Lubomyr Chabursky is an expert witness consultant with extensive experience testifying in IT litigation regarding issues such as project delays, defects, requirements management, and system testing processes. He has analyzed documentation for numerous projects across different industries to determine root causes of inefficiency, delays, and failures in project management. Chabursky's consulting involves distilling complex technical issues, assisting with litigation strategy, and advising on best practices for large-scale systems development.

1. Expert Witness Consultant - Lubomyr Chabursky Page 1 of 2
Lubomyr Chabursky – Expert Witness Consultant
Information Technology Consulting and Analysis:
 Testified as an expert witness regarding the causes of delay in system testing, based on a numerical analysis of
defects, and a qualitative analysis of the nature and breadth of errors. Testimony also included giving opinions on
system testing process, requirements management, scope management, the respective roles of customer and vendor
representatives in requirements gathering, design, and testing activities.
 Analyzed defect logs using statistical and graphic techniques, and on that basis deduced conclusions about the
effectiveness and efficiency of an integrator's performance in a case involving the implementation of a medical
institution ERP. Analyzed the project management failings of the integrator and traced the effects of those failings
into scheduling delays and the defect management process.
 Designated as an expert in the implementation of a leading ERP solution in the large retail market. Analyzed financial,
scheduling, staffing and project management documentation and records to reconstruct information about work
effort and activities performed by the customer in this large customer-lead implementation. Aligned and
synchronized that information with other project documentation and communications records to establish root
causes of inefficiency, causes of delay, and failings of proper decision-making.
 Analyzed the errors and testing process of a developer in a development of a legislative system. Compared the results
of the testing to the functional spec to demonstrate that the integrator performed in accordance with the contract
 Analyzed the results of a user acceptance test in the implementation of a specialized ERP for large utilities companies.
Established the effect of imprecise scope provisions on the lengthening of the UAT and the effective conversion of the
UAT into a prototyping exercise.
 Established the similarity of product and concepts in an idea submission and misappropriation case by a comparison
of proposal with the functionality, features and appearance of a complex e-commerce website marketplace.
 Developed a valuation model to determine the worth of a company and its technology in a shareholders oppression
case. Through a comparison of features and functionality of the company's technology with the features and
functionality of a new ERP system that was in the process of being acquired, established that the appraised value of
the company regarding its technology was inconsistent with contemporaneous initiatives involving the acquisition of
new technology.
 Analyzed facts, distilled issues and assisted lead counsel in developing litigation approach, theory and strategy for
large technology matters, including the largest systems development litigation in Canada.
 Assisted counsel in preparing cross-examination of many deponents concerning technical aspects of systems
development, including all aspects of project management, schedule management, configuration management,
software engineering, scope management, and quality management.
 Assisted and/or prepared strategy, exhibits and scripts for lead litigation counsel to examine and cross-examine
deponents in technical areas of complex litigation, such as expert witnesses in statistics and economics in several
commercial cases, including a lengthy trial concerning a $2 billion claim for pay equity.
 Prepared approach and evidence for ADR resolution of disputes. Simplified and explained complex technical issues for
arbitrators and adjudicators in mini-trial.
 Provided expertise and analysis in a case regarding requirements issues, acceptance testing, systems performance
and availability, conversion issues and acceptance closure issues.
 Advised clients, including the Canadian government, with respect to:
o Proper project management practices and techniques for large-scale systems development projects, including
principles of configuration management, risk management, and scheduling management;
o Structure and organization of large-scale project client-contractor relationships, tailoring of procurement
process, and verification of contractor qualifications;
o Precise definition of scope, articulation of statements of work, and specification of contractual obligations; and,
o Resolving disputes through effective mechanisms and application of business considerations.
 Provided advice to Canadian government and small businesses on Y2K preparedness, and developed a program for
educating small business in how to take preparatory steps.
 Managed a team of 50 personnel to organize the document and electronic holdings of a large systems development
case, involving over 5 million pages and 1.5 million electronic files.
 Developer of the "Radical QA Model: A Guide To Dramatically Increasing Project Success By Managing Expectations
And Results"

2. Expert Witness Consultant - Lubomyr Chabursky Page 2 of 2
Publications
 “Tough Questions in Large-Project Litigation”, June 7, 2007, International IT Law Summit, presented with Alan Friedman,
Jones Day.
 “Radical QA: Dramatically Increasing Project Success”, Journal of Quality Assurance Institute, June 2005
 “Radical QA”, June 9, 2005, International IT Law Conference
 “Using QA to Manage Contracts and Relationships”, October 4, 2005, International Quality Conference
 “The Scope Game”, October 6, 2005, International Quality Conference
 “Radical QA”, September 23, 2004, International Quality Conference
 “Project Practices – Lessons Learned from PSCS Litigation”, April 18, 2003, report to Government of Canada
 “Scope Management – Lessons Learned from PSCS Litigation”, April 18, 2003, report to Government of Canada
Examples of Management Consulting Assignments
Major Ticketing Company
A major ticketing service provider developed a ticketing system for a large live entertainment company and promoters.
Consulting assignment revealed that the complaints about lacking functionality were unfounded, and that problems
experienced after go-live were not the fault of the service provider.
Major Casino-Hotel Chain
Major Casino-Hotel that was a sophisticated user of revenue management practices engaged a developer of revenue
management software to create entirely new functionality, and to adapt its software geared for accommodations and travel
industry to the more intricate requirements of gaming resorts. Consulting assignment demonstrated that the developer failed
to properly understand and document the requirements, in part due to the developer’s inappropriate distortion of software
development methodologies and practices. Our analysis revealed that given the amount and types of errors that were still
prevalent in the software after many months of delay, the customer had a reasonable basis to lose confidence in the
developer’s ability and willingness to ever deliver a system that would work and meet the requirements of the customer.
Major ERP Manufacturer
A manufacturer of industry leading ERP solution overstated development achievements which led to overinflated stock price.
Consulting Assignment analyzed the product development processes and achievements compared to claims of achievement
and progress. Analysis revealed that actual development progress was much slower than claimed, and could not substantiate
representations made to investment analysts.
Major Health Care Provider and its ERP Vendor
An integrator/outsourcer asserted that it was ready to go-live with the system several months earlier, but for delays caused by
the vendor and customer. Consulting Assignment revealed that the Integrator had poorly staffed this mission critical project;
had discarded all reasonable project management principles, practices, standards, and tools for a project of this size and
nature; had abandoned all rational, industry standard and contractually promised systems life-cycle methodologies; had failed
to implement and execute a reliable and sound test strategy and plan; had never stabilized the system's underlying technical
infrastructure; and contributed to concurrent delays through its own critical, ongoing systems defects.
Integrator of Microsoft Solutions
A State Legislature hired integrator to build a legislation tracking system based on Microsoft’s Sharepoint platform. New
administration refused to honor the bargain struck in the development contract. Consulting Assignment explained the unique
business bargain created by the contract, demonstrated that the integrator applied an appropriate methodology for that
unique circumstance, and demonstrated that the customer introduced an unreasonable amount of change during acceptance
testing.