Generic Methodology for Analyzing Delay Claims
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 125, Issue 6
Abstract
It is common for a construction project to encounter delays. There are several reasons that can contribute to delaying a project. Analyzing the various causes that contribute to a project's delay is an important task to resolving it. Determining, in a scientific manner, the impact, timing, and the contributing effect of each of those causes to the overall delay should assist in helping the parties settle the delay without litigation. Project participants are becoming more aware of the high costs and risks associated with delay claims and their litigation. Thus, the construction industry needs to develop methodologies and techniques to prevent and more efficiently resolve delay claims. While many practitioners have been following some kind of a methodology for analyzing delay claims, a written exposition of such a methodology is not widely available in the literature. Thus, this paper presents a written exposition of a generic methodology for analyzing delay claims. This methodology has been developed and successfully used, by the writer, in various projects to resolve delay claims. The developed methodology will be illustrated through its application in those projects. Moreover, this methodology shows that while there are several techniques for analyzing delay claims, very few of these can be considered adequate. The use of such an adequate technique is a key in obtaining a fair allocation of the delay responsibility. This paper's methodology utilizes one of these few adequate techniques for analyzing delay claims.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Alkass, S., Mazerolle, M., Tribaldos, E., and Harris, F. (1995). “Computer aided construction delay analysis and claims preparation.” Constr. Mgmt. and Economics, 13(4), 335–352.
2.
Kallo, G. (1996). “The reliability of critical path method (CPM) techniques in the analysis and evaluation of delay claims.” Cost Engrg., 38(5), 35–37.
3.
Kraiem, Z., and Diekmann, J. (1987). “Concurrent delays in construction projects.”J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., ASCE, 113(4), 591–602.
4.
Ritz, G. (1994). Total construction project management. McGraw-Hill, New York.
5.
Schumacher, L. (1996). “An integrated and proactive approach for avoiding delay claims on major capital projects.” Cost Engrg., 38(6), 37–39.
6.
Schumacher, L. ( 1997). “Defusing delay claims.” Civ. Engrg. Mag., 67(3), ASCE, New York, 60–62.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
History
Received: May 9, 1997
Published online: Dec 1, 1999
Published in print: Dec 1999
Authors
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.