Comparing claims and disputes performance between traditional project delivery method and alternate project delivery methods
Date
2018
Authors
Bashettiyavar, Gautham, author
Mehany, Mohammed S. Hashem M., advisor
Senior, Bolivar, advisor
Switzer, Ralph V., committee member
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Abstract
Claims and disputes are common in construction projects and the costs associated with these adversarial relationships can reach up to $4-12 billion per year. While previous studies have indicated that project delivery methods (PDMs) might impact the frequency and severity of claims and disputes on construction projects, none provided any empirical evidence to support this perception, especially as related to the claim types in different project delivery methods. To address this issue and explore the different variables that might affect claims and disputes among many other project performances metrics, this empirical study was initiated. Data was collected by distributing a questionnaire to Departments of Transportation (DOTs) across the transportation sector. The data was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Results showed that while PDMs, procurement, and contractual methods have no significant impact on the claims and disputes performance, PDMs can impact other factors (e.g. contractor's performance and trust). These significant findings provide opportunities for further research in other areas such as trust and partnering, which were proven to strategically act as indirect mitigation practices to claims and disputes occurrence in construction projects. The research can also be used by practitioners to further understand the real reasons behind claims and disputes, avoid their triggers, and build a good model of trust for claims and disputes avoidance.
Description
Rights Access
Subject
claims and dispute
design bid build
project delivery methods
CM/GC
alternate project delivery methods
design build