Devil's in the detail : judgment highlights need for invoice transparency

This article considers the implications of the decision in Clayton Utz Lawyers v P & W Enterprises Pty Ltd [2011] QDC 5, and the meaning of "itemised bill" as defined in the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld).

How much geological detail is needed for gasifier success?

The incipient Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) industry in Queensland, Australia, undertook three trial projects in two Mesozoic basins of southeast Queensland. The experiences of these three operations provide useful retrospective insight into gasifier productivity. This paper identifies key output measures of gasifier ‘success’ including output gas composition, presence of contaminants in groundwater and consistency of chamber operation. Likewise, a review of the geological and hydrogeological understanding of each site prior to gasifier commissioning was undertaken. Productivity parameters from gasification were then correlated against the level of baseline geological/hydrogeological understanding for each site. The aim of the study was to identify the optimum scope of geological and hydrogeological understanding required at the site assessment phase to ensure safe, maximum gasifier output during production phase. This approach allows identification of poor or unexpected performance that is attributable to pre-existing uncertainty. A historical review of gasifier conditions inferred from the three trial projects is presented. Hence from the Queensland experiences it is possible to identify what aspects of baseline geological understanding should be clearly understood at the site selection phase in order to limit anomalous gasifier performance and undesirable deviations, and maximise production output.

Examining the new product innovation – performance relationship: Optimizing the role of individual-level creativity and attention-to-detail

New product innovation has been identified as the key to firms' marketplace success, profit and survival. Yet, the failure rate for new products is high. Because of the high costs associated with new product development, there is considerable theoretical and managerial interest in how to minimize the high failure rates of new products and what separates new product winners from losers. This study focuses on individual level ambidexterity – namely head of the R&D departments' capacity to engage in creativity and attention-to-detail simultaneously, a skill involving different centers of attention, and relying on somewhat incompatible behaviors and processes. The ability to engage in these behaviors simultaneously is seen as being ambidextrous. Drawing from the data of 150 advanced manufacturing firms in India (gathered from one CEO and one head of the R&D department for each firm), the results show that when an individual head of R&D engages heavily only in creativity, too many new, risky ideas may come and when he/she engages heavily only in attention-to-detail, he/she may suffer through a lack of novel ideas. Both approaches limit individual's contribution to enhancing product innovation – financial performance relationship. The results also show that an individual head of R&D needs to engage in high levels creativity and attention-to-detail in the pursuit of enhancing product innovation to achieve superior financial performance.

The provision of visitable housing in Australia: Down to the detail

In response to the ratification of the United Nations Convention of the Rights of People with Disabilities (CRPD), Australian housing industry leaders, supported by the Australian Government, committed to transform their practices voluntarily through the adoption of a national guideline, called Livable Housing Design. They set a target in 2010 that all new housing would be visitable by 2020. Research in this area suggests that the anticipated voluntary transformation is unrealistic and that mandatory regulation will be necessary for any lasting transformation to occur. It also suggests that the assumptions underpinning the Livable Housing Design agreement are unfounded. This paper reports on a study that problematised these assumptions. The study used eleven newly-constructed dwellings in three housing contexts in Brisbane, Australia. It sought to understand the logics-of-practice in providing, and not providing, visitable housing. By examining the specific details that make a dwelling visitable, and interpreting the accounts of builders, designers and developers, the study identified three logics-of-practice which challenged the assumptions underpinning the Livable Housing Design agreement: focus on the point of sale; an aversion to change and deference to external regulators on matters of social inclusion. These were evident in all housing contexts indicating a dominant industry culture regardless of housing context or policy intention. The paper suggests that financial incentives for both the builder and the buyer, demonstration by industry leaders and, ultimately, national regulation is a possible pathway for the Livable Housing Design agreement to reach the 2020 goal. The paper concludes that the Australian Government has three options: to ignore its obligations under the CRPD; to revisit the Livable Housing Design agreement in the hope that it works; or to regulate the housing industry through the National Construction Code to ensure the 2020 target is reached.

Detail of tombstone of Arthur Molling; Strangriede Cemetery (R 26.05); Hannover Cemeteries Tombs

Digital Image

Detail of tombstone of Arthur Molling; Strangriede Cemetery (R 26.05); Hannover Cemeteries Tombs

Digital Image

Does the level of graphical detail of a virtual handball thrower influence a goal-keeper's motor response?

The authors investigated how different levels of detail (LODs) of a virtual throwing action can influence a handball goalkeeper's motor response. Goalkeepers attempted to stop a virtual ball emanating from five different graphical LODs of the same virtual throwing action. The five levels of detail were: a textured reference level (L0), a non-textured level (L1), a wire-frame level (L2), a point-light-display (PLD) representation (L3) and a PLD level with reduced ball size (L4). For each motor response made by the goalkeeper we measured and analyzed the time to respond (TTR), the percentage of successful motor responses, the distance between the ball and the closest limb (when the stopping motion was incorrect) and the kinematics of the motion. Results showed that TTR, percentage of successful motor responses and distance with the closest limb were not significantly different for any of the five different graphical LODs. However the kinematics of the motion revealed that the trajectory of the stopping limb was significantly different when comparing the L1 and L3 levels, and when comparing the L1 and L4 levels. These differences in the control of the goalkeeper's actions suggests that the different level of information available in the PLD representations ( L3 and L4) are causing the goalkeeper to adopt different motor strategies to control the approach of their limb to stop the ball.