Zeberga, M S; Haaskjold, H and Hussein, B (2024) Digital technologies for preventing, mitigating, and resolving contractual disagreements in the AEC industry: A systematic literature review. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 150(6): 03124002, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry invests significant resources in executing construction projects. However, contractual construction disagreements (CCDs), such as conflicts, claims, and disputes, frequently arise between contractual parties, leading to additional costs, prolongation costs, liquidated damages, or extension of time, to name a few examples. Although prior studies offer some insights, there still needs to be a more comprehensive and systematic identification of different digital technologies useful to prevent, mitigate, or resolve CCDs. This study fills this gap by exploring two primary research questions: (1) What digital technologies have been identified to manage contractual disagreements in the AEC industry? (2) How might artificial intelligence (AI) facilitate the digitalization of contractual disagreement management in the AEC industry? This study followed a rigorous systematic review protocol and used the Transparent Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) framework to identify 82 peer-reviewed articles published from 2000 to 2023. The findings demonstrated that AI, distributed ledger technologies, and building information modeling are the most dominant digital technologies in managing CCDs in the AEC industry. The study presents a conceptual framework that maps the benefits of AI and other digital solutions in facilitating conflict prevention, claim mitigation, and dispute resolution. The findings have valuable benefits for industry practitioners seeking to enhance CCD management. Moreover, the identified research avenues pave the way for future exploration and advancement of digital solutions in managing CCDs.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | architecture, engineering, and construction industry; claim mitigation; conflict prevention; contractual construction disagreement; digital technology; dispute resolution; systematic literature review |
| Index terms: | maps, digitalization, mitigation, exploration, meta-analysis, artificial intelligence, digital technology, prevention, liquidated damages, dispute, systematic literature review, conceptual framework, construction industry, building information modelling, resolution, practitioner, construction project |
| Subjects: | information systems, practitioner, artificial intelligence, conflict resolution, digital technology, theoretical framing, financial risk, research evaluation and metrics, spatial and geospatial analysis, production management, computing systems, industry analysis, environmental resource management, dispute resolution, contractual remedy |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Project Management, Digital Applications, Cost Management, Legal Issues, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Contract Administration, Stakeholder Management |
| 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