Strategies for Conflict Resolution (LO4)
Conflict could affect the delivery of our project considerably, and can destabilise the whole delivery process, poor decision making, damaged relationships, delays, poor publicity, reputational damage and additional costs. This list can continue if not managed well, and the impact can increase through all phases of works. With any dispute it will always be beneficial to all parties to resolve quickly, therefore using a third party that has no benefits from the outcome is often the best and fairest resolution to help keep a teams relationship intact and productive.
Conflict and Dispute Resolution Processes
It is obviously in our interest to get an early resolution for all parties if justified, this can be managed right from the outset of this project, using the procurement method chosen to create collaborative integrated teams that work together from day 1 with the same key objectives. Reality means where this involves profit to a contractor or budget or reputational issues/ risks for a client this can cause friction or claims. If a team understands these needs and follows the contractual performance requirements they can be minimised or removed.
Contract dispute escalation: Within the procurement process it is important to ensure the contract has clear means of escalation so issues can be managed at the right time by the right people.
Fig. 9 Dispute escalation process (source Bill Spragins “The Dispute resolution”
Typically if parties cannot resolve issues within the team, dispute options can follow in the form of Negotiation, Mediation, Conciliation, Arbitration or Adjudication as analysed below.
Dispute Resolution Type / Benefits / Dis-Benefits
Early resolution/ Investigation
- Independent person can impartially investigate complaints to define what is wrong. Can lack clarity and certainty about a real problem.
- An impartial report gives the people involved (eg employers and employees) the support and confidence to take safe action to correct the situation.
- Relationship not affected negatively
- Collaborative process is beneficial
Negotiation: A potential starting point in a dispute process looking at an acceptable solution for both parties but does not always a conclude issues. This can involve a written negotiation offer, followed by a negotiation period between officers from each party with authority to settle the dispute. The team can negotiate their own agreement without objective third party assistance. In some disputes without a third party it may cause delays if two opposing views become combative.
- Client or contractor can engage additional resource to strengthen their case such as a legal or technical advisor and reduce time. May not cause a resolution, delaying or making issues worse.
Mediation: Parties should be facilitated to reach a mutually agreeable solution. Arrangements can be via an independent mediator if agreement not cannot be met by local negotiation.
- Once an agreement has been met the mediator can help the parties further by writing up the agreement.
- Objective third party
- Long Process
- Low Risk
- Can be expensive
- Assisting people to negotiate
If mediation fails, much of a parties information has been shared with the opposing party, and could be far less useful in potential litigation.
Can encourage the necessary communication – exchanges of information, feelings, and interests – that will lead people to their own resolution of the dispute. Does not always result in a settlement agreement
The resulting agreement is voluntary, being the choice of the participants in the mediation. Legal precedent is not possible in mediation, not setting a broader social impact.
Conciliation: Can be regarded as a useful next step on from mediation. It can be used when mediation has been unsuccessful and the neutral third party is asked to make suggestions for settlement, so taking on the role of a conciliator. This settlement can be given informally, or formally in writing, with the parties having an agreement as to its status. So parties may agree whether the conciliator’s suggestion is to be binding or non-binding.
- It can be used when mediation has been unsuccessful and the neutral third party is asked to make a suggestion for settlement No access to the litigation system, and no discovery phase in which to uncover evidence.
- Can encourage parties to settle agreements on their own with limited intervention by a mediator Potential questions over the mediator’s bias or competency.
Adjudication: A judicial process in which a neutral third party makes a decision to resolve the dispute. It can be regarded as a quick form of arbitration. Adjudication has particular relevance in the construction industry commonly used within NEC3 type contracts. In the construction industry it is carried out under the provisions of the Construction Contracts Act 2002 and parties can be forced into the process. The decision of the Adjudicator is binding but not final but it can be revisited if necessary. Can be regarded as a quick form of arbitration Adversarial method of dispute resolution
Adjudication table (See Appendix 5)
- Adjudication has particular relevance in the construction industry commonly used within NEC3 type contracts If dissatisfied with an adjudicator’s decision options to go to arbitration or litigation but this simply extends the adversarial methods without a guarantee of success.
