Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Selecting the Appropriate Method for Resolving Construction Disputes in Iran

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One of the most important issues in dispute resolution is deciding which method or methods are most appropriate for a particular dispute. The purpose of this study is to identify appropriate dispute resolution methods based on the source of construction disputes to help contractors and owners to choose the most effective resolution method for the disputes. Previous studies addressing appropriate dispute resolution methods have compared various methods, but this research paid attention that different problems require different solutions and takes its point of departure by introducing appropriate dispute resolution methods based on their sources thus increasing the quality and effectiveness of the dispute resolution process. Qualitative data were collected using semi-structured interviews with 30 experts from five construction groups in Iran by applying a purposive sampling method. Qualitative content analysis and inductive approach were used to analyze the data. Furthermore, Maxqda software was used to manage and organize complete interview transcripts and facilitate the data analysis process. This research has identified four main sources of disputes in the construction industry namely; contractual, owner behavioral, contractor behavioral, and uncertainty sources. The research finding suggests that the selection of appropriate dispute resolution based on the type of disputes could enhance success in resolving disputes, perhaps without having to resort to Arbitration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In Iran, this is the Management and Planning Organization.

References

  • AAA (2004) Glossary of dispute resolution terms. American Arbitration Association, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Acharya NK, Dai Lee Y, Man Im H (2006) Conflicting factors in construction projects: korean perspective. Eng Constr Archit Manag 13(6):543–566. https://doi.org/10.1108/09699980610712364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ASFE. (1988). Alternative dispute resolution for the construction industry. Associated soil and foundation engineers published by the association of engineering firms practicing in the geosciences. Silver Springs, MD: Author

  • Barnett RS (1997) Alternate dispute resolution: a growth industry. Build Des Constr 38(3):44

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman GS (1995) Facilitated negotiation: an effective ADR technique. Dispute Resolut J 50:18–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun J (1998) Arbitration-promises made, promises broken. Public Manag 80:9–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooker P, Lavers A (1997) Perceptions of alternative dispute resolution as constraints upon its use in the UK construction industry. Constr Manag Econ 15(6):519–526

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown HJ, Marriott AL (2018) ADR principles and practice. Sweet & Maxwell, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunet EJ, Craver CB (2001) Alternative dispute resolution: the advocate’s perspective. Lexis Nexis Matthew Bender, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmichael DG (2002) Disputes and international projects. CRC Press

  • Chaphalkar NB, Patil SK (2012) Decision support system for dispute resolution in construction contracts. KSCE J Civ Eng 16(4):499–504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-012-1303-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaphalkar NB, Iyer KC, Patil SK (2015) Prediction of outcome of construction dispute claims using multilayer perceptron neural network model. Int J Proj Manag 33(8):1827–1835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.09.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheung SO, Pang KHY (2012) Anatomy of construction disputes. J Constr Eng Manag 139(1):15–23. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheung S, Tam C, Ndekugri I, Harris F (2000) Factors affecting clients’ project dispute resolution satisfaction in Hong Kong. Constr Manag Econ 18(3):281–294

    Google Scholar 

  • Chong HY, Rosli MZ (2009) The behaviour of dispute resolution methods in Malaysian construction industry. In: Industrial engineering and engineering management, 2009. IEEM 2009. IEEE international conference on (pp. 643–647). IEEE. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEM.2009.5373253

  • CII (1995) Dispute prevention and resolution techniques in the construction industry. Prepared by the dispute prevention and resolution research team, Construction industry institute, research summary 23–1, The University of Texas at Austin, Texas

  • Colosi, T. (1999). A core model of negotiation. Negotiation Readings, Exercises, and Cases, 313–319.

  • Coulson R (1986) Business Arbitration–what you need to know. American Arbitration Association, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox RK (1997) Managing change orders and claims. J Manag Eng 13(1):24–29. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(1997)13:1(24)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronin-Harris C (1995) Mainstreaming: systematizing corporate use of ADR. Alb L Rev 59:847

    Google Scholar 

  • Currie OA, Robey RG (1988) Winning strategies in construction negotiations, Arbitration, and litigation. Constr Contracts Litig 911–960

  • Cushman RF, Carter JD, Gorman PJ, Coppi DF (2001) Construction disputes: representing the contractor. Aspen Publishers Online

  • Dawson B (2007) Scope for improvement: a survey of pressure points in Australian construction and infrastructure projects. Blake Dawson Waldron Lawyers, Sydney

    Google Scholar 

  • DiDonato L (1993) Alternate methods to resolve contract disputes: Approaches to effective prevention. Am Assoc Cost Eng

  • Diekmann JE, Nelson MC (1985) Construction claims: frequency and severity. J Constr Eng Manag 111:74–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellison SD, Miller DW (1995) Beyond ADR: working toward synergistic strategic partnership. J Manag Eng 11(6):44–54. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(1995)11:6(44)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdis E, Ozdemir SA (2013) Analysis of technical specification-based disputes in construction industry. KSCE J Civ Eng 17(7):1541–1550. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-013-0016-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenn P, Davies E, O’Shea M (1998) Dispute resolution and conflict management in construction: an international review. Routledge, Taylor & Francis

