Kassab, M; Hegazy, T and Hipel, K (2010) Computerized DSS for construction conflict resolution under uncertainty. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(12), pp. 1249-1257. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Due to the inherent nature of construction projects, conflicts are unavoidable among the various parties involved. Such conflicts often delay projects and cause losses for all parties. This paper presents the development of a decision support system (DSS) to help in resolving construction disputes. The DSS integrates the elimination method to shortlist promising resolutions to a conflict, the graph model for conflict resolution to determine the best resolution that satisfies all decision makers' preferences, and the information gap theory to consider uncertain decision preferences. A prototype system has been developed and a case study of a construction conflict used to demonstrate its features. The presented methodology for construction conflict resolution is useful for both researchers and practitioners to better deal with the dispute-prone nature of the construction industry under uncertainty and lack of information. In this paper, the proposed prototype successfully simulated and predicted the sequence of decisions that took place in the case study dispute, in the presence of uncertainty.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | conflict resolution; decision support system; game theory; information gap theory; mcda |
| Index terms: | preference, practitioner, construction project, methodology, game theory, prototype, decision support, construction dispute, resolution, construction industry, presence, graph model, conflict resolution, dispute, case study |
| Subjects: | dispute resolution, practitioner, data collection methods, mathematical modelling, environmental science, decision models, modelling and simulation, production management, research methods, decision-making and reasoning, industry analysis, conflict resolution, decision analysis |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Sustainability, Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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