Liyanawatta, T N; Francis, M and Ranadewa, K A T O (2024) Avoiding construction disputes: A comprehensive framework for pre-contract planning. International Journal of Construction Management, 24(12), pp. 1282-1294. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
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.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | dispute avoidance; lapses; pre-contract; professionals; RIBA 2020; strategies |
| Index terms: | dispute, qualitative approach, quantity surveying, design error, resolution, purposive sampling, construction dispute, investigation, architect, strategy, documentation, interview, body of knowledge, construction project, management practice, mitigation, practitioner |
| Subjects: | financial risk, professional development, production management, research methods, management, conflict resolution, dispute resolution, practitioner, profession, data collection methods, knowledge management, professional practice |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Design Practice, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Information Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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