Al-Gahtani, A S Z (1991) Construction claims for public and private projects in Saudi Arabia. DSc thesis, George Washington University, USA.
Abstract
This study identifies types of construction claims and reasons claims are filed in Saudi Arabia. It compares causes and effects of claims on public versus private construction projects. A literature review identified 43 categories of claims. These categories and related information were used to develop interview questions. Owners, contractors, and consultants from both public and private construction projects were interviewed. They were asked to identify the frequency of different types of claims, the annual number of claims, methods of settlement, and the level of importance of different claim categories. A statistical analysis examined the differences in claims experience between the public and private sectors. The findings of the study identify important causes of claims in Saudi Arabia: extra work by the owner that the contract did not specify, suspension of work, and contractor delay of the project schedule. The study concludes that the Saudi construction industry should recognize these causes in order to reduce the incidence and impact of construction claims.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Murphree Jr., E L |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Saudi Arabia; construction claims; interview; owner; statistical analysis |
| Index terms: | construction project, construction claim, interview, literature review, construction industry, Saudi Arabia, statistical analysis, owner, private sector |
| Subjects: | Geography, production management, industry analysis, payment, sociology, data analysis and analytics, data science, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Project Management, Geographical Context, Contract Administration, Business Strategy, Research Practice, 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