Planning for claims: An ethnography of industry culture

Rooke, J; Seymour, D and Fellows, R (2004) Planning for claims: An ethnography of industry culture. Construction Management and Economics, 22(6), pp. 655-662. ISSN 01446193

Abstract

Claims by contractors for additional payments have been identified by commentators as a major source of difficulty in the industry. Ethnographic research with industry members reveals some key features of planning practices that underlie such events. Claims are sometimes planned at tender stage and sometimes during the course of a project. One practice at tender stage is a pricing technique that minimizes the tender price while maximizing the out-turn cost of a contract by exploiting mistakes in the bill of quantities. Another is the programming of work to maximize its vulnerability to delay. More reactive techniques may be employed during the course of the project, often to make up for an unanticipated increase in costs. These and other similar practices may be reported as features of an integrated culture, defined in such a way as to encompass activity and reject Cartesian dualism. The unique adequacy requirements of methods are suitable criteria for the evaluation of such reports. The claims culture arises from economic conditions in the industry, which include low entry barriers and competitive tendering. However, removal of these conditions alone cannot guarantee that the practices will cease.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: claims management; ethnography; ethnomethodology; organizational culture; procurement
Index terms: organizational culture, programming, vulnerability, tender price, claims culture, competitive tendering, guarantee, bills of quantities, ethnomethodology, tender stage, ethnography, economic condition, pricing
Subjects: programming, contractual relationship, economic analysis, financial and cost management, qualitative and interpretive research, tendering, research methods, contract structure, environmental hazards, sociology
Topics: Procurement, Sustainability, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Contract Administration, Digital Applications
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

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