on how the change was implemented and its impact on programme and costs. CRUX consistently identifies change of scope as the largest single cause of disputes. Poor documentation of decisions lies at the heart of this. Change in construction is virtually inevitable, so the industry should be prepared for it and manage it better.
Embrace BIM technology. BIM not only facilitates efficient design but addresses one of the greatest obstructions to swift dispute resolution: the shortage of accurate and reliable records. Insufficient or inconclusive documentary evidence enables both sides to claim to be right, but a ‘smoking gun’ will make at least one of the parties think twice.
Conclusions
Disputes in road construction projects are not about to disappear, but there is much that the industry can do to minimise the chances of a dispute occurring and, when it still does, to maximise the opportunities for prompt resolution. Early investment in development and a focus on well-written contracts combined with effective communication must lie at the heart of any improvement.
Some factors are harder to change. Low margins and high risk can encourage contractors to rely on successful claims to turn a profit. Furthermore, disputes thrive on uncertainty – but risk and uncertainty can both be managed.
But possibly the most significant change we will encounter in the coming years will emanate from increasing engagement with technology, especially BIM, which will impact on all the above issues. It will be of particular interest to revisit the league table in a few years to see whether engagement with technology has indeed impacted on dispute causation.
Regardless, there is much still to get right. The road to dispute-free construction will be a long one.
For more information about services HKA can offer in dispute resolution, please contact petercaillard@hka.com.
About the author
Peter Caillard is a Chartered Civil Engineer with nearly 40 years of experience in the construction industry. Peter has managed projects through all stages of construction from preliminary design through to final account using a variety of forms of contract. He has been engaged with projects throughout the world including the UK and Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and North America, and his experience covers all aspects of design and construction including highway geometry, road pavement construction, drainage, earthworks, highway structures, public utilities, and materials testing. He is widely experienced in the design and construction of highways, transport and infrastructure projects.
In recognition of World Environment Day, we spoke with Alex Lee, Principal
5th June 2023
Alex Lee leads the Environment & Climate Change technical division of our Forensic Technical Services. We spoke to him about the industry he works in, the environment and how we can be more sustainable in our own lives.
Getting to know your experience a bit more, what is your background in the environmental industry?
I have a Master’s in Environmental Modelling and Monitoring and a Ph.D. in Geology. Specifically, my doctorate provided an opportunity for me to roam glaciers which was brilliant.
My first job was assisting in the development of long-term safety cases for nuclear repositories. This included modeling groundwater plumes up to 150,000 years into the future. It necessitated developing models inclusive of long-term future climate change, glaciations, sea level change, geochemical evolution, and much more.
We were using supercomputers to code and develop our models from first principles, where I learned so much from some of the very brightest. I was very lucky to have been part of such a strong team.
From there, I joined ERM, a global environmental consulting business, as a lead risk assessor in their soil and groundwater team. For the 17 years prior to joining HKA, I was on the management team at WSP. My career has enabled me to work globally and on some of the most challenging environmental problems, direct multi-disciplinary projects, and deliver expert witness testimony.
Principally, my background is in ground and surface water contamination, human health, and vapour risk assessments. But at the root of it all, I joined the environmental industry as I truly just liked being outside. I joined on a promise (in part) of exotic field works. I remain unsure if I was sold the truth, but I have certainly seen some interesting, albeit dirty, places.
That’s a great lead to my next question: where the passion for the environmental industry comes from? One part of it is from your love of the outdoors, and presumably, you want to make a difference as well.
Most people, including myself, who join the environmental sector want to be impactful (besides being outside). They want to make an actual difference. We tend to be people who, when we walk past a piece of litter, we pick it up. It’s not somebody else’s problem. Many who join this sector are climbers, walkers, kayakers, etc., or just people who are immersed in the outdoors and who see great value and importance in protecting it in all its detail and diversity.
Even in a corporate setting, when I am sitting at my desk, on a spreadsheet, crunching numbers, I get satisfaction knowing the delivery of my work seeks to impact the physical world around us.
