CONSTRUCTION PROJECT DISPUTES IN THAILAND: THE MAJOR STAKEHOLDERS’ COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVES

Surangkana  Trangkanont

Authors

Surangkana Trangkanont Civil Engineering Program, Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, 90112 Thailand.

Keywords:

Construction disputes, owners, contractors, consultants

Abstract

Disputes in construction projects are inevitable because of conflicts of interest between the project stakeholders. The consequences of disputes bring about inefficient project performance and, to some extent, project failure. This research aims to identify the evolution of construction project disputes and the effective resolutions of dispute settlements in Thailand. Both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies were applied in order to achieve the study’s goals. The qualitative approach of an in-depth interview (IDI) was used to understand the actual practices. The research content validity was accomplished by using the percentage of agreement among expert judgments. Then,the survey quantitative method was applied. The gathered data were analyzed through Kruskal-Wallis H and Mann-Whitney tests in order to scrutinize the different viewpoints among the major stakeholders. The results showed that there were disparate viewpoints of4 root causes of disputes among the stakeholders. These causes consisted of “Contractors’lack of project staff and workers”, “Project delay and cost overrun due to defective drawings”, “Project delay due to MEP works”, and “Owners’ payment delay”. Preferred dispute resolutions were “Negotiation” and “Conciliation”. The findings will enable the stakeholders to understand, protect, and resolve the project disputes and ultimately improve Thai construction productivity.

References

Anderson Jr., L.L. and Polkinghorn, B. (2002). Managingconflict in construction megaprojects: leadershipand third- party principles. Conflict ResolutionQuarterly, 26:167-198.

Bakhary, N.A., Adnan, H., and Ibrahim, A. (2015). Astudy of construction claim management problemsin Malaysia. Procedia Economics and Finance,23:63-70.

Barough, A.S., Shoubi, M.V., and Skardi, M.J.E. (2012).Application of game theory approach in solving theconstruction project conflicts. Procedia Social andBehavioral Sciences, 58:1586-1593.

Boyce, C. and Neale, P. (2006). Conducting In-depthInterviews: A Guide for Designing and ConductingIn-depth Interviews of Evaluation Input. PathfinderInternational, Watertown, MA, USA, 12p.

Cakmak, E. and Cakmak, P. I. (2014). An analysis ofcauses of disputes in the construction industry usinganalytical network process. Procedia Social andBehavioral Sciences, 109:183-187.

Chaphalkar, N.B. and Sandbhor, S.S. (2015). Applicationof neural networks in resolution of disputes forescalation clause using neuro-solution. KSCEJ. Civil Eng., 19:10-16.

Chaphalkar, N.B. and Patil, S.K. (2012). Decision supportsystem for dispute resolution in constructioncontracts. KSCE J. Civil Eng., 16:499-504.

Cheng, M-Y., Tsai, H-C., and Chiu, Y-H. (2009). Fuzzycase-based reasoning for coping with constructiondisputes. Expert Syst. Appl., 36:4106-4113.

Cheung, S-O. (1999). Critical factors affecting the useof alternative dispute resolution processes inconstruction. Int. J. Proj. Manag., 17:189-194.

Jannadia, M. O. , Assaf, S. , Bubshait, A. A. , and Naji, A.(2000). Contractual methods for dispute avoidanceand resolution (ADR). Int. J. Proj. Manag., 18:41-49.

Kassab, M. , Hipel, K. , and Hegazy, T. (2006). Conflictresolution in construction disputes using the graphmodel. J. Constr. Eng. M., 132:1043-1052.

Ng, H.S., Peňa-Mora, F., and Tamaki, T. (2007). Dynamicconflict management in large- scale design andconstruction projects. J. Manage. Eng., 23:52-66.

Olander, S. (2007). Stakeholder impact analysis inconstruction project management. ConstructionManagement and Economics, 25:277-287.

du Preez, O. (2014). Conciliation: A founding element inclaims management. Procedia Social and BehavioralSciences, 109:115-123.

Razali, N.M. and Wah, Y.B. (2011). Power comparisonsof Shapiro-Wilk, Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Lillieforsand Anderson-Darling tests. J. Stat. Mod. Anal.,2:21-33.

Runglertkrengkrai, S. and Engkaninan, S. (1987). Thepattern of managerial behaviour in Thai culture.Asia Pac. J. Manag., 5:8-15.

Suwanrada, W. (2009). Poverty and financial security ofthe elderly in Thailand. Ageing Int., 33:50-61.

Thailand Arbitration Center. (2016). Alternative DisputeResolution - ADR. Available from: http://thac.or.th/index.php/alternative-dispute-resolution. Accesseddate: Sept 8, 2016.

Thorn, D.W. and Deitz, J.C. (1989). Examining contentvalidity through the use of content experts. Occup.Ther. J. Res., 9:334-346.

Vale, L., Silcock, J., and Rawles, J. (1997). Generalpractice: An economic evaluation of thrombolysisin a remote rural community. Brit. Med. J.,314:570-572.

Vargha, A. and Delaney, H.D. (1998). The Kruskal-Wallistest and stochastic homogeneity. J. Educ. Behav.Stat., 23:170-192.

Yusuwan, N.M. and Adnan, H. (2013). Issues associatedwith extension of time ( EoT) claim in Malaysianconstruction industry. Procedia Technology, 9:740-749.

Zaneldin, E.K. (2006). Construction claims in United ArabEmirates: types, causes, and frequency. Int. J. Proj.Manag., 24:453-459