Disputes In Construction Projects Research Articles

Dispute Causes Analysis Using Analytical Hierarchy Process for Capstone Projects

Abstract: A disagreement, conflict, or subjective matter that leads to a legal process is termed as a dispute. The likelihood of a dispute arising in a loosely framed large scale construction project is high, which has an impact on project progress and can be considered a type of project risk. When different parties associated with the project are unable to resolve the disputes arising during the contract period it can be resolved by applying Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) technique which includes Arbitration, Litigation, Mediation and Conciliation. There are several types of construction disputes in construction projects like price escalation claim, change of work order claim, extra item claim, variation claim, loss of profit claim, delay claim which can be differentiate in various categories of dispute causes.

Application of lean for early identification and avoidance of disputes in construction projects

Purpose The dispute resolution process in the construction industry is known for delays in settlement, with some cases even escalating to complex arbitration and litigation. To avoid conflicts turning into disputes, the parties need to be proactive in identifying and resolving conflicts in their nascent stages. It is here that innovative lean construction practices can potentially act as a game-changer to avoid disputes, and this study aims to attempt to understand this phenomenon empirically. Design/methodology/approach A questionnaire-based empirical study, followed by semi-structured interviews, is conducted to understand the relevance of key tenets of lean principles in dispute avoidance. Findings Although stakeholders agree on the usefulness and practicality of lean principles in dispute avoidance, the extent of agreement is lesser when it comes to its implementation practicality. Moreover, there is a demographic influence observed on lean tenets such as “open communication”, “stakeholder collaboration” and “constraint identification”. Practical implications The results point towards an approach that combines contractual mandate, training and awareness creation to iron out the differences in the usefulness and practicality of lean approaches to avoid disputes. Originality/value Lean implementation is widely discussed in many construction contexts, such as sustainability, productivity improvement and planning. However, a discussion on lean philosophy’s role in dispute avoidance is muted. Therefore, this study assumes significance.

An Empirical Study on the Effects of Disputes on Successful Completion of Construction Projects

Disputes are common in construction projects, demanding significant attention in terms of financial resources, time, and manpower to seek resolutions. Conversely, unresolved disputes can create unfavorable effects on project performance. When project leaders recognize the major consequences of disputes, they can formulate strategies to proactively prevent or alleviate such conflicts. This heightened awareness empowers project teams to swiftly identify and resolve disputes, preventing their adverse consequences on successful project completion. The primary objective of this research is to enhance project management practices by providing insights into the effects of disputes, thereby enabling stakeholders to implement proactive strategies for prevention, mitigation, and effective resolution. Utilizing existing literature published between 2019 and 2023, this study critically analyzes 18 selected journal papers sourced from the ProQuest Central database, all of which have undergone rigorous review. This research identified nine major effects that appear due to disputes in construction projects. Further, cost overrun is identified as the major effect of disputes that can impact negatively in project performance and successful completion. This study further identified research gaps that need future studies.

Causes of Disputes in Construction Projects

Disputes are common in construction projects due to their complex nature. However, disputes are costly and it requires more money, time, and resources to find resolutions. By identifying the causes of disputes, project leaders can find measures to prevent or mitigate such possible disputes in construction projects. Therefore, the objective of this study was to identify the major causes of disputes in construction projects. Secondary data from the studies done from 2019 to 2023 were used for this study and the results revealed 50 causes of disputes in construction projects. Further, these causes were categorized into four categories that are client related, consultant related, contractor related, and other causes of disputes. The results of this study show that among the 50 common causes of disputes, 36% is consultant related, and 34% is client related issues. Other than that, 51% of causes of disputes emerge during the pre-contract phase. This study also identified the research gaps and areas that need future studies.