It’s about making the world a better place, which sounds cliché, but there is truth to it.
Furthermore, because of each environment’s uniqueness, no two jobs are the same. This uniqueness creates appeal and a challenge. It requires environmental scientists to be adaptable and practical in acquiring the data and yet also be academics learning and leaning on other disciplines to process it.
It is this combination of the practical and uniqueness that provides another common appeal to those that embark on a career in the environmental sciences. Indeed, this combination, including the opportunity to make a difference, ultimately drew me to the sector.
Moving on, how ingrained should ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) principles, and more specifically, environmental sustainability principles, be in a company’s operations?
Whether you believe in climate change or not, or any other ecocide headlines in your daily newsfeed, I believe that we have an individual responsibility to use the Earth’s resources wisely. You may not believe in climate change, but that does not mean it is acceptable or sensible that we consume our finite resources at an uncontrolled rate.
Meanwhile, none of us can avoid the term ESG in evolving policy, legislation, and guidance. This term can invoke mixed messages and is indeed seen by some as a burdensome requirement to company reporting, a barrier to operations, and a potential source of litigation.
I agree that the ESG journey will not always be easy, and that transition and change will take time. Yet because something is hard is not an excuse to do nothing or not to start. I believe and have seen that a failure of companies to embrace ESG practices as part of their core values can, and will, likely result in negative impacts, whether that comes in the form of monetary penalties for non-compliance with existing regulations, damage to a brand’s reputation, lost finance, or lost customers.
ESG governance and acceptable reporting must lead to long-term behavioural and policy change.
In summary, ESG provides a lens and a framework within which companies may now be monitored to improve and drive accelerated change. Consequently, its principles, even if imperfect, can, I believe, only be a positive addition to society.
I would ask employees to be curious, ask questions about the company’s operations, and hold themselves and others accountable (without fear) at all levels. Be courageous, be critical and get involved to deliver change.
The 2023 World Environment Day theme is ‘Solutions to plastic pollution’. What is your perspective on plastic pollution and how can we be more sustainable, with regards to plastic consumption?
I am thankful to all those who pick up plastic and litter without being asked, for it is a cleaner world thanks to what they do. Individual actions matter in creating a better environment.
In specific consideration of synthetic plastics, they are undoubtedly useful stuff. They are lightweight, durable, and waterproof. Yet these same qualities mean that they hang around in landfill sites, transform our beaches into junkyards, and are ingested by animals and fish and may even affect our health.
From a carbon perspective, the resistance of plastic to decay is good in that it will not add to methane emissions. If placed into a landfill rather than thrown onto a street, then arguably, the hydrocarbons are going back into the ground they came from (the need for landfill space is another question)! But most plastics are improperly disposed of at or near the location where they end their usefulness. They are littered to the ground, thrown out of a car window, heaped onto an already full bin, or inadvertently carried off by a gust of wind. This is despite the average distance of litter from a bin being just 5 metres!
Unfortunately, cutting the demand for plastics is tricky as it is a far too convenient product; indeed, world plastic production is increasing by 4% per year. So, irrespectively, there is no getting around the fact that we all need to try to untangle (reduce) ourselves from plastic dependency wherever we can.
There are some things we can do to be more sustainable:
BUY LESS
Think about “need vs want”
Refuse any single-use plastics you do not need – look at what you are buying, which may also save you money! Avoid plastic bottled water. This avoidable disaster keeps growing. We are using 200-390 billion litres per year.
Avoid products with excessive packaging.
BE CURIOUS
Ask and think about the full lifecycle of a product e.g.
Avoid products that contain microbeads – Look for “polyethylene” and “polypropylene” on the ingredient labels of cosmetic products.
RECYCLE IT
Think before you dispose of any plastics and actively seek out recycling options.
SEE IT – PICK IT UP
If you see plastic litter pick some of it up. Litter clean-up costs over £ 1 billion in the UK and $11.5 billion annually in the US.