- The decision of the Adjudicator is binding but not final but it can be revisited if necessary. Adjudication can be on a documentary submission basis. Which doesn’t help a business relationship between the parties without an opportunity to discuss issues openly (such as in mediation rooms).
Arbitration: A judicial process in which the disputing parties arrange for a neutral third party to decide the dispute for them. It is conducted under the provisions of the Arbitration Act 1996. The arbitration process can range from informal to formal, and the parties have some choice about the process. However it is still a legal process the parties present their cases and the arbitrator will make a decision on the issues. The decision is legally binding, with only a few rights of appeal against it.
Informal to formal, and the parties have some choice about the process
- Private
- More economic than litigation Can be binding or non-binding agreements, therefore if not binding parties could take their issue back to court, which could add to the cost of litigation to that of the prior arbitration.
- Shorter Process
- With multiple parties, multiple arbitrators, and complicated legal disputes this could actually slow the process.
- Still a chance a relationship between partied can continue.
- A legal process where the parties present their cases and the arbitrator will make a decision.
- The decision is legally binding, and basically final with few rights of appeal against it so can resolve so project can progress.
Litigation: When party or parties against each other take steps that may lead to a court trial and ultimately a resolution of the matter. Sometimes this could be the last option but could allow costs to be reimbursed and could allow for a successful completion if handled quickly (such as an out of court agreement between parties).
- High Risk, poor publicity
- Expensive – legal fees and time.
- Can affect relationships
- Can affect reputation considerably even if you win
Recommendations: The important factor with dispute resolution is how the Project team (Client, Service provider, contractor and sub-contractors) are integrated at the start of this project. By this I mean the right procurement in the form of an Alliance agreement based on collaboration, shared resources and goals, and culture managed from the leadership down, to understand and trust in the team’s decisions and outcomes. Adjudication has particular relevance in the construction industry commonly used within NEC3 type contracts, and would be a relevant starting point.
Contracts can provide agreed dispute resolution procedures involving mediation, adjudication and arbitration and potentially a combination of all three with obligations to negotiate in good faith, potentially managed by dispute resolution boards, with partnering meetings to discuss obligations set out in the contract.
Strategies for Collaboration and Partnering (LO5)
So why collaborate, and what can it do for all parties involved? The main need comes from restrictive budgets and the need to share resources, be it staff, contractors or local authority/ private sector combined buying power, but also to become more efficient a particular government driver. A good starting point is required from the outset in the procurement model, and may need to address cultural differences between parties, and how this can be embedded into a workable relationship.
With this project we could develop partnerships which many organisations such as Client, University of Brighton, Brighton and Hove City Council, Local Communities, Local interest groups (Cycle or environmental groups), Private business including Bus, train, utility companies and Brighton Football club. All could provide support and benefits to our development.
This collaborative driver has been a common theme in many recent contracts particularly within TERM Partnering contracts for local authorities and was originally embraced within construction projects following Egan’s “Rethinking Construction” encouraging the need for collaborative integrated teams to deliver construction works, but it has shown some issues with full integration often hitting a wall with potential opposing needs of restricted budget vs profit need, and a culture of contractual claims against a client.
Within a report by Dave Stitt “We need to talk about Collaboration” he provides case studies that illustrates many potential stumbling blocks that can help shape the best way for us to partner/ collaborate together (see Appendix 7).
Trust and Culture:
Culture and trust should be utilised by our team to collaborate for good reason. Lack of trust can often be the breaking point of any relationship and needs to be addressed to really get the full benefits of collaborating. Baroness O’Neil “What we don’t understand about Trust” states to be trustworthy we need to be “competent, honest and reliable” and others have added “caring” to this list. I often hear the term “blame culture” I feel this is a cultural failure of team responsibility vs trust of an individual firm or person.
