Ren, Z; Anumba, C J and Ugwu, O (2000) Towards a multi-agent system for construction claims negotiation. In: Akintoye, A (ed.) Proceedings of 16th Annual ARCOM Conference, 6-8 September 2000, Glasgow, UK.
Abstract
Although many research projects have been undertaken on construction claims, little research has been conducted on the improvement of claims negotiation. On the other hand, industry practice shows that claims negotiation is one of the most time and energy consuming activities in claims management. The major problems of claims negotiation are inefficiency, late client intervention and complex human factors. The development of a multi-agent system (MAS) provides an opportunity to improve these problem areas. The important characteristics of MAS: autonomy, knowledge sharing, goal orientation and learning make it possible to build a system in which agents, on behalf of their owners, can settle most of the quantifiable claim negotiation items in an effective and efficient way. To build such a system, many important aspects, such as the reasoning model, negotiation mechanism, and empowerment of agents need to be addressed. This paper reviews developments in construction claims management, analyses the nature of construction claims negotiations, and explores the potential of a multi-agent system for claim negotiations. The benefits of the proposed approach are presented and the area for further work outlined.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | claims management; claims quantification; computer-supported negotiation; dispute avoidance; multi-agent systems; construction claim |
| Index terms: | multi-agent system, human factor, negotiation, claim negotiation, agent, construction claim, empowerment, reasoning, quantification, knowledge sharing, dispute, owner |
| Subjects: | knowledge management, artificial intelligence, practitioner, dispute resolution, sociology, measurement and scaling, cognitive psychology, occupational health and safety management, conflict resolution, payment, management, contract management |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Research Practice, Information Management, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Legal Issues, Digital Applications, Human Resources, Contract Administration |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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