Koc, K and Gurgun, A P (2022) Ambiguity factors in construction contracts entailing conflicts. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 29(5), pp. 1946-1964. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: Conflicts, claims and disputes are inherent in most construction projects. Acceptable degree of commonality in the interpretation of contract provisions is critical in effective contract administration. This study aims to assess the effects of contract ambiguity factors on construction conflicts, highlighting the causes of divergent interpretations using fuzzy technique for order of preference by the similarity-to-ideal-solution (TOPSIS) method. Design/methodology/approach: Fuzzy TOPSIS framework with 27 ambiguity factors is constructed by conducting a comprehensive literature review, accompanied by a pilot study. Questionnaire survey is formed, and one-to-one interviews are arranged with 35 contract administration experts. Findings: The findings indicate that (1) ambiguity due to excessive changes in the bill of quantity (BOQ) (including ambiguous provisions related to BOQ changes), (2) incomplete clauses that do not describe the scope of the intended work purely, (3) ambiguity due to excessive amendments in the scope of works (including ambiguous provisions related to scope changes), (4) ambiguous enforceability including excessive demands and (5) ambiguous goal and performance requirements are the top five ambiguity factors affecting construction conflicts. Research limitations/implications: Presented framework is performed referring to ambiguity factors in all type of construction contracts in the general sense. However, the identified factors may vary depending on the project type, contract type, procurement method or use of standard contract forms (such as NEC, FIDIC). Originality/value: The literature lacks the investigation of ambiguity factors in construction contracts, yet the assessment of the effects of contract ambiguity is essential to minimize conflicts.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | ambiguity factors; construction contract; contract interpretation; fuzzy topsis; multi-criteria decision making; semantic risks |
| Index terms: | construction contract, investigation, bills of quantities, procurement method, contract administration, FIDIC, fuzzy topsis, topsis, dispute, methodology, decision-making, construction project, questionnaire, preference, scope change, interview, literature review, survey |
| Subjects: | dispute resolution, scope management, standard forms of contract, contract type, data collection methods, financial and cost management, contractual arrangements, data analysis and analytics, contract management, production management, research methods, decision-making and reasoning, decision-making and optimization, decision analysis |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Contract Administration, Project Management, Research Practice, Cost Management, Procurement, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here