Consider being proactive and maybe get involved with your local litter picks or even organise an office pick.
Aside from plastics, what are your top practice tips for being more sustainable?
Offsetting is a seductive concept but no substitute for cutting our footprints. Instead, we should always adopt the mantra to try and eliminate or reduce. There are three typical steps on the journey to becoming more sustainable.
Step 1: Understand your environmental footprint. There is no such thing as an average person’s footprint because some fly, others do not. 70% of flights are taken by ~15% of the population. If you are a frequent flyer, you have some big potential wins in getting your footprint down. Plenty of personal carbon calculators are online for all to look at. Start by having a look.
Step 2: Now that you understand your footprint, pick your battles. If you’re going to make a difference, focus on the larger things, not the smaller ones, e.g., one premium economy flight from London to Hong Kong burns around 4.5 tonnes CO2e. If you have a 5-tonne aspirational target per year, this will leave you only 500g for everything else! I am not saying don’t fly but think twice or maybe reduce your trips.
Step 3: On a more day-to-day basis, for me it’s food. People don’t often realise how big the environmental footprint of food can be. Again, it’s about thinking twice about some of the products you are buying and, ideally, only buying products that are in season. If you have a meat-heavy diet, you could use up most of your 5-tonne aspirational target just on food shopping, so maybe try to reduce it. Other examples include, 250 grams of Parmesan Cheese has a 4.8kg CO2e footprint, or three bottles of wine a week is equivalent to driving 385 miles in an average car. However, these are just examples, and you need to look at what you are buying then think what I can eliminate or reduce.
I would iterate that the golden rule is not to become misdirected and overly focused on chasing out the small things. Each family is different and has different needs and a different shape of footprint; it should be personal and tailored. Yet always remember that any change is always better than no change. For some, it may be food; for others, travel or energy. Just take one area at a time and maybe one big thing in each area.
Ultimately it also helps to be informed with some easy reading. Without such, you may miss some of the easy wins or be shocked at some of the avoidable products you use. Finally, we must recognise that none of us is perfect and all of us are environmental hypocrites but let’s just try. Do not be fooled by the arguments that my footprint does not matter. Cumulatively, they do and, as a bonus, may even save you money!
Finally, do you have any recommended videos or readings?
There’s a book called ‘How Bad are Bananas?’, which puts in perspective the carbon footprint of everyday items in the average person’s life. It calculates how much carbon and water they use up. I would recommend it as an easy read to dip in and out of and it’s surprisingly enjoyable. The United Nations has also published 170 actions to combat climate change, which is good.
A conversation with Adham Kotb, Associate Director
3rd May 2023
Adham Kotb is an Associate Director, based out of our Jeddah office, specialising in Construction Contracts and Conflict Management. We spoke to him about his career and his role at HKA, and he reflects on memories with his family.
Tell me about your background.
I am from Egypt and feel fortunate to have gained diversified experience – in terms of both work and culture – working in the construction industry in the UK, the UAE, Qatar, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia.
What attracted you to your speciality?
The idea of bridging the gap between engineering and law is what first grabbed my attention to my specialty. Learning about contracts and dispute resolution at King’s College London made me eager to learn more and continue working in this field.
What inspires you in your role?
Helping parties to collaborate more successfully by managing conflicts and preventing disputes inspires me to do the required hard work and to inspire others.
What do you think has been the reason for your success?
The journey to success is always long, but I am progressing on the right track through a mix of continued study and hard work. Academics and practice complement each other in amazing ways. For example, my work experience enabled conducting my research at the University of Birmingham in a practical context that addresses real-world issues. On the other hand, my post-graduate studies certainly improved the quality of my work.
Why is HKA a stand-out employer for you?
HKA is great because of its people. Amazing colleagues and leaders who truly care about their colleagues. HKA would not have become a stand-out employer without the efforts of its impressive leaders like Haroon Niazi, Partner, Head of Middle East, and Tim Whealy, Partner.
