LEGAL AFFAIRS SECTION
Jan 1, 2008

Reconciliation of Owner and Contractor Views in Heavy Construction Projects

Publication: Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
Volume 134, Issue 1

Abstract

Delay and loss of productivity are the two main types of damage experienced by the contractor when the owner issues a change order. Courts have recognized critical path method schedule analysis as the preferred method of identifying and quantifying critical delays. As for the inefficiency damages, there is no direct way of measuring inefficiency due to its qualitative nature and the difficulty of linking the cause of the productivity loss to the damage. Most of the scholarly work published in this area was based on data supplied by the contractors; and that explains why there are discrepancies between what the contractor asks for and what the owner believes the contractor is entitled to. This study addresses the need for a statistical model to quantify the productivity loss from verifiable site data such as owner’s daily reports, change orders, drawings, and specifications, rather than rely solely on contractor surveys. A model is developed and validated to quantify the productivity loss in pipe work in roadway projects due to the change orders. The productivity loss study analyzed two sets of data that include: (1) variables that predict which of the two parties, the owner and the contractor, contributed to the productivity loss; and (2) variables that predict, from the legal viewpoint, productivity losses which only the owner is responsible for. The study showed the difference between what the contractor asked for and what he/she is actually entitled to. This model can be used by both the owner and the contractor to quantify the productivity loss due to change orders, and to offer an objective approach to reconcile their differences. This study concludes with an example to demonstrate the use of the model.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

References

Amelco v. City of Thousand Oaks (California Supreme Court No. S091069, 2002).
Appeal of Clark Construction Group, Inc. (2000 WL 37542) VABCA No. 5674, 00-1 BCA 30,870 (Clark).
Crowley, D., and Livengood, J. C. (2002). “Measured mile analysis and international mega-projects.” AACE Int., Trans. of the Annual Meeting, Portland, Ore., CDR051–CDR057.
Derksen, S., and Keselman, H. J. (1992). “Backward, forward and stepwise automated subset selection algorithms: Frequency of obtaining authentic and noise variables.” Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol., 45(2), 265–282.
Foulger, D. (1979). “Credibility and the statistical interaction variable: Speaking up for multiplication as a source of understanding.” Annual Conf. of the Speech Communication Association, San Antonio.
Habing, B. (2004). “Transformation of variables.” ⟨http://www.stat.sc.edu/curricula/courses/516/516s7p8sup.pdf⟩ (April 2006).
Hanna, A. S., Russell, J. S., Gotzion, T. W., and Nordheim, E. V. (1999a). “Impact of change orders on labor efficiency for mechanical construction.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 125(3), 176–184.
Hanna, A. S., Russell, J. S., Nordheim, E. V., and Bruggink, M. J. (1999b). “Impact of change orders on labor efficiency for electrical construction.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 125(3), 224–232.
Ibbs, C. W., and Allen, W. E. (1995). “Quantitative impacts of project change.” Source Document No. 108, Construction Industry Institute, Univ. of Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex.
Osman, G., III. (2004). “Discussion of ‘Quantitative definition of projects impacted by change orders.’” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 130(4), 611–614.
Ringwald, R. C. (1993). Means heavy construction handbook, Means, Kingston, Mass.
S. Leo Harmonay, Inc. v. Binks Mfg. Co., No. 82 Civ. 6868 (IBC), 597 F. Supplement 1014; filed October 26, 1984.
Singh, R. (2002). “CPM as a tool in claims management.” ACE Int. Trans. of the Annual Meeting, Portland, Ore., CDR141–CDR142.
Stat soft, Inc. (1984–2003). “General regression models.” ⟨http://www.statsoft.com/textbook/stgrm.html⟩ (December 2005).
Thomas, H. R., and Napolitan, C. L. (1995). “Quantitative effects of construction changes on labor productivity.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 121(3), 290–296.
Thomas, H. R., and Oloufa, A. (2001). Negotiating loss of labor efficiency for electrical contractors, The Electrical Contracting Foundation, Bethesda, Md.
U.S. Industries, Inc. v. Blake Construction Co., Case Nos. 80-1581, 80-164 filed in 1982.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
Volume 134Issue 1January 2008
Pages: 128 - 137

History

Received: Oct 24, 2006
Accepted: May 30, 2007
Published online: Jan 1, 2008
Published in print: Jan 2008

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Engy Serag
Assistant Professor, J.R. Filanc Construction Engineering and Management Program, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, San Diego State Univ., San Diego, CA 92108.
Amr Oloufa
Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Central Florida, Orlando, FL 32826.
Linda Malone
Professor, Dept. of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems, Univ. of Central Florida, Orlando, FL 32826.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

Cited by

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share