ProNetwork News

Many design firms attend risk management training sessions and implement certain practices based on an industry trend or project claim. Other firms may only concentrate on contracts and insurance coverage’s as a risk management strategy, which only addresses a portion of an effective risk management program. As they say – “you cannot manage something that is not measured.” With that said, the first question should be:

How effective is your risk management program?

An excellent method in answering that question is determining a design firms risk profile.

In the world of claims-related contract clauses for design professional agreements, the indemnity and defense clauses get all the attention. However, lurking in the shadow of the indemnity clause is a menacing cousin with potentially even greater and more frequent impact and risk: the prevailing party attorneys’ fee clause. Both clauses share the common risk that they are often not covered by professional liability insurance because each represents a contractually-assumed liability which would not exist in the absence of the contract.

For many design firms, the ability to offer and maintain competitive employee benefit programs continues to be one of the keys to attracting and retaining the best available talent.  Yet, the regulatory and legal environment within which these benefit plans are being designed and administered is more complex than ever.  Not only are there ERISA issues, but there is a literal alphabet soup of COBRA, FMLA, HIPAA, etc. With this greater complexity and heightened scrutiny comes risk:  risk for the company itself, and the executives and administrators responsible for overseeing and administering the benefit plans.

Which is better, more or less documentation in your project file after the job is complete? Despite recent advances in technology, document retention has become a difficult, expensive and complex proposition. Computers have changed design professionals’ work flows and methods, greatly increasing efficiencies, but also exponentially multiplying the volume of data; e-mails, attachments, drawing revisions, text and voice messages, not to mention folks are still sending faxes and letters, actual paper ones. All of this adds up and can become an unmanageable mess, even for the best of us.

The closely watched California Supreme Court case of Beacon Residential Community Association v. Skidmore Owings and Merrill et. al. has been decided, and the opinion is bad news for California Architects. The Court held that architects owe a duty of care to future homeowners in the design of residential buildings where the architect is a principal architect on the project, meaning that the architect is not a subordinate to other design professionals.