Getting to know you. What are your interests outside of work?
I love travelling to new places with my family. That creates enjoyable experiences and lasting memories. I picture my kids when we were all having fun on a roller coaster in Abu Dhabi’s Warner Bros, and when we rolled up our trousers and waded at the beach of a Maldives island with two baby sharks swimming beside us.
HKA was delighted to welcome our newest colleagues to our diverse global team in March 2023
19th April 2023
Thank you for choosing to join our HKA global team. HKA is a great place for our brilliant people to work, grow and play. Your diversity, experience, and skills will make our company even better as we continuously collaborate and improve HKA together. Our culture is collaborative, honest, transparent, and high performing – we are one global team.
Joining a new company is a challenging and exciting time. Please look after your mental and physical health. Protecting your health is HKA’s number one priority and we are here to support you. We embrace hybrid working, we are enjoying meeting up in our offices together again and reaping the benefits of in-person time – looking forward to seeing you in one of our offices soon.
We hope you enjoy working with us in our global team and have time to develop as well as laugh together too.
Kate Wood, Partner, Chief People Officer
Rémi Aboulfaraj, Consultant Paris, France
Rémi is an accounting professional with more than six years of experience in accounting, financial audit and financial advisory. Prior to joining HKA, Rémi worked for several well-known firms, most of which were Big 4. During his studies, he began his career as a work-study student in accounting at several accounting expertise firms. After these years, Remi began a career in financial audit and work mainly on listed entities across a range of industries (energy, mining, pharmaceutical and defence, etc).
Sarah Azib, Public Relations Officer Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Sarah joins HKA as Public Relations Officer and is based in Jeddah, KSA. Sarah has over 10 years of experience working as a PRO in Saudi Arabia, covering the various legal processing activities for companies and their staff. She has experience in working as a government liaison, personnel management and human resources.
Hlami Baloyi, Managing Consultant Johannesburg, South Africa
Hlami Baloyi has joined HKA as a Managing Consultant. He has a National Diploma S4 (Mechanical Engineering) and is a member of the Project Management Institute (PMI-SP®). He is currently studying Professional Diploma in Forensic Schedule Analysis.
Hlami is a seasoned Project Planner with about 15 years in the industry, he has worked across various industries including Energy, Construction, Hydro, Mining, Renewables, Oil and Gas, etc.
He also has experience in the initiating and development of daily, weekly, or monthly project progress reports for Operations Management and resource allocations to site supervisors and foremen, as well as their daily productivity.
Janice Cheng, Senior Consultant Hong Kong SAR, China
Janice is a Quantity Surveyor with 18 years of experience in the construction industry in both Hong Kong and the UK. Janice has previously worked with several major main contractors on various complex infrastructure projects such as Thames Tideway, MTRC Railway infrastructure, Macau Casino (City of Dreams) and Theme Park redevelopment (Ocean Park) with demonstrable skills and knowledge in post contract project delivery using NEC3 contract and various NEC suite in the supply chain procurement.
Muqaddas Farooqi, Associate Consultant Chicago, IL, USA
Muqaddas recently graduated from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign with a master’s degree in civil engineering. Her degree concentrations were in Construction Management and Structural Engineering. Muqaddas is rejoining HKA as a full-time employee after an internship last summer.
Marcio Godinho de Luca, Senior Consultant Paris, France
Marcio has over 20 years of experience in the construction industry. He has acted as Senior Planning/Project Controls Engineer on more than 10 international projects. From South America (Brazil and Bolivia) to Europe (Spain, Italy, Ireland, UK, France and Finland), Marcio has extensive and diverse project planning expertise. With an established record in scheduling, measurement, cost, schedule delay analysis, quality, contract assessment, interpreting and applying commercial terms of the contracts in the project schedules, Marcio successfully combines both knowledge and experience under traditional industrial segments, such as energy (power plants), oil & gas (pipelines, off-shore platforms and refineries), mining, and telecommunications.
