Halligan, D W; Hester, W T and Thomas, H R (1987) Managing unforeseen site conditions. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 113(2), pp. 273-287. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Owners often attempt to use construction contract language to apportion responsibility for unforeseen site conditions among themselves, contractors, and designers. The legal merits and limitations of alternate contract clauses and contract forms have received considerable attention in the literature. Here, using the data from several recent studies, it is shown that the actual contract language used is largely irrelevant to the actual costs borne by owners and contractors. More importantly, the management techniques used determine the ultimate cost to all participants. Two management techniques particularly relevant to unforeseen site conditions are the use of interpretive reports and the early resolution of claims. These techniques, their effectiveness, and the overall limitations of legalistic approaches to the management of unforeseen site conditions are discussed in detail.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | owner, designer, effectiveness, construction contract, resolution, actual cost |
| Subjects: | profession, contract type, financial and cost management, performance management, conflict resolution, sociology |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Cost Management, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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