Expert technical solutions is an established staffing company offering work-from-home technology staffing jobs with remote and full-time employment options, including IT project management, software implementation, engineering services and cybersecurity.
Tech leaders need to stay abreast of emerging technologies and research, yet it can be challenging finding reliable sources that provide both informative updates and are accessible enough for non-specialists.
Project Management
Project management is a subfield of business management that specializes in creating products, services, or events to fulfill client requirements. One key difference between project and regular business management is timescale: projects have final deliverables with limited delivery windows; thus necessitating more dynamic approaches to scheduling such as an issue log for tracking any sudden shifts.
Delay Analysis
Delay analysis involves evaluating the impact of delays on construction projects. While this task is complex and its results may be challenged by one or more parties depending on circumstances surrounding the dispute and contractual provisions, its primary goal should be identifying whether a delay can be justified as excusable (i.e. not attributable to contractor), thus justifying an extension in timeframe; or whether such delays should not receive such consideration.
There are various delay analysis techniques, all requiring an accurate baseline schedule and as-built information from a construction project. This program represents the supplier’s planned intention for sequencing activities on a construction project, so must be regularly updated in order to perform these analyses accurately. Most methods employed herein tend to be retrospective in nature and will assess any effects of delay related to one activity within relation to its scheduled completion date, working backwards along the critical path from key dates along the critical path.
Issues associated with delay analysis that could compromise its reliability include lags and leads, preferential logic settings, calendar settings, progress percentage settings and retained logic settings that have the potential to distort plan depictions. Furthermore, confusion over what has caused the delay, who caused it and for how long may also result in discrepancies within analysis results.
At the end of the day, an experienced delay analyst can advise which technique would best serve to resolve a claim in dispute, depending on its type and level of detail required, availability of project records/programme, complexity of circumstances leading to this claim and available documentation/programme.
Time impact analysis is the go-to technique for analyzing delays. As its name implies, time impact analysis measures how individual delays impact project milestones by measuring differences between schedules prior to and post delay event occurrence. This method of delay analysis is quick and intuitive to apply; however, since it doesn’t rely on a baseline programme it should only be used to quantify individual delay events rather than comprehensively analyze all delay claims. An intensive and sophisticated method for delay analysis is the collapse as-built or “collapse as-planned” technique, which involves creating an as-built programme and comparing key dates along the project critical path with original plans; then reviewing project records to identify causes of delay.
Expert Opinion
Expert opinions provide scientific views or comment from a designated group of experts in any given field, providing an authoritative source of scientific insight that can complement empirical evidence or act alone as the sole basis for making decisions. Their value may be diminished however if their statements exceed certain limits: for instance what an expert may testify to, on what information their opinion can be based and how confidently an expert must feel that its correctness.
Expert judgment requires access to specific types of information that allow them to make accurate predictions. During an expert elicitation session, this requires questions regarding quantities where true values may exist and experts who possess both scientific expertise as well as confidence when distinguishing amongst similar quantities.
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993), is one of several landmark Supreme Court decisions which set forth admissible expert testimony standards. While courts may not specify all factors involved in making their determinations about admissibility of expert opinions, generally speaking they have upheld that experts must base their opinions on reliable sources of information when providing their opinions in testimony.
Sources of information may include expert opinions of other experts, data derived from tests or experiments, and observations made directly by them. While some jurisdictions’ rules of evidence prohibit experts from relying on hearsay, this rule is generally seen as restricting admissibility of expert testimony.
Though it can be tempting for experts to rely solely on their information, doing so can lead to issues of self-serving bias and ignorance of limitations of knowledge. Your bias alarm should sound when someone whole-heartedly supports one viewpoint without acknowledging evidence that contradicts it, or fails to acknowledge their limitations of knowledge. One effective way of countering these tendencies is ensuring the expert can explain why other sources are more reliable.
Technology Disputes
Technology disputes are an unfortunate part of life on projects, often costing both in terms of time and financial resources. They typically arise from disagreements regarding performance specifications, installation, maintenance contracts and warranties and training; if left unaddressed they can quickly escalate. One way to reduce risks associated with technology disputes is incorporating a dispute resolution clause into your contracts that clarifies procedures for resolving conflicts that may arise such as mediation, arbitration or expert determination.
Technology arbitration can also be an invaluable way to resolve disputes arising from complex technology projects. Such disputes often involve multiple parties and jurisdictions as well as high-level technical experts; arbitration offers a more cost-effective and quicker solution than traditional litigation; in addition, its proceedings allow parties to tailor proceedings specifically to their needs such as provisional measures or using new evidentiary tools like automated code reviews.
Recent increases in tech disputes are driven by a proliferation of commercial collaborations that involve increasing scale and complexity of deals, with larger tech alliances likely leading to greater potential for disputes as a result. It seems likely that more partnerships of this type will follow suit over time resulting in even more legal disagreements between parties involved.
Furthermore, there is an increasing recognition of the need for faster and more effective dispute resolution mechanisms to deal with IP disputes, where claims often relate to ongoing infringements and breaches that continue up until trial or hearing – unlike commercial litigation cases which typically deal with tortious events or breaches that have ended already.
White & Case Arbitration conducted a survey where respondents indicated they would be more inclined to arbitrate technology disputes if there was a roster of adjudicators with specific industry or sector experience that were readily available publicly. With its introduction, SCL Procedure should help make arbitration more attractive as an avenue of dispute resolution in TMT disputes in the UK.