Collaborative Partnering:
Collaborative Procurement Options:
Procurement of the right contract to suit this project comes down to a multitude of factors with choices of traditional, collaborative, partnership agreements etc. However before you get that far taking into account your stakeholders needs is vital, so setting up the right communication strategy to engage the key players with events, workshops and focus groups to establish a shared ownership and mutual objectives and needs, these stakeholders if brought on board can be key to successful delivery and back of a project particularly if issues arise.
Partnership Agreements: A formal business arrangement setting out the need for parties to share and agree goals and aspirations and to:
- Agree a shared vision for collaboration
- evaluate the effectiveness of the partnership and
- build a framework for issues of accountability and responsibility
- start small and set realistic aimsbuild on the partnership year by year
Design and Build (D&B) – NEC3 Integrated teams and collaboration can be achieved but can be harder to implement, Using NEC under D&B can produce an all inclusive package and as an industry standard, familiarity of this contract type can be is advantageous.
Alliances: Creating Alliances between authorities and providers and increase efficiency, also
Collaborative contracts Term Partering Contracts (TPC), HMEP – Alliance Contracts (HMEP Alliance toolkit), Framework agreements.
HMEP Lean Toolbox: Sets up the scope of a project and highway infrastructure lifecycle.
- To encourage innovation and change in the industry
- Improvements to efficiencies
- Saves Money
BS11000 Collaborative Business Relationships:
By utilising and encouraging the use of frameworks to help select suitable partners BS11000 can assist local authorities in managing their interactions with other organisations. Other toolkits available such as the Client/Provider Collaboration Toolkit and the Shared Services Toolkit thoroughly explore the BS11000 ethos. These will help the selection in regards to relationships with Awareness, Knowledge, partner selection, working, staying together and exit strategies. (For additional BS11000 refer to Appendix 7.2)
The table below adapted from the ICE contracts document shows how collaboration in procurement can establish advantages in regards to risks between the client and contractor and is a good illustration of how future contracts are looking for a more uniform share of risk, resources with shared goals and objectives.
Fig 10. Collaborative contract risk
Production Management in design and construction ICG guidelines 2015 sets out guidelines for improving performance (See Appendix 7.3) through collaboration.
Recommendations: Collaboration is an integral part of any project delivery, within this project, as per conflict resolution discussed earlier it starts with the formation of the team and the procurement process. A collaborative contract with a team picked for the right drivers, shared needs objectives and partners that can embrace change and cultural differences. New contracts such as Alliance type agreements can establish a formal arrangement early in the process and strong leadership can make sure this cultural understanding becomes the back bone of works with the ethos of we succeed together.
Change Management (LO7)
As discussed with collaboration driving our approach to this project this in turn often brings a need for change, this is exacerbated with the constant need within business and local authorities for reduced budgets, and a real need for efficiencies and potential innovations. Understanding these drivers and how these changes affect our projects is essential. There are several models to utilise however I have illustrated “Burke-Litwin’s model,” understanding for drivers for change as below.
The main need I see is for clear and consistent communication at all levels not just with a communication or training team, but a real acknowledgement from the leadership down, that a cultural change can be a beneficial choice for the whole integrated team employees and contractors and that it needs to be embraced and nurtured the same way collaborative contracts often are.
Fig 11 Source “Burke-Litwin: Understanding Drivers for Change”
Refering to Fig 11 the Burke-Litwin model concentrates on how the environment affects change in works:
1. External Environment
These external environments can be factors with Political, Economic, Social and Demographic, Technological, International, Legislative, Environmental. See a Pestle Analysis example in Appendix 3.3 to see where these sit.
2. Mission and Strategy
These are statements for the reason why the business exists and its needs, Corporate strategy is an integral part that sets out the vision and drivers and the reason we want to succeed. Such examples would be from a local authorities need for Social and economic success, a better place to live and work etc. We can also analyse our factors with our potential strengths and weaknesses, threats and opportunities via a Swot Analysis (See Appendix 3.2)
3. Leadership
Behavioural understanding is vital with leadership, constant change without a specified need can undermine trust and lose employee and business confidence. This means communication and engagement to the right people at the right time is key.
