Dispute causation: identification of pathogenic influences in construction

Abstract

Purpose -While a considerable amount of knowledge has been accumulated about dispute causation, disputes continue to prevail and disharmonise the process of construction with considerable cost. This paper seeks to identify the underlying pathogens that clients and contractors perceive to contribute to disputes in construction projects. The identification of pathogens can provide an ameliorated understanding of the origin of disputes and therefore enable their prevention. Design/methodology/approach -Case law and focus groups with a client and contracting organisation from Western Australia are used to determine the pathogens of disputes. Findings -Analysis of the case law findings revealed that the underlying issues that were brought to litigation were to do with points of law, namely "civil procedure". A significant number of disputes are thus settled using alternative dispute resolution methods such as adjudication, arbitration and mediation. For clients the underlying latent conditions that resulted in a dispute were due to the nature of the task being performed (e.g. failure to detect and correct errors) and those arising from people's deliberate practices (e.g. failure to oblige by contractual requirements). For the contractor focus group the circumstances arising from the situation or environment the project was operating in were identified as the main underlying latent condition for disputes (e.g. unforeseen scope changes). Research limitations/implications -Focus groups are only undertaken with clients and contracting groups as they were identified as the main parties involved in dispute during the analysis of litigation cases within Western Australia. Input from consultants and subcontractors may provide a more balanced perspective as to the perceived causes and costs of disputes. Originality/value -The research has been able to provide the initial building blocks for understanding the underlying pathogens contributing to disputes. However, more empirical research is required before conclusive findings can be made, particularly with regard to the influences on subcontractors.

Design for construction: utilizing production experiences in development

“…However, according to Goh (2002), it is necessary to consider the experience of all employees at all levels of the organization, not only the experience of the white-collar workers (Dai et al, 2007). The inability to consider acquired experiences from already performed projects for use in new ones is a potential source of low quality and high cost in construction (Love et al, 2010). However, to date, little attention has been paid to how to capture and feed back production knowledge and how to use it in the development of new construction projects in order to increase constructability (Lam and Wong, 2009).…”

Procurement Selection Model: Development of a Conceptual Model Based on Transaction Costs

“…Accordingly, in order to develop a proper procurement selection process, the client should be prepared to deal with political/legal/social uncertainties in the transaction environment, and to account for higher TCs by making sure the cost estimate for contingencies is as covered as possible. Researchers such as (Mitropoulos & Howell, 2001;Walker & Pryke, 2009;Love et al, 2010) also supported the extensive effect uncertainties in the transaction environment. Also, other hypotheses will be tested and analyzed in the same way.…”

Causes of disputes in the Turkish construction industry: Case of public sector projects

“…Similarly, contractual matters are identified as one of the primary dispute factors (Heath et al, 1994;Rhys Jones, 1994;Kumaraswamy and Yogeswaran, 1998;Thompson et al, 2000;Mitropoulos and Howell, 2001;Chan and Suen, 2005a; Chan and Suen, 2005b;Cheung et al, 2006;Abeynayake, 2008). Another important dispute factor is identified as variations in many dispute related studies (Watts and Scrivener, 1992;Heath et al, 1994;Bristow and Vasilopoulos, 1995;Kumaraswamy and Yogeswaran, 1998;Cheung et al, 2001;Chan and Suen, 2005b;Cheung et al, 2006;Love et al, 2010). Likewise, previous researches also revealed that any contradictory and error of information in the contract documents cause disputes between the parties (Bristow and Vasilopoulos, 1995;Fenn et al, 1997;Kumaraswamy and Yogeswaran, 1998;Mitropoulos and Howell, 2001;Cheung et al, 2006;Abeynayake, 2008).…”

“…Main reasons for disputes in Sri Lanka construction industry are determined as breaches of contract, inadequate administration of responsibilities, plans and specifications that contain errors, omissions and ambiguities, sudden tax and cost increase (Abeynayake, 2008). The research in Australia provided to understand the underlying pathogens contributing to disputes as failure to detect and correct errors, failure to oblige by contractual requirements, and unforeseen scope changes (Love et al, 2010). According to Gad et al (2011) different contractual factors, cultural backgrounds, legal and economic factors, languages, technical standards, procedures, currencies, and trade customs make projects more vulnerable to disputes.…”