Ren, Z; Anumba, G J and Ugwu, O O (2001) Construction claims management: Towards an agent-based approach. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 8(3), pp. 185-197. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Disputes are now considered endemic in the construction industry. They often arise from the poor resolution of claims in the course of construction projects. Efforts have been geared towards reducing the incidence of claims. These efforts are of two kinds: those that seek answers from basic principles and legal issues at the pre-construction phase and those that attempt to solve the problems through claims management procedures at the construction phase. This paper reviews the developments in claims management and highlights the deficiencies in current claims management approaches. It focuses on the need for improvement of the efficiency of claims negotiation and suggests the use of multiagent systems as an approach to achieve it. The potential benefits of the suggested approach are discussed in the concluding section of the paper.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | claim justification; claim negotiation; claim quantification; claims management; multiagent systems; risk management |
| Index terms: | risk management, construction phase, resolution, construction industry, negotiation, legal issue, quantification, efficiency, pre-construction, dispute, construction project, construction claim, agent, claim negotiation |
| Subjects: | risk assessment, dispute resolution, practitioner, project delivery, legal systems, performance management, contract management, production management, measurement and scaling, payment, conflict resolution, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Contract Administration, Legal Issues, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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