Adequacy of Regulatory Framework to Minimize Disputes in Construction Projects

The construction industry is a competitive, complicated environment where people with various skills, perspectives, and levels of knowledge. Conflicts are unavoidable in this complicated setting due to differences in perspectives among project participants. Conflicts quickly develop into disagreements if they are not handled properly. The end goals of every construction project are to reduce cost, improve quality, and complete the job on schedule. One of the biggest things that prevents the construction project from being successfully finished is disputes. Construction conflicts have become significantly more common and complex in recent years. Consequently, it's critical to understand what leads to disagreements. However, in the event of a dispute, Dispute Resolution Methods are implemented to resolve differences and prevent the breach of relationship and communication between the parties to achieve the construction project in the desired time, budget, and quality. The purpose of this study was to identify and evaluate the main factors that contribute to building disputes. Through a comprehensive literature review, 39 root causes of construction disputes were identified under seven categories namely client-related, contractor-related, design-related, contract-related, human behavior-related, project-related, and external factors. The responses gathered from construction industry specialists in Sri Lanka via a questionnaire survey were used to determine the significance of those indicated factors by converting them to the Relative Importance Index(RII). Results showed that the project-related category is the most significant category that causes disputes in construction projects. Additionally, correlation analysis shows that there is a strong relationship among the dispute-causing categories. Also, the respondents are familiar with “arbitration” as the dispute resolution method and they are satisfied with the “conditions of contract” as a Regulatory framework for dispute resolution. The findings support the notion that construction disputes are a source of concern for every project and that the best way to address this issue is to prevent and cautiously manage them to ensure the smooth operation of the construction process.

Examining causes of disputes in subcontracting litigation cases using text mining and natural language processing techniques

Disputes are common and widespread in subcontracting practices and would ultimately lead to litigation resulting in significant negative consequences including delay, increased cost, and tarnished reputation of contracting parties. Although considerable studies have analyzed disputes in construction projects, research efforts still fall short in investigating causes of disputes in subcontracting practices. To bridge the knowledge gap, this paper investigated the causes of disputes in subcontracting practices by automatically examining 3150 litigation cases that are publicly available in China using text mining and NLP (natural language processing) techniques. Documents of litigation cases were presented into vectors by data preprocessing and vector presentation. Clustering analysis of the data was conducted by using an improved K-Means model, K-Means++. Finally, 37 causes of disputes were discovered in the subcontracting litigation cases. Results showed that variations due to unforeseen circumstances, labor service issues from subcontractors, disagreement on engineering quantities between subcontractors and other contracting parties, invalid signature of subcontractors for obtaining more payment, payment issues between subcontractors and clients or general contractors, contradictory on the return of performance bond, disagreement on the interest of late payment, and arrears issues suffered by subcontractors were the top eight significant causes of disputes in subcontracting practices in China. This study contributes by systematically exploring the causes of disputes in subcontracting practices using automated text analysis approaches instead of manual content analysis. The findings of this study can provide construction practitioners a deeper understanding of disputes in subcontracting and thereby helping them increase their capacity to handle disputes.

Identification of the Precautions to Minimize the Occurrence of Disputes Leading to Litigation: Evidence from Turkish Construction Industry

The litigation process is notorious for being long, costly and deteriorating business relations although the majority of construction contracts resort to litigation in case of any dispute. For this reason, it is very important to settle disputes in construction projects before applying for the litigation process to preserve the sustainable structure of the construction industry. Identification of precautions to reduce the number of disputes leading to litigation is crucial as it can help prevent project failures, minimize legal costs, and improve overall stakeholder satisfaction in the construction industry. Therefore, this study aims to identify solutions to diminish the disputes resulting in the litigation process in the Turkish construction industry. To achieve this goal, semi-structured interviews with 50 lawyers experienced in construction-related cases in Turkey were conducted. The data obtained from the interviewees were analyzed via content analysis to identify the common themes. Later, detected common themes were categorized in a Focus Group Discussion (FGD) by 15 experts selected in accordance with the purpose sampling method. Afterwards, Fuzzy AHP method was conducted with the data gathered from the 15 experts to determine the significance of each theme. This study revealed numerous crucial solutions to diminish the disputes resulting in lawsuits in the Turkish construction industry. Firstly, to prevent disputes and defective products, it is essential to increase the effectiveness of the auditing system and disseminate and legalize alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods as well as oblige the construction firms to have certification. Additionally, careful examination of citizens' petitions and timely and impartial approach by officials to citizens' problems can prevent conflicts from escalating. Furthermore, to improve the qualifications of officers, public personnel exams in accordance with the concerning expertise area are to be conducted.

Avoiding construction disputes: a comprehensive framework for pre-contract planning

Many industry disputes originate during the pre-contract stage, emphasizing the importance of preventing these issues early on rather than relying on post-facto resolutions. Therefore, professionals need to act proactively to avoid lapses in the pre-contract stage from the initial stage of the construction project. However, the current literature lacks an investigation of dispute avoidance by identifying professionals involved in the pre-contract phase of construction projects. This research, thus, aims to investigate the strategies to avoid disputes in construction projects in the pre-contract stage from the perspective of responsible professionals. The study adopted a qualitative approach by conducting semi-structured interviews among 15 industry practitioners involved in dispute management practices, selected through purposive sampling. The data collected was analyzed using the N-Vivo12. The findings revealed 48 lapses in the pre-contract stage and 104 strategies to avoid disputes. The findings further revealed that most of the lapses occurred during the technical stage. In contrast, the architects are responsible for design errors, and quantity surveyors contribute to documentation issues. The research offers a comprehensive framework for professionals and regulatory authorities to encourage dispute mitigation efforts, thereby contributing to the body of knowledge.

