Tobin, A G V (2009) Conflict-resolution competencies for the construction professional. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 162(4), pp. 181-184. ISSN 17514312
Abstract
Conflicts form part of the everyday work environments of construction professionals. There are few construction projects that are conflict-free zones. Considerable financial resources, not to mention legal costs, are committed when conflicts spiral beyond the control of those on site. This paper proposes that conflict-resolution competencies should form part of the repertoire of the responses that have been learned and mastered by the construction professional. The paper describes the range and nature of those competencies in relation to their application in the various formal arenas where conflict resolution is practised. Partnering is discussed as a preemptive approach to conflict avoidance in a cooperative forum.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | disputes and arbitration; education and training |
| Index terms: | construction project, arbitration, education and training, partnering, dispute, work environment, conflict resolution, resolution, construction professional |
| Subjects: | professional education, professional development, partnership management, conflict resolution, management, production management, dispute resolution |
| Topics: | Education, Stakeholder Management, Information Management, Organizational Design, Legal Issues, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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