Aibinu, A A; Ofori, G and Ling, F Y Y (2008) Explaining cooperative behavior in building and civil engineering projects' claims process: Interactive effects of outcome favorability and procedural fairness. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(9), pp. 681-691. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Cooperation is fundamental to successful procurement and delivery of building and civil engineering projects. This study explores the role of perceived fairness as a motivator of cooperative behavior in the process for administering project claims. The objective is to investigate how a contractor's perceptions about fairness of the procedure for administering project claims would interact with the outcome received from the claims to influence the contractor's cooperative behavior in terms of conflict intensity and potential to dispute. The data collection instrument was a structured questionnaire. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 41 contractors' personnel regarding their experience with claims on 41 completed projects in Singapore. The data were analyzed using the structural modeling approach. The results indicate that on projects where contractors did not receive a favorable outcome from claims, there was lower intensity of conflict and lower potential to dispute when contractors perceived that the procedure for administering the claims was fair than when the procedure was perceived to be unfair. The findings suggest that, in construction, cooperative behavior is a combined function of the outcome and procedure leading to that outcome. It also suggests that enhancing cooperative behavior goes beyond formal contract provisions but rather how the contract is administered in practice. It is recommended that employers' project management team whose actions of rejecting invalid claims may be misinterpreted and disputed pay greater attention to how decisions on claims are reached. A fair procedure could cushion the effect of an unfavorable decision and thereby reduce a contractor's uncooperative attitude.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | claims; contractors; delivery; project management |
| Index terms: | face, project management team, interview, personnel, cooperative behaviour, cushion, cooperation, questionnaire, dispute, Singapore, project management, motivator, structural modelling, fairness |
| Subjects: | project management theory and practice, Geography, management, leadership, dispute resolution, data collection methods, profession, analytical methods, building materials, psychology |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Human Resources, Legal Issues, Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management |
| 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