Otim, M A; Tutesigensi, A and Mutikanga, H E (2022) Can professionalism make contract disputes in infrastructure projects disappear? In: Tutesigensi, A and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 38th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2022, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
Abstract
Despite general resignation that occurrence of disputes in construction projects is inevitable, it is possible to avoid or prevent them. That, however, requires anticipation and prediction of the series of events that might lead up to disputes and yet there is a general paucity of such information. The research reported in this paper sought to contribute to a better understanding of dispute-emergence mechanisms by exploring the series of factors that foster emergence of disputes in large infrastructure projects. To achieve that, a single case study methodology was adopted, focusing on a major dispute encountered in a large infrastructure project. Secondary qualitative data were collected and analysed using thematic analysis. This research highlights that a deficiency in professionalism facilitates dispute-emergence and highlights the need for upskilling construction industry professionals in the development and administration of construction contracts.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction contracts; construction disputes; professionalism |
| Index terms: | construction contract, thematic analysis, construction project, methodology, emergence, construction dispute, infrastructure project, professionalism, construction industry, case study, large infrastructure project, dispute |
| Subjects: | research methods, methods and analysis, production management, infrastructure engineering, professional development, infrastructure and transport systems, industry analysis, systems engineering, data collection methods, contract type, dispute resolution |
| Topics: | Procurement, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Legal Issues |
| 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