Fenn, P; Lowe, D and Speck, C (1997) Conflict and dispute in construction. Construction Management and Economics, 15(6), pp. 513-518. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
'Conflict' and 'dispute' are two distinct notions. The conceptual difference between the two is explored and further reviewed through the literature on conflict and dispute in the field of construction; a taxonomy for future study is also introduced. Conflict, it is proposed, exists wherever there is incompatibility of interest, and therefore is pandemic. Conflict can be managed, possibly to the extent of preventing a dispute resulting from the conflict. Dispute is associated with distinct justiciable issues. Disputes require resolution. This means that they can be managed: the process of dispute resolution lends itself to third party intervention. The construction industry and the chemical process industry in the UK are compared, through perceptions and experiences of conflict and disputes arising from their two sets of standard contract forms. The methodology is a review of published cases and a survey conducted among professionals with experience. The paucity of research in this field is discussed and the empirical work on the causes of conflict and dispute is reviewed. It is concluded that effective management of conflicts and disputes would be furthered by separating the two fields, and particularly by applying a more stringent structuring.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | chemical industry; conflict; construction; dispute; standard contracts; taxonomy |
| Index terms: | methodology, survey, resolution, construction industry, taxonomy, future study, pandemic, dispute |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, data collection methods, research design and methodology, dispute resolution, conflict resolution, industry analysis, health risk and incident analysis, research methods |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Health and Safety, 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