Kartam, S (1999) Generic methodology for analyzing delay claims. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 125(6), pp. 409-419. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
It is common for a construction project to encounter delays. There are several reasons that can contribute to delaying a project. Analyzing the various causes that contribute to a project's delay is an important task to resolving it. Determining, in a scientific manner, the impact, timing, and the contributing effect of each of those causes to the overall delay should assist in helping the parties settle the delay without litigation. Project participants are becoming more aware of the high costs and risks associated with delay claims and their litigation. Thus, the construction industry needs to develop methodologies and techniques to prevent and more efficiently resolve delay clams. While many practitioner have been following some kind of a methodology for analyzing delay claims, a written exposition of such a methodology is not widely available in the literature. Thus, this paper presents a written exposition of a generic methodology for analyzing delay claims. This methodology has been developed and successfully used, by the writer, in various projects to resolve delay claims. The developed methodology will be illustrated through its application in those projects. Moreover, this methodology shows that while there are several techniques for analyzing delay claims, very few of these can be considered adequate. The use of such an adequate technique is a key in obtaining a fair allocation of the delay responsibility. This paper's methodology utilizes one of these few adequate techniques for analyzing delay claims.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | construction industry, becoming, litigation, practitioner, methodology, construction project |
| Subjects: | production management, research methods, philosophical process, industry analysis, dispute resolution, practitioner |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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