Forensic delay analysis: An investigation of the reasons for disagreements in time-related disputes

Construction project delays are widespread and persistent.  The premise of this paper is that the current fact-related aspects of extension of time (EOT) disputes, and therefore disagreements between the parties and their experts, can be partially or fully avoided by (i) exploiting advances in information technology; (ii) the introduction of agreed contractual delay protocols; and (iii) radical changes to the concept of 'ownership' of information. The work presented here is part of a wider study examining the impact of advances in information technology (specifically, the availability of information-rich building models) on the more efficient resolution (or even avoidance) of contractual disputes. It is argued that there is a prima facie case for this, and therefore for the reduction of transaction costs, by exploiting the potential of information technology. However, a review of the literature indicates that commentators have not fully considered the interplay between the availability of reliable data, the readiness of actors in providing it, and the conflicting motives behind the way it is analysed by experts.   This currently results in deficiencies in evidence and a zero-sum gamble for the parties seeking the resolution of delays and their consequences.  To address this, the work reported here uses data from twelve recent project case studies to identify and categorise the type of issues that currently arise between the parties and their legal representatives during the management of time-related contractual disputes, and, by modelling the factors at play, to derive a contractually viable strategy for tackling the current transaction inefficiencies.