Scholarly Papers
Aug 26, 2024

Competence as a Key Factor in Causal Mechanisms of Construction Disputes

Publication: Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Volume 16, Issue 4

Abstract

Construction disputes appear ubiquitous in megaprojects, but, they are undesirable due to their negative consequences which include project cost escalation and project delays. Reducing, or better still eliminating, disputes in projects is a desirable indicator of project performance. Much of the previous research on construction disputes has focused on identifying general sources of construction disputes and has tended to deal with immediate causes and ignored root causes of construction disputes. Better understanding of construction disputes can be achieved by understanding the entire causation mechanism of construction disputes right from the root cause through to the immediate cause. Such an understanding will facilitate efficient approaches to managing disputes. In this paper we present research undertaken to elucidate root causes of important disputes in one case study of a megaproject in a developing country. Secondary data including project reports, contract documents, minutes of meetings, and project communications were collected and analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Using the concept of a mechanism, we reveal a root cause of construction disputes, namely, limited competence of internal project stakeholders. Hence, we put a spotlight on the need to improve competence of construction professionals in the areas of construction contracts, procurement management, contract administration, and project governance. We argue that focus on the preceding areas of competence and deployment of these competences throughout the lifecycle of megaprojects will reduce disputes and improve project performance.

Practical Applications

This paper highlights the mechanism through which significant disputes arose in an infrastructure megaproject. It promotes the idea that avoidance/elimination of the root cause of the dispute can mitigate dispute occurrence and improve overall project performance. The study reveals lack of competence among project delivery stakeholders especially the client, consultant, and contractor as a root cause of construction disputes. The paper demonstrates that improved project performance can be achieved with increased competence of internal project stakeholders not only in the early stages of the project but throughout the project lifecycle.

Get full access to this article

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

Data Availability Statement

Some or all data, models, or code generated or used during the study are proprietary or confidential and may only be provided with restrictions (the client organization asked for anonymity of the project and its stakeholders).

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge, with gratefulness, the scholarship scheme that enabled the research to be undertaken as part of postgraduate studies of the first author.

