Grosse, H (2023) Thrown into a construction dispute: The personal toll of aggressive claims management. In: Tutesigensi, A and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 39th Annual ARCOM Conference, 4-6 September 2023, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Abstract
This practitioner research investigates the impact of aggressive claims management on project team members. I autoethnographically explore experiences on a construction project. While I maintained a cooperative relationship with the client and design team, another contractor employed aggressive claims management. The unfolding conflict provides the material - observations and experiences for this autoethnography. In addition, I use Heidegger's thrownness as a theoretical lens to understand the unfolding processes. The investigation shows that aggressive claims management raises stress levels in the team members resulting from the need to justify and defend oneself. Tactfulness mitigates the effects but is often insufficient due to robust economic necessities and raised emotional involvement. The stress and pressure almost inevitably lead to counter-aggression and the erosion of moral standards and values for economic survival, resulting in a vicious circle of even more severe conflict. I provide no answer to how to deal with the conflict, but I show its effects by using Heidegger's thrownness to explore where it originates.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | autoethnography; heidegger; claims management; practitioner research; stress |
| Index terms: | investigation, practitioner, construction project, project team, survival, construction dispute, toll, design team |
| Subjects: | practitioner, dispute resolution, data collection methods, environmental science, professional practice, project delivery, production management, transportation engineering |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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