Dispute Classification in Construction Projects Based on Litigation Cases

Disputes in construction projects arise due to failure to address their root causes and lack of procedures for dispute avoidance and mitigation. Courts are facing a growing number of construction-related lawsuits that hinder the resolution processes with negative impact on the project completion. This study was an attempt to define major causes of disputes in construction projects from a review of 177 selected litigation cases in the Kuwaiti courts. Dispute sources in construction were classified into four categories: abnormal conditions, financial situation, project delay, and project management. Statistical analysis was conducted to rank the severity of dispute sources. For verification of results, construction experts were interviewed. A regression model was used to predict the disputed claim value. The most severe dispute sources were ranked according to the following: payment delay, contract documents (incomplete information, conflict of interest in both parties, noncompliance, unawareness), main contractor time delay, and owner time delay. It is hoped that results open avenues to a clearer understanding of the causes of disputes in contractual agreements in the construction industry, as well as identify areas to mitigate dispute occurrences. Because the scope of the research was limited to Kuwait, findings of this investigation may lead to a more in-depth investigation of other court scenarios of similar nature from the other parts of the Gulf region.

A novel approach for construction disputes causal inferences based on empirical data: a case-controlled method combined with Bradford Hill criteria

PurposeThis paper aims to devise a case-controlled method combined with Bradford Hill criteria for causal inference of contractual disputes in construction projects. It is a genuine attempt in a systematic method from research design to execution for causal issues where only observational data is available.Design/methodology/approachThe authors located insufficient top management support as the putative pathogen of construction disputes based on a literature review, an interview and Delphi surveys. A questionnaire survey was then conducted to collect case-controlled data to ensure comparability, in which for each disputed project put in the experimental group, the authors sought for a dispute-free project of similar characteristics. The incidence rates of insufficient top management support in the experimental and control groups were then examined by Bradford Hill criteria as an alternative to the test of intervention effect.FindingsThe association of insufficient top management support and construction disputes was tested to conform with the Bradford Hill criteria with case-controlled data where applicable and logical deduction where statistical tests were not applicable. With a clear, positive, reasonable and statistically significant association, while excluding methodological biases, confounding and chance, the authors reached a causal verdict of insufficient top management support causing contractual disputes.Originality/valueThis paper supports the validity of applying a case-controlled method combined with Bradford Hill criteria in investigating causal issues in project management, especially the verdict of causal inference based on empirical data. In addition, the located root cause of contractual disputes could inform project management personnel with reasoned strategies for dispute avoidance.

Analyzing Underlying Factors of Rework in Generating Contractual Claims in Construction Projects

Claim management plays an essential role in the success of construction contracts. The enhancement of the contractual claim process in construction projects improves the relationship between parties and impacts conflicts and disputes. Previous studies related to contractual claims focused primarily on general causes with relatively little attention paid to reasons associated with reworking. Rework in construction contracts generates cost overruns and delays, resulting in claims, conflicts, and disputes. Given the causal relations of rework, contractual claims, and disputes in construction projects, the necessity to implement rework management has become more critical. Although construction reworks lead to claims and disputes, a quantitative approach has not been undertaken to analyze the relationship between rework causes and contractual claims. This study aims to identify the key causes of rework that affect construction contracts and categorize them as rework factors in generating contractual claims by apprising the correlative rework causes and contractual claims. A quantitative approach is considered an appropriate method for data collection. Based on a review of the literature, a questionnaire including a comprehensive list of rework causes was developed, and the collected data were then analyzed using the exploratory factor analysis method. The results provided evidence of categorizing the causes of rework under four underlying factors: process, management and planning, material and equipment, and human resources. This study bridges the knowledge gap of dimensionality between rework and contractual claims, which can create measures to address rework causes in generating contractual claims. The paper suggests that effective rework management could reduce contractual claims through attention to the causes of rework at the early stages of contracting.