4. Organisation Culture
Cultural change is a long term change that van come with changes in procurement options, changes of jobs due to restructure or redevelopments and needs to be looked at as long term plan.
5. Structure
When structure of a business is changed it can result in concern for employees with potential work changes to learn or redundancy. This needs to be actioned from a strategic level with the aim to keep the right staff and communicate at all levels frequently to show why and the benefits.
6. Work Unit Climate
When there is a need to relocate or change in personnel, or a change in terms of conditions of service this needs to be managed sensitively.
7. Task Requirements and Individual Skills/Abilities
8. Individual Needs and Values
9. Motivation is driven by achievement, goal driven and job security and can be dependent on social aspects of the work environment. Keeping the team motivated in times of change can be difficult but is essential not to lose project focus.
(For other change models see Appendix 8)
Recommendations for change management:
With projects it is easy to carve designs, specifications and process into stone where we should be looking for deviations from standard or innovative options. Change with a project can be managed but needs to be in a controlled way, particularly in regards to project management, by this I mean following a change process as in the line diagram below.
Fig 12
8. Risks associated with the A270 (LO6 funding mechanisms)
The agreed finance mechanism for the university project will be under Public Private Partnership (PPP), see Finance Mechanisms (Appendix 6). A number of financing mechanisms are available for infrastructure projects, and for public-private partnership (PPP) projects in particular are listed below with the associated risks.
Risk Management of Funding Mechanisms and direct risks of the A270:
The A270 risk factors:
Working in close proximity to any strategic road can have potential high risk for the project and area as a whole for economic, social and Health and safety implication just for a starter.
It is always good to look at how the cycle of risk should be assessed before analysing and identifying the potential hazards to be reduced or illuminated.
Fig 13. Risk Management cycle.
Risk can be identified as any uncertain event that can cause damage or impact on our project if it were to occur:
Conclusion
The world is constantly evolving, physically with the environment (co2 reduction needs), technological advances (machinery, materials), resources (fuel/ waste, special materials or skilled workforce), as well as socially in regards to new media and how we interact with each other globally. Being able to embrace these opportunities is something a good project manager and team need to be aware of to make sure they don’t “reinvent the wheel” or miss out on better options. A culture of embracing change therefore should not be frowned upon but encouraged to get the most of budgets and the team, and this needs to be from the leadership down, to integrate an ethos of benefits and challenges to the team rather than dwelling on negatives that cannot be changed.
With ever tightening finances the need for efficiency drivers will never stop, and with guidelines such as Highway Maintenance Efficiency Programme (HMEP) for local authorities with the promotion of collaborative contract forms, and asset management based on case studies from industry leaders it can produce processes that can actually show productive results. This I feel should not be perceived as a threat (with potential reduced funding with new maintenance funding incentives) but something that Local Authorities and any business should be looking at anyway. New process and innovations are opportunities for clients and contractors to reduce budgets or increase profit and could produce something that could be sold elsewhere. We therefore need to look at this for every project however large.
As part of moving the industry forward Collaboration is a word I hear daily in regards to team structures, procurement and industry leaders looking for efficiencies to overcome reductions to budgets and profit potential for service providers.
Creating an integrated team focused on collaboration should be our basis for efficiency, innovation, and can reduce disputes.
Working with an integrated team with different needs (Budget savings, profit) can be challenging but the best results often come from such issues and the sharing of knowledge, skills and most importantly ideas of how to deliver our project the best way.
So to achieve this we need to prove the benefits to really embed the collaborative need. Learn from mistakes and grow as a team
It is safe to say you cannot please everybody all of the time, however engaging the key stakeholders at the right time, in the right way can radically reduce claims, poor public perception and potentially give our project manager space to deliver works unhindered, without the need to concentrate on potential issues and daily complaints on top of engineering issues. Communication strategy encompassed with new Commissioning models have therefore become integral to the delivery of modern project management. It seems stakeholders demand more, have more access to knowledge and media access and can therefore influence and impact projects positively and negatively.
2016-6-5-1465155251