Upload
arleen-fletcher
View
220
Download
5
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Avoiding and Mitigating Delay and Disruption Claims Conflict: Role of
Precontract Negotiation
Presented by
Mansour Ali Al-Zahrani
Author:Ajibade Ayodeji Aibinu
OUTLINE INTRODUCTION
RESEARCH METHOD
DATA ANALYSIS
FINDINGS
CRITIQUES & LIMITATIONS
Q & A
INTRODUCTION Delay and disruption claims often generate
conflict and contract dispute.
Avoiding construction delay climes lead to substantial financial saving projects
Explores the effect of precontract negotiation as a means of avoiding or mitigating delay and disruption claim conflict
Why Delay and Disruption Claims Are Contentious
The complex nature of Delay and Disruption claims
The inconsistency of the available techniques/ methods for quantifying and analyzing delay and disruption claims.
The position of the owner-appointed contractor administratorin the traditional contracting system.
The nature of the conflicts in delay and disruption claims.
Role of Precontract Negotiation in Delay and Disruption Claims
ResolutionSeek to enhance mutual understanding
among parties regarding methodologies, techniques, and procedure for assessing and quantifying anticipated delay and disruption claims.
Seek to improve the quality of information needed for assessing the impact of anticipated delay and disruption
Theoretical Framework and Hypothesis
Primary HypothesisPrecontract Negotiation between the owner
and contractor on the rules of assessment and quantification for anticipated delays would moderate the relationship between the outcome favorability and the intensity of conflict on delay.
Secondary HypothesisHigh precontract negotiation- High perceive
the quality of decision making.High perceive the quality of decision making-
lower the intensity of conflict
RESEARCH METHOD Using data obtained from a questionnaire survey
was adopted to test the research hypotheses.
The constructs of hypothesis were operational zed into measurable indicators.
The items investigated the antecedents of construction conflicts and dispute.
Items developed in form of statements to measure individual construct of the main hypothesis
RESEARCH METHOD Of 200 contractors contacted, 41 responded
representing a response rate of 20.5%.
Three procedure for testing the interaction hypothesis: Multigroup procedureTwo-step construct score procedureProduct indicator approach with (PLS-SEM)
RESEARCH METHOD Product indicator approach with (PLS-SEM)
DATA ANALYSISReliability of constructs
The minimum Cronbach’s alpha value is 0.6Discriminate Validity:
Used Analysis of cross loading.
DATA ANALYSISCorrelation Analysis
Test of Interactive Effect HypothesisEarly participation of parties through
precontract discussion mitigate the parties reaction to unfavorable decision on the claim when they arise during construction
Findings Whether administrator's decision favorable or not the contractor
reported lower intensity of conflicts when there is clear precontrac negotiation and agreement.
Higher levels of precontract negotiation were also associated with higher quality of decision making.
While higher levels of the quality of the decision-making process were associated with a lower intensity of conflict.
CRITIQUES & LIMITATIONS Positive:
1- Article shows the benefit of prcontract negotiation and its importance.
Negative:
1- The number of participants in survey questionnaire is very small and response based on their experience. 2- use many previous research model, scales and statistical analysis that are not clear in his article.
Q & A