A case study of dispute resolution methods pertaining to the construction standard form in Iran

If disputes are not resolved promptly, they tend to become prolonged and escalated, creating a more complicated and less manageable scenario. Therefore, inappropriate dispute resolution methods would jeopardize a project’s success. In this research, performance of Iran’s standard construction form for settling disputes is explored. Findings address the need for revising the form, thereby contributing to the effective resolution of disputes. The concurrent triangulation (mixed methods) strategy was used to conduct the investigation. Qualitative data were collected using semi-structured interviews with 30 experts, and quantitative data were collected using questionnaires with 112 experts. Findings of this study show that there are three dispute resolution methods associated with use of the construction standard form in Iran: submitting an inquiry to the Management and Planning Organization (MPO), expert decision and referring a case to the Technical Supreme Council (TSC) for arbitration. Of these, the expert decision method is not applicable because it is not accompanied by the required executive instructions, and TSC arbitration is time-consuming. Thus, submitting an inquiry to the MPO is the only recommended option.