Kraiem, Z M and Diekmann, J E (1987) Concurrent delays in construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 113(4), pp. 591-602. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The time allowed for construction project performance is usually an important consideration for both the project owner and the project contractor. Yet, it is typical for construction projects to be delayed. Delays may be caused by the owner (compensable delay), by the contractor (nonexcusable delay), by acts of god, or a third party (excusable delay), or several different kinds of delays may happen concurrently. Because of the many sources and causes of construction delays, it is often difficult to analyze the ultimate liability in delay claims. The original schedule (as-planned) is known, and, likewise, the actual schedule (as-built) is known. What is unknown is the appropriate schedule when all allowable adjustments to the schedule are taken into account; this schedule is often called the as-adjusted schedule. This paper presents a tool to aid in analysis of delay claims. The procedure set forth will handle delays and accelerations and will help in determination of the as-adjusted schedule.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | acceleration, excusable delay, owner, construction delay, construction project, liability |
| Subjects: | production management, liability law, project controls, sociology |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Project Management, Time Control, Legal Issues |
| 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