10 Reasons why a committee member should not project-manage major works

On a recent visit to Japan, I made an appointment to see an acclaimed acupuncturist, recommended to me by my GP as a true “healer”. As I laid eagerly on the treatment table trying to make sense of the conversation between my new saviour and his Japanese patient in the next room, I imagined what this master of healing might look like.  Stereotypical images of Mr Miyagi disappeared as the privacy curtain swept open and standing before me was a short, bilingual Englishman with piercing blue eyes and wry smile.  He laid his hands on my belly, looked through my eyes and into my soul and said, with an air of casual omniscience, “you can’t delegate – you have to do everything yourself”.

It was surreal and humbling having this gaijin guru sum me up so accurately simply by laying his hands on me. If, like me, you are compelled to carry the weight of the world on your shoulders and struggle to trust anyone else to do your work with the same level of skill, dedication and enthusiasm, read on… 

If you’re a committee member and you think it might be a great idea to project-manage or superintend the body corporate’s upcoming renovation project, here’s 10 reasons why that’s not a great idea:

1. Your role is to make decisions 

Your core function is to participate in committee decision-making: budgets, approvals, procurement decisions, and oversight. You owe duties of care and have fiduciary obligations to act reasonably, in good faith, and in the best interests of the body corporate as a whole.

If you involve yourself in a project day-to-day, you will cease to look like an impartial decision-maker and may instead become the person responsible for:

• defining the scope of works,
• instructing contractors,
• approving variations,
• managing defects,
• handling delays,
• controlling site access, and
• dealing with safety issues.

That creates a practical and legal mismatch: you are effectively both decision-maker and operator.

2. Personal liability risk increases if you are negligent

Queensland statutory protections are not absolute. Committee members are protected for acts or omissions done honestly and without negligence, but acting negligently will remove that protection.

That matters because project management of major works is precisely the sort of activity in which negligence allegations arise, for example:

• failure to obtain appropriate expert advice,
• poor contractor selection,
• inadequate supervision,
• failure to respond to known defects or safety risks,
• approving defective or incomplete work,
• allowing cost overruns without proper authority.

A member who merely votes on a properly informed committee resolution is in a much safer position than a member who personally directs the works and becomes the factual cause of loss.

3. Acting beyond authority

There’s a high risk of exposure if you act beyond your authority in relation to major works.

You have no unilateral authority to bind the body corporate unless the committee has formally authorised that role and the relevant expenditure and decision-making powers are within the lawful limits. Problems arise where a member informally:

• instructs a contractor to start extra work,
• agrees to scope changes,
• approves variations,
• makes representations about payment,
• commits the body corporate to time extensions or settlement terms.

Even if your intentions are to help, the body corporate may later argue you acted without authority.

4. Conflict of interest and apprehended bias become more acute

You must avoid conflicts and act in the interests of the body corporate in preference to your personal interests. Project management involvement can compromise that duty in several ways:

• you may favour a preferred contractor,
• you may become invested in defending your own earlier decisions,
• you may suppress criticism of defects or delays to avoid personal embarrassment,
• you may influence payment approvals for work you supervised.

Even absent actual misconduct, the appearance of bias can be damaging. Once you become operationally embedded in the project, it becomes harder for owners to have confidence that your procurement, certification, and dispute decisions are objective.

5. You may become a witness rather than a decision-maker

For major works, disputes often arise about:

• what instructions were given,
• whether work was defective,
• whether delays were excusable,
• whether variations were authorised,
• whether the body corporate waived defects or accepted completion.

If you are deeply involved in project management, you may become a central factual witness. That is undesirable because:

• your evidence may be attacked as self-serving,
• you may influence committee decisions about disputes in which you are personally implicated,
• the committee’s collective decision-making may be compromised by your operational role.

In effect, the committee may lose the benefit of independent oversight.

6. Insurance may not respond

Bodies corporate commonly hold committee liability insurance, but such cover does not usually protect fraudulent, dishonest, or knowingly improper conduct, and protections generally assume good-faith committee conduct rather than uncontrolled operational involvement.

The practical problem is not only exclusions – it is also characterisation. If a committee member acts as a de facto project manager or superintendent insurers may scrutinise whether the claim arises from:

• committee functions,
• professional services,
• construction management activity,
• or conduct outside the insured role.

That is particularly problematic if you have no professional indemnity cover and the body corporate has not formally retained you in a professional capacity.

7. Major works require independent expertise

As a committee member, you are not expected to be an expert, and the committee should seek professional assistance when needed. Major works commonly require:

• engineering advice,
• quantity surveying,
• contract administration,
• defect identification,
• certification of progress claims,
• WHS coordination,
• legal review of building contracts and variations.

If you assume project management without the necessary qualifications and QBCC licence (the penalties for which are very serious), that can itself support an allegation that by allowing you to act in that capacity, the body corporate failed to act reasonably. Conversely, if the body corporate appoints an independent project manager, superintendent, engineer, or contract administrator, the body corporate is better placed to show it made informed decisions based on appropriate advice.

8. Your involvement may contaminate committee voting

A voting committee member who is also managing the project may effectively be asked to vote on:

• their own recommendations,
• their own management decisions,
• contractor claims they handled,
• disputes arising from their own conduct,
• approval of expenditure they informally incurred.

That is poor governance. Even if technically permitted where you declare your conflict and abstain from voting, it creates a serious process risk because the other members are likely to be influenced by your recommendations and involvement.

9. Records and transparency 

Statutory procedures are required to be followed to ensure valid decision-making at committee level. Informal project management by a voting member can lead to:

• off-the-record directions,
• undocumented site conversations,
• email commitments outside committee resolutions,
• variation approvals without formal motions,
• uncertain delegation boundaries.

That makes later reconstruction of authority and responsibility difficult and exposes the body corporate to disputes with owners and contractors.

10. What you should do instead

For major works, the safer and better governance position for you is to remain in an oversight role and not a management role by:

• helping identify the need for the works,
• reviewing expert reports,
• considering quotes and tender recommendations,
• voting on properly framed resolutions,
• monitoring reports from an independent project manager or superintendent,
• ensuring conflicts are disclosed and recorded,
• requiring formal approval of variations and major instructions.

That will preserve your statutory protections more effectively by ensuring you remain within the sphere of honest, informed committee decision-making rather than entering the realm of operational execution.

Moreover, the delegation of duties to others will decrease your stress levels, unblock your neural pathways and save you a trip to Tokyo to visit the healer (which I highly recommend in any event).