George Grainger, Senior Consultant Sydney, NSW, Australia
George is a commercial and construction lawyer who has worked in-house and in private practice both in New Zealand and Australia. He has provided legal advice on, and been embedded in, a number of complex projects including seismic strengthening of civic facilities, water treatment, aircraft fleet management, resource extraction and zoo development. George’s approach is to understand a client’s broad needs and operating environment and ensure advice is targeted, appropriate and useful.
Byungjin Lee, Associate Director London, UK
Byungjin is a professionally qualified civil engineer with over 15 years of experience in various construction sectors, including transportation infrastructure, water management systems, power plants and buildings in the UK, Europe, Asia Pacific, South Africa, and the Middle East. Having worked as a contractor and consultant acting on behalf of clients, he has a broad knowledge of commercial and claim management through effective pre- and post-contract management. He has specialised in quantum analysis and significantly contributed to the settlement of various complex disputes.
Tumelo Mothibi, Managing Consultant Johannesburg, South Africa
Tumelo Mothibi is a Managing Consultant at HKA with more than 10 years of experience in the Construction Industry as a Construction Planner. He had the privilege to work with surveyors, engineers, and architects and working with estimators to calculate the resources needed for projects.
He has managed several projects and produced progress reports and forecasts for clients and stakeholders. Tumelo has been involved in most major bids and served the role of construction monitoring with the Shell EPCM project. Although predominantly based on construction sites, he has experience in working between offices and construction sites.
Christina Pavli, Managing Consultant London, UK
Christina is a chartered construction manager with over 5 years of experience in the construction sector. She has worked as project manager and architectural engineer on diverse projects in London, Copenhagen and Athens, both office-based and on site, having gained significant experience in residential, office, hotel, retail, educational, infrastructure and technology projects.
Christina possesses a solid background in project management, planning and contract administration, and has also been involved with claim rebuttals as well as delay and critical path analyses on live projects.
Craig Ritchie, Associate Director London, UK
Craig is a construction professional with over twenty-five years of experience in infrastructure, including twenty within rail and transportation. He has an educational background in building and quantity surveying but also holds a doctorate in the environmental social sciences.
His core construction skills include commercial management, contract management, contract administration, quantity surveying, claims management, dispute resolution, project management, estimating, cost management, financial planning, strategic planning, and risk management. Environmentally, he is knowledgeable in issues surrounding climate change, biodiversity, ESG, sustainability, and existential risk.
Has worked in various departments of London Underground, Transport for London, and Network Rail. He also has experience working for consultancies and main contractors in the rail, civil engineering, and building realms.
Josh Robinson is an experienced graphic designer with extensive knowledge across multiple design disciplines. He has worked in a breadth of design fields including print, motion and digital solutions with a background from the arts industry. Josh specialises in being a brand ambassador with his broad technical abilities in contemporary graphic design. He has consistently created outcomes that best suit the client by remaining contemporary in his approach and using research-led initiatives to quickly become an expert in any client industry.
Behrang Sarrafi, Associate Director Sydney, NSW, Australia
Behrang is an experienced Structural Engineer with 20 years’ experience in structural design. He is an innovative and enthusiastic professional and brings with him extensive experience in structural engineering and management having worked on wide range of projects including residential, commercial and industrial, reinforced concrete and steel structures. He has led the retrofitting study and design of buildings and industrial structures as well as detail structural design of various residential and commercial buildings.
Behrang holds a PhD in civil engineering and is a chartered member of the institute of Engineers Australia as structural engineer.
A conversation with Dina Shabib, Managing Consultant
3rd April 2023
Dina Shabib, Managing Consultant, discusses how her career has grown and developed, shares why HKA is a stand-out employer to her, and reveals a specific piece of feedback that has stuck with her throughout her career.
Tell me about your background.