Factors Influencing Disputes in Construction Projects: A Case Study on Local Cambodian Construction

The construction industry is a driver of growth in another sector due to its heavy reliance on an extended and varied supply chain. Like Cambodia as a developing country, the construction industry significantly contributed to the economic development and created many jobs. The construction becomes one of the important pillars supporting the Cambodian economy. However, the construction is typically more prone to disputes. Understanding the cause of disputes in construction projects improves the efficiency of a local company and the success of projects. The study was carried out using a quantitative research method with 385 respondents from local construction companies, located in Phnom Penh city, Cambodia. The confirmation factor analysis (CFA) analysis the three important groups of disputes: Human Behavior Conflict, Contractual Conflict, and Technical Conflict. The findings are useful for local Cambodian construction companies in the avoidance of disputes and better improvement on customer satisfaction. Keywords: Construction Dispute, Human Behavior Conflict, Contractual Conflict, Technical Conflict DOI: 10.7176/EJBM/15-4-03 Publication date: February 28 th 2023

Disputes and Claim Management during the COVID-19 Crisis: The Lessons Learned

The COVID-19 crisis has presented the construction sector with challenges that the world has never seen before. Productivity is down, costs have increased, conflicts and claims are increasing, delays are high, health and safety practices are increasing, and profit margins have been reduced. The challenges require unprecedented, sudden, and unplanned changes to construction management practices and strategies. Through an open-ended survey questionnaire, this research investigated how COVID-19 causes disputes in construction projects and the measures that quantity surveying firms take to resolve the disputes in construction contracts due to the pandemic. The data revealed that disputes and claims have increased by some 80% due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, the data revealed that the COVID-19 pandemic has increased project costs by more than 40%. Shortages of materials, compliance with standard operating procedures, social distance, fluctuation, and shortages of labor are the causes of disputes. Unlike prior to the COVID-19 crisis, disputes are not caused by variations, ambiguous contract clauses, mistakes, errors, and competencies of the parties to the contracts. To resolve COVID-19-induced claims, contract clauses, negotiations, conciliation, trust management, and contingency provisions are the most effective. This research provides new information on claim management during a crisis. From an ontological standpoint, the main findings of this study are generalizable to construction projects in and outside of Nigeria.

Urban construction-based social risks assessment in hot arid countries with social network analysis

Social consequences on urban development are becoming increasingly relevant in Kuwait. Social risks associated with urban construction projects have utmost level of uncertainty for community and their significance is growing tremendously. The study aims to assess social risks of urban construction projects by using social risk analysis theory in Kuwait. A case study was conducted in Kuwait, including 17 incidents of social disputes in construction projects, and 12 factors of social risk were evaluated. Based on literature review and reported cases in Kuwait, 08 stakeholders associated with key social risk factors were identified. A conceptual framework for the analysis of social risk was established taking into account the relationships among risks and stakeholders by using Gephi and UNICET. Additionally, semi-structured interviews were conducted with experts from construction field. Thematic analysis was performed for social risks associated with construction engineering. The SNA model's analytical results revealed that social dangers were highly linked to challenges such as erroneous decision-making, poor reliability of government and government's inept/ineffective management. Structure difficulties and inadequate environmental protection were the riskiest elements in a complex setting, and they should be given special attention. Based on the results of the questionnaire, it was revealed that poor credibility of government had the most frequencies among the 12 other social risk factors, followed by government's lack management and improper decision making with equal proportions, site safety hazards and claim and compensation. Survey for stakeholders showed that government had the highest frequency which indicates that public and contractors are the most significant participants. The weighted degree of weighted degree of Social Risk and Stakeholders concluded that stakeholders set are the nodes with the highest weighted degree compared to Social Risk set. Moreover, the government, owner, contractor, designer, and the construction supervisor are the most weighted nodes in the stakeholder set, while communities, residents, and media are the least. Government's Lax/Improper Administration, Poor Credibility of Government, and Unsuitable Decision-Making have the most weighted degrees in the social risk set. According to centrality results, facilitators are the most important social risks with the highest capability of beginning a point of information to prevent a set of consequential social risks that has a direct effect on the general population. As a result of this role, they are the most crucial aspect in social risk management. In conclusion, the suggested social risk analysis approach can help project managers, government officials, and project owners pay more attention to social risk elements by providing a formal framework for analyzing such risks and minimizing social impacts.