    Google Scholar 

  • Gad GM (2012) Effect of culture, risk, and trust on the selection of dispute resolution methods in international construction contracts. Grad Theses Dissertations 1232

  • Gad GM, Shane JS (2017) Culture-risk-trust model for dispute-resolution method selection in international construction contracts. J Leg Aff Dispute Resolut Eng Const 9(4):

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillie P, Goetz P, Muller F, Feinberg KR (1991) Using mediation to resolve construction disputes. Altern Dispute Resolut Constr Ind 153–210

  • Glasner K (2000) Contract disputes: the role of ADR. Dispute Resolut J 55(3):50

    Google Scholar 

  • Groton JP (1997) ADR in the Construction Industry. Dispute Resolut J 52:48–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Groton JP, Blumenfeld A, Ratterman D (2005) How to keep your project out of litigation, Arbitration, and even mediation. In: CII annual conference-leadership of tomorrow: Bridging the Gap Grapevine, Texas

  • Harmon KM (2003) Resolution of construction disputes: a review of current methodologies. Leadersh Manag Eng 3(4):187–201. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)(2003)3:4(187)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartman F, Snelgrove P (1996) Risk allocation in lump-sum contracts-concept of latent dispute. J Constr Eng Manag 122(3):291–296

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasheminasab S, Mortaheb M (2014) Causes of common and frequent claims in oil, gas and petrochemical projects of Iran. KSCE J Civ Eng 18(5):1270–1278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-014-0422-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hibberd P, Newman P (1999) ADR and adjudication in construction disputes. Wiley-Blackwell, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoctor D (1989) Techniques for resolution of major construction contract disputes. Public Works Fortn 123(9):26–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Jahren CT, Dammeier BF (1990) Investigation into construction disputes. J Manag Eng 6(1):39–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Keil JH (1999) “Hybrid ADR” in the construction industry. Dispute Resolut J 54(3):14–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumaraswamy MM (1997) Common categories and causes of construction claims. Constr Law J 13:21–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumaraswamy MM, Yogeswaran K (1998) Significant sources of construction claims. Int Constr Law Rev 15:144–160

    Google Scholar 

  • LTSF (2013) The ninth annual report of the LTSF. Litigation trends survey findings. Fulbright and jaworski L.L.pp. From: www.fulbright.com

  • Lu W, Zhang L, Pan J (2015) Identification and analyses of hidden transaction costs in project dispute resolutions. Int J Proj Manag 33(3):711–718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.08.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyons J (1985) Arbitration: the slower, more expensive alternative?. Am Law 107

  • Macneil IR (1974) Restatement (second) of contracts and presentiation. Va Law Rev. https://doi.org/10.2307/1072414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menassa CC (2009) Quantitative framework to evaluate alternative dispute resolution investments in architecture engineering and construction projects using option and real option theory. ProQuest LLC. 789 east eisenhower parkway, PO Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106

  • Mitkus S, Mitkus T (2014) Causes of conflicts in a construction industry: a communicational approach. Procedia-Social Behav Sci 110:777–786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.922

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitropoulos P, Howell G (2001) Model for understanding, preventing, and resolving project disputes. J Constr Eng Manag 127(3):223–231. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)(2001)127:3(223)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohd Danuri MS, Hussain SM, Suhaimi M, Mustaffa NE, Jaafar MS (2010) Growth of dispute avoidance procedure in the construction industry: a revisit and new perspectives. Const LJ 26(5):347–361

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohd Danuri MS, Mohd Ishan Z, Mustaffa NE, Abd-Karim SB, Mohamed O, A-Rahmin , RA (2015) Dispute avoidance procedure: observing the influence of legal culture towards a workable legal system. Pertan J Soc Sci Humanit 23(2):509–535

    Google Scholar 

  • MPO (2000) Aeinnâmehe ravesh kâre shurâye fani ostân [Procedural Regulations for Technical Council of Provinces]. Circular No.102/1315-51/213, 31 May 2000. Management and Planning Organization, Tehran

  • MPO (2007) Nezâmeh fani v egrâye kashvar [Country Technical and executive system], Circular No.ه 3497ت/42339-11 July 2006. Management and Planning Organization Tehran. http://tec.mporg.ir/Portal/View/Page.aspx?PageId=24cddfab-d2f8-4ff9-a473-2176d7a24686

  • Nelson S (2003) Advanced legal concepts-CE 395U.3 class notes. University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuman WL (2005) Social research methods: quantitative and qualitative approaches, vol 13. Allyn and Bacon, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Ock JH, Han SH (2003) Lessons learned from rigid conflict resolution in an organization: construction conflict case study. J Manag Eng 19(2):83–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Ojiako U, Chipulu M, Marshall A, Williams T (2017) An examination of the ‘rule of law’and ‘justice’implications in online dispute resolution in construction projects. Int J Proj Manag 36:301–316

