Kumaraswamy, M M; Nadarajah, R; Palaneeswaran, E and Rahman, M M (2001) Dealing with delays in evaluating extensions of time. In: Akintoye, A (ed.) Proceedings of 17th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2001, Salford, UK.
Abstract
Many construction claims and costly disputes are frequently linked to delays. The disputes usually relate to both (1) the identification of root causes and related responsibilities, and (2) the evaluation of net effects of such delays. An arsenal of different approaches has been deployed in evaluating EOT (Extension of Time) entitlements. This paper presents interim outcomes from an ongoing research project: (1) in comparing and classifying EOT evaluation techniques; and identifying principal strengths, weaknesses and 'best practices' in different scenarios; and (2) in formulating a basic structure and 'Level 1' modules of a proposed knowledge-based Decision Support System (DSS) that is envisaged to eventually assist either contracting party or their agents/consultants in evaluating EOT entitlements. These interim outcomes are based on findings from a preliminary questionnaire survey, a literature review and seven in-depth interviews with experienced practitioners in Hong Kong. The 'Level 1' DSS modules are designed to verify whether there is, in principle, a valid case for EOT (or not) triggered by any of the causes under clause 50 of the Hong Kong Government Conditions of Contract for Civil Engineering Works. The 'Level 2' DSS modules will deal with the quantification of any potential EOT. The interim outcomes, taken together with the present uncertainties and evident ambiguities in estimating EOT, confirm the need for developing the proposed DSS.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | claims; decision support system; delays; extension of time |
| Index terms: | estimating, agent, construction claim, questionnaire, module, practitioner, best practice, survey, contracting party, literature review, dispute, decision support, interview, evaluation technique, Hong Kong, quantification |
| Subjects: | Geography, architectural elements, measurement and scaling, decision analysis, payment, practitioner, dispute resolution, business, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, financial and cost management, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Design Practice, Contract Administration, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Risk Management, Roles and Professions |
| 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