References

Works Cited

Arcadis. 2021. “2021 global construction disputes report: The road to early resolution.” Accessed April 19, 2024. https://www.cmaanet.org/elearning/2021-global-construction-disputes-report-road-early-resolution.
Bahemuka, A. 2021. “Alternative dispute resolution in the construction industry.” Int. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 10 (3): 80–88. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.ijcem.20211003.03.
Cherry, K. 2023. “The components of attitude, very well mind.” Accessed December 18, 2023. https://www.verywellmind.com/attitudes-how-they-form-change-shape-behavior-2795897.
Chohan, R. 2020. “Opportunistic behavior in industrial marketing relationships.” Accessed January 17, 2024. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1413227/FULLTEXT01.pdf.
Clarke, V., and V. Braun. 2017. “Thematic analysis.” J. Positive Psychol. 12 (3): 297–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613.
Danial, N., and M. S. Misnan. 2023. “Avoiding contract termination: Perspectives on essential skills in road project negotiations.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 15 (1): 05022007. https://doi.org/10.1061/JLADAH.LADR-857.
FIDIC (Fédération Internationale des Ingénieurs—Conseils). 2017. Conditions of contract for construction—Red book. 2nd ed. Geneva: FIDIC.
Flyvbjerg, B. 2014. “What you should know about megaprojects and why: An overview.” Project Manage. J. 45 (2): 6–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.21409.
Garemo, N., S. Matzinger, and R. Palter. 2015 “Megaprojects: The good, the bad, and the better.” Accessed December 26, 2021. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/megaprojects-the-good-the-bad-and-the-better.
Hardjomuljadi, S. 2020. “Use of dispute avoidance and adjudication boards.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 4 (12): 03720004. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000431.
Health and Safety Executive. 2021. “Competence in health and safety.” Accessed April 6, 2022. https://www.hse.gov.uk/competence/what-is-competence.htm.
Hietanen-Kunwald, P., and H. Haapio. 2021. “Effective dispute prevention and resolution through proactive contract design.” J. Strategic Contracting Negotiation 5 (1–2): 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/20555636211016878.
HKA Global Limited. 2020. “Engineering and construction a regional analysis of causation. Lessons learned from claims and disputes.” Accessed April 19, 2024. https://www.hka.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/CRUX-Insight-Engineering-Construction-A-Regional-Analysis-of-Causation.pdf.
Illankoon, I. M. C. S., V. W. Y. Tam, K. N. Le, and K. A. T. O. Ranadewa. 2019. “Causes of disputes, factors affecting dispute resolution and effective alternative dispute resolution for Sri Lankan construction industry.” Int. J. Construct. Manage. 22 (2): 218–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2019.1616415.
IPMA (International Project Management Association). 2006. Nacional competence baseline. Valencia, Spain: Asociacion Espanola de Ingenieria de Proyectos.
Iskandar, S. Hardjomuljadi, and H. Sulistio. 2021. “The most influencing factors on the causes of construction claims and disputes in the EPC contract model of infrastructure projects in Indonesia.” Rev. Int. Geogr. Educ. Online 11 (2): 80–91. https://doi.org/10.33403/rigeo.800441.
Jelodar, M. B., T. W. Yiu, and S. Wilkinson. 2015. “Dispute manifestation and relationship quality in practice.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 8 (1): C4515003. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000171.
Jensen, C. 2017. “Major infrastructure projects: Key front-end issues.” Accessed January 17, 2024. https://www.actuaries.org.uk/system/files/field/document/ICE_Front%20End%20Issues_Web%20Version.pdf.
Kolosky, C. 2024. “Procurement in construction: Strategies, models, and best practices.” Accessed April 19, 2024. https://www.knack.com/blog/blog-procurement-in-construction/.
Koskinen, H. I. 2021. “Horse entrepreneurs and their customers as partners in combating the coronavirus pandemic: A preliminary study of the principal-agent relationship.” In Stakeholder strategies for reducing the impact of global health crises, edited by V. Kumar and G. Malhotra, 99–115. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Kyalisiima, C., A. Tutesigensi, and M. Kayondo. 2022. “Is the competence of internal stakeholders in construction projects an antidote to construction contract disputes?” In Proc., 38th Annual ARCOM Conf., edited by A. Tutesigensi and C. J. Neilson, 104–113. London: Association of Researchers in Construction Management.
Liyanapathirana, D., O. Adeniyi, and P. Rathnasiri. 2024. “Tactical conflict prevention strategies in public–private partnerships: Lessons from experts.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 16 (1): 04523046. https://doi.org/10.1061/JLADAH.LADR-996.
Liyanawatta, T. N., M. Francis, and K. A. T. O. Ranadewa. 2023. “Avoiding construction disputes: A comprehensive framework for pre-contract planning.” Int. J. Construct. Manage. 24 (12): 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2023.2276652.
Mbatha, S. K. 2022. “Causes and impacts of conflicts in construction projects: A viewpoint of Kenya construction industry.” Int. J. Soft Comput. Eng. 10 (5): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijsce.D3485.0510521.
Nabi, M. A., and I. H. El-adaway. 2021. “Understanding disputes in modular construction projects: Key common causes and their associations.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 148 (1): 04021184. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0002208.
Ogburn, M. L., and I. H. El-adaway. 2013. “Biddability, constructability, operability, and environmental checklist: Potential role in reducing conflicts, claims, and disputes.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 6 (1): 05013001. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000135.
Rauzana, A. 2016. “Causes of conflicts and disputes in construction projects.” IOSR J. Mech. Civ. Eng. 13 (5): 44–48. https://doi.org/10.9790/1684-1305064448.
Saunders, M. N. K., P. Lewis, and A. Thornhill. 2019. Research methods for business students. 8th ed. London: Pearson.
Shaikh, H. H., N. Y. Zainun, and S. H. Khahro. 2020. “Claims in construction projects: A comprehensive literature review.” IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 498 (1): 012095. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/498/1/012095.
Stahl, B. N. A., and J. R. King. 2020. “Expanding approaches for research: Understanding and using trustworthiness in qualitative research.” J. Dev. Educ. 44 (1): 26–28.
Tanriverdi, C., G. Atasoy, I. Dikmen, and M. T. Birgonul. 2021. “Causal mapping to explore emergence of construction disputes.” J. Civ. Eng. Manage. 27 (5): 288–302. https://doi.org/10.3846/jcem.2021.14900.
The World Bank. 2018. Procurement guidance: Contract management practice. 1st ed. New York: The World Bank.
The World Bank. 2022. Global Infrastructure Outlook Forecasting infrastructure investment needs and gaps. New York: The World Bank.
Turner, J. R. 2022. “Using principal–steward contracting and scenario planning to manage megaprojects.” Project Manage. J. 53 (1): 8–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/87569728211061836.
Viswanathan, S. K., A. Panwar, S. Kar, R. Lavingiya, and K. N. Jha. 2020. “Causal modeling of disputes in construction projects.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 12 (4): 04520035. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000432.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Volume 16Issue 4November 2024

History

Received: Jan 17, 2024
Accepted: Jun 10, 2024
Published online: Aug 26, 2024
Published in print: Nov 1, 2024
Discussion open until: Jan 26, 2025

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

C. Kyalisiima [email protected]
Civil Engineer, Uganda Electricity Generation Company Limited (UEGCL), Plot 6-9 Okot Close Bukoto, P.O. Box 75831, Kampala, Uganda (corresponding author). Email: [email protected]
A. Tutesigensi, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, School of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.
M. Kayondo, Ph.D.
Head of Research and Business Development, Uganda Electricity Generation Company Limited (UEGCL), Plot 6-9 Okot Close Bukoto, P.O. Box 75831, Kampala, Uganda.
H. E. Mutikanga, Ph.D.
CEO, Uganda Electricity Generation Company Limited (UEGCL), Plot 6-9 Okot Close Bukoto, P.O. Box 75831, Kampala, Uganda.

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.

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