Role of Case Laws in Claim Management and Contracts

There is a long history of court judgments in the construction sector, providing a wealth of knowledge that can guide contract parties in preempting claims and disputes in construction projects. However, knowledge from case law findings does not seem to percolate to day-to-day contract management activities. This anecdotal statement needs empirical verification. Thus, the current study attempted to understand the extent of case-law-based legal knowledge percolation in day-to-day contract management and its impact on the dispute resolution climate. The study highlighted the gap between the need for and availability of case-law-based training/knowledge using data from India. There were four major observations from the research. First, questionnaire survey results highlighted the fact that engineers and managers in construction projects acknowledge the inevitability of legal awareness for day-to-day contract management. While about 72% of the respondents (76 out of 106) agreed that case-law-based training could have helped in managing disputes better, only 10% (11 out of 106 respondents) reported that their organizations offer regular case-law-based knowledge and training. Moreover, 65% of the respondents (69 out of 106) either confirmed that their organizations do not maintain a case-law learning repository or they are unaware of its availability. Therefore, the second observation is that there is a shortfall in avenues that help professionals gain case-law-based knowledge from training. Although pure experience-based learning can lead to a risky trial and error approach, opportunities for self-learning are also muted. Third, by highlighting a growing trend of expenses incurred for the arbitration and litigation of construction disputes—in other words, legalization—the study highlighted the importance of the development and administration of case-law-based professional training programs. Last, the study also illustrated the potential for case laws to guide engineers and managers in their day-to-day contract management activities. The findings from the study can help the construction industry collaborate closely with researchers and academicians to move a step closer to making legal knowledge easily accessible to contract managers and help them make decisions that can withstand legal scrutiny.

Importance of Effective Communication to Minimize Disputes in Construction Projects

Disputes are inevitable in construction projects. There are different causes for these disputes which require more time, cost, and effort of project teams to find resolutions. Therefore, disputes impact negatively on project performance which can result in unsuccessful project completion. Poor communication between the teams is one of the causes of disputes. Therefore, by identifying the factors that affect communication effectiveness, project leaders can manage project communication effectively with well-defined information distribution methods. The purpose of this study was to emphasize the importance of effective communication to minimize disputes in construction projects. The objective was to identify the factors that improve the project team’s communication. Existing publications from 2019 to 2022 were studied as secondary resources for this study. This study revealed five factors that affect effective communication between the teams for a construction project together with research gaps and future research areas.

Disputes in Construction Projects: A Perspective of Project Characteristics

Disputes in Construction Projects: A Perspective of Project Characteristics

Corrective and Preventive Action Plan (CAPA) for Disputes in Construction Projects: A Norwegian Perspective

The consensus in the Norwegian construction industry is that the projects are characterized by conflicts. Because unresolved disputes that reach courts take time and resources to be solved, this leads to lost productivity and high costs for all stakeholders. Of the root causes of conflicts identified previously, tender specification and contract understanding were the most significant issues. To expand on previous findings, a qualitative analysis of 58 formal, semi-structured interviews was conducted to determine whether personal characteristics and types of contracts presented conflicts. Interviews were conducted with contractors, public clients, consultants, academics, and lawyers. Data were analyzed using NVIVO 12.0 following specific relevant themes and thematic maps. Corrective and preventive actions included the development of a new method to produce better-prepared tender documents, knowledge building in contract management, training to ensure better communication and dialogue between client and contractor, trust-building, dispute resolution along the way, and avoid awarding contracts at the lowest price or the use of a hybrid model. Improved routines may drive costs down, and cooperation and new forms of tendering and contracting could be the key to prevent and minimize disputes in Norway.

Evaluation of Biases in Construction Project Dispute Resolution: Case Study

Evaluation of Biases in Construction Project Dispute Resolution: Case Study

Classifying Compensations in Construction Disputes Using Machine Learning Techniques

It is highly probable to encounter disputes in construction projects and construction disputes are detrimental as they may lead to cost overruns and delays. Knowing the compensation with some certainty can avoid parties from extending inconclusive claims. Decision support systems can be helpful to understand the aspect of the compensation, if any compensation can be acquired. Within this context, the primary objective of this research is to predict the associated compensations in construction disputes by using machine learning (ML) techniques on past project data so that in new projects, decision support can be provided with some certainty via forecasts on the aspect of the compensation. To do this, a conceptual model identifying the attributes affecting compensations was established based on an extensive literature review. Using these attributes, data from real-world dispute cases were collected. Insignificant attributes were eliminated via Chi-square tests to establish a simpler classification model, which was experimented via alternative single and ensemble ML techniques. The Naïve Bayes (NB) classifier generated the highest average classification accuracy as 80.61% when One-vs-All (OvA) decomposition technique was utilized. The conceptual model can guide construction professionals during dispute management decision-making and the promising results indicate that the classification model has the potential to identify compensations. This study can be used to mitigate disputes by preventing parties from resorting to unpleasant and inconclusive resolution processes.