Agapiou, A (2013) UK construction participants' experiences of adjudication. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 166(3), pp. 137-144. ISSN 17514312
Abstract
This paper aims to fill a gap in the literature by exploring the construction professionals' interaction with adjudication at a key stage in its evolution based on a focus group analysis of industry experiences. The research aims to provide a richer understanding of the professional's interaction with the adjudication process more generally, as well providing detailed insights into the issues that different professional groupings have experienced with the process, more specifically. At first glance, the conclusions of the research offer few surprises, confirming the importance of financial aspects of the process, the timescales involved, the quality of adjudication professionals and the role of legal practitioners in adjudication. A closer examination of the focus group analysis, however, suggests that the loss of confidence in the process is attributable to a myriad of interrelated factors linking professional reputation with understanding of commercial realities and business relationships, lawyer-client power imbalances and dispute tactics, the role of lawyers with dispute complexity, parliamentary intentions and the timescale of the process. Although, it is recognised that on-going changes to adjudication will add more uncertainties into the context, the findings of this study will act as a springboard from which further research will be conducted.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contracts & law; disputes & arbitration; management |
| Index terms: | complexity, evolution, adjudication, lawyer, interaction, arbitration, dispute, business relationship, construction professional, focus group, practitioner |
| Subjects: | behavioral psychology, professional development, systems engineering, profession, practitioner, dispute resolution, data collection methods, strategic management, environmental science |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Research Practice, Sustainability, Legal Issues, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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