Consultants' perceptions on construction delay analysis methodologies

Braimah, N and Ndekugri, I (2009) Consultants' perceptions on construction delay analysis methodologies. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 135(12), pp. 1279-1288. ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

Resolving the delay claims that usually trail delayed completion of construction projects is beset with immense difficulties that often lead to disputes between the parties involved. The research reported in this paper is a part of a wider study aimed at developing a framework for reducing the attendant disputes and aiding cost-efficient dispute resolution. The focus of the part reported here is owner consultants' perceptions on existing methodologies for analyzing project delay. Based on a survey of U.K. construction consulting organizations, the study examined, among others, the awareness and use of these methodologies, their perceived reliability, expert involvement, and obstacles to their use. The main study findings are: (i) delay analysis is a multidisciplinary task, with the project quantity surveyor often playing the leading role on the owner's side; (ii) the simpler methodologies are used more often than the complex ones although the former are known to be less reliable than the latter; and (iii) the principal obstacles to the use of the sophisticated methodologies are: lack of adequate project information, the use of programmes not in CPM network form, and poorly updated programmes. It is thus argued that improvement in current programming and record-keeping practices will promote the use of the more reliable methodologies which, in turn, will facilitate smoother resolution of delay claims.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: claims; consultants; contract management; critical path method; delay time
Index terms: resolution, quantity surveying, dispute, owner, programming, delay analysis, construction project, construction delay, methodology, critical path method, project delay, contract management, programme, survey
Subjects: dispute resolution, programming, profession, data collection methods, operations research, contract management, production management, research methods, sociology, project controls, conflict resolution
Topics: Digital Applications, Legal Issues, Contract Administration, Time Control, Project Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTE

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