I am a civil engineer with 17 years of experience in the construction industry. I began my career as a site civil engineer, the profession I had always aspired to work in. Early in my career, I was working on a project that had disputes and eventually the parties went into arbitration. I was asked to support the project manager in preparing for arbitration, which gave me exposure to a whole other aspect of the construction industry.
After that, I began working as a contract administrator while employed by a company in Jordan. Being located on-site provided valuable experience that helped support my career development. I was able to advance to the role of claims consultant.
This year, I also enrolled in a master’s in construction law program.
What attracted you to your specialty?
I like working on a variety of projects with different people. I also enjoy analysing complex data to draw clear and simple conclusions that help clients overcome challenges and facilitate negotiations to reach a settlement.
What inspires you in your role?
I’m inspired by many things, including the desire to learn new things, the sharing of knowledge with other professionals, and the results of my work, but what motivates me the most is the desire to see how far I can advance and how accomplished I can be in my field.
Describe a typical day in your role.
I read documents, analyse data, discuss conclusions with my colleagues, and prepare reports.
I joined the ED&I committee, which is a new experience for me, and I really like being part of the group.
What do you think has been the reason for your success?
My dedication, ongoing learning, and ability to learn from my mistakes by taking on board constructive feedback have all contributed to my success.
What is a piece of feedback that has stuck with you throughout your career?
At my first job, my manager advised me to listen carefully to others in order to have a productive conversation. You have to be able to listen to understand, think, and form an opinion before answering. It’s important to fully understand what is being communicated.
Why is HKA a stand-out employer for you?
HKA has a great work environment and prioritises employee improvement. I have been with HKA for 8 months, and as a new joiner, others’ attitudes toward me have been overwhelmingly positive – very friendly and supportive.
I am also appreciative and pleased to have a female line manager who is knowledgeable, supportive, and willing to offer guidance. Women help women!
Getting to know you. What are your interests outside of work?
I love reading, travelling to explore new places, and from time to time, I like to adventure. I have done some solo traveling. In 2019, after doing a lot of travel across the region, I visited Malaysia as a solo traveler. I had a very different, yet incredible experience.
Last year, I went skydiving for the first time, it was absolutely thrilling experience!
Listen to Derek Nelson speak on Expert Evidence in Construction Disputes – Problems and Safeguards
29th March 2023
Derek Nelson, Partner & Head of Expert Services, Europe at HKA, joined a panel of experts at the International Construction Claims and ADR Conference in Dubai in November 2022 who discussed Expert Evidence in Construction Disputes – Problems and Safeguards.
View the videos below to see the answers Derek provided to the prompted question.
Is the characterisation of experts as “hired guns” justified, and to the extent that it is, what safeguards can be put in place to ensure an experts’ independence?
Do you think anything like the IBA guidelines, but for experts, would be helpful?
The issue of late appointments. Parties frequently appoint experts later in proceedings. What types of problems does that approach give rise to?
Does the expert become more of an expert or less as they become more entrenched in the role?
What types of safeguards can be put in place to ensure that experts give a full range of opinion on what they’ve been asked to give their expertise on?
Often various methodologies that can be applied to solve a problem can produce different results and that can increase costs. What type of steps can parties, lawyers, tribunals and experts take to try to reduce that?
Derek is a Fellow and Immediate Past Chairman of The Academy of Experts. He has acted as an expert determinator, adjudicator, mediator and is a panel member with the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators’ Business Arbitration Scheme (BAS) with extensive experience as an independent expert witness in both international arbitrations and litigation.
He is a chartered quantity surveyor, a chartered engineering surveyor and commercial manager.
Derek is both an accredited and certified expert witness, an accredited mediator and an accredited expert determinator. His experience covers over 40 years in construction and engineering. Derek has been appointed in the role of independent expert witness on over 75 occasions, addressing issues in a combination of delay, quantum and disruption, and has testified on over 20 occasions in both court and arbitration proceedings on such matters, including giving concurrent evidence.