    Google Scholar 

  • Omoto T, Kobayashi K, Onishi M (2002) Bargaining model of construction dispute resolution. In: Systems, man and cybernetics, 2002 IEEE international conference on Vol. 7, pp. 6-pp. IEEE

  • Park CY, Han SH, Lee KW, Lee YM (2017) Analyzing drivers of conflict in energy infrastructure projects: empirical case study of natural gas pipeline sectors. Sustainability 9(11):2031. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9112031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pena-Mora F, Sosa CE, McCone DS (2003) Introduction to construction dispute resolution. Prentice Hall. https://doi.org/10.7916/D8CZ3CTJ

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peña-Mora F, Tamaki T (2001) Effect of delivery systems on collaborative negotiations for large-scale infrastructure projects. J Manag Eng 17(2):105–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Qu Y, Cheung SO (2013) Experimental evaluation of logrolling as an effective mediating tactic in construction project management. Int J Proj Manag 31(5):775–790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.05.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reuben RC (1996) Lawyer turns peacemaker. ABAJ 82:54

    Google Scholar 

  • Richter IE (2000) The project neutral: neutralizing risk, maintaining relationships and watching the bottom line. Constr Bus Rev 8(2):52–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross D (n.d.) Construction disputes resolution. From http://www.layngross.com

  • Rubin RA, Fairweather V, Guy SD (1999) Construction claims: prevention and resolution. Wiley, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Saeb A (2019) Enhancement of dispute resolution mechanism in the iranian construction industry. Doctoral thesis. University of Malaya

  • Saeb A, Mohameda O, Danuri MM, Zakariac N (2018) Critical factors for selecting a neutral to support alternative dispute resolution methods in the construction industry. Civ Eng J 4(1):11–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Saeb A, Mohamed O, Danuri MSM, Zakaria N (2018b) Development of alternative dispute resolution in the Iranian construction industry. Malays Constr Res J (MCRJ) 25

  • Sander FE, Rozdeiczer L (2006) Matching cases and dispute resolution procedures: detailed analysis leading to a mediation-centered approach. Harv Negot L Rev 11:1

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders MN, Saunders M, Lewis P, Thornhill A (2011) Research methods for business students, 5/e. Pearson Education India, Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Shadbolt RA (1999) Resolution of construction disputes by disputes review boards. Int Constr Law Rev 16:101–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Shin KCK (2000) Identification of critical dispute characteristics (CDCs) during construction project operations (Doctoral dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology)

  • Song X (2013) The application of insurance as a risk management tool for alternative dispute resolution (ADR) implementation in construction disputes (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University)

  • Sourdin TM (2006) Legislating for alternative dispute resolution: a guide for government policy makers and legal drafters

  • Steen RH, MacPherson RJ (2000) Resolving construction disputes out of court through ADR. J Prop Manag 65(5):58–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Stipanowich T (1987) Arbitration and the multiparty dispute: the search for workable solutions. Iowa Law Rev 72:473

    Google Scholar 

  • Storskrubb E (2016) Alternative dispute resolution in the EU: regulatory challenges. Euro Rev Priv Law 24(1):7–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Sykes J (1996) Claims and disputes in construction. Constr Law J 12(1):3–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas HR, Smith GR, Mellott RE (1994) Interpretation of construction contracts. J Constr Eng Manag 120(2):321–336

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson PJ, Sanders SR (1998) Peer-reviewed paper: partnering continuum. J Manag Eng 14(5):73–78. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(1998)14:5(73)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trantina TL (2003) An attorney's guide to alternative dispute resolution (ADR):" ADR 1.01"

  • Treacy TB (1995) Use of alternative dispute resolution in the construction industry. J Manag Eng 11(1):58–63. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(1995)11:1(58)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trochim WM, Donnelly JP (2001) Research methods knowledge base. http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/sampnon.php

  • Vidogah W, Ndekugri I (1998) Improving the management of claims on construction contracts: consultant’s perspective. Constr Manag Econ 16(3):363–372

    Google Scholar 

  • Vorster MC (1993) Dispute prevention and resolution. Construction Industry Institute

  • Ware SJ (2001) Alternative dispute resolution (Contributions in American History). West Group. ISBN

  • Williamson O (1979) Transaction cost economics: the governance of contractual relations. J Law Econ 22(2):233–261

    Google Scholar 

  • Xinhua H (2010). A framework of dispute avoidance and resolution of construction project management. Paper presented at the management and service science (MASS), 24–26 Aug 2010 international conference on. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMSS.2010.5577879

  • Yousefi S (2009) Attitude-based strategic and tactical negotiations for conflict resolution in (Doctoral dissertation, University of Waterloo)

  • Yousefi S, Hipel KW, Hegazy T (2010) Attitude-based strategic negotiation for conflict management in construction projects. Proj Manag J 41(4):99–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Zack JG (1995) Practical dispute management. Cost Engineering-Morgantown 37(12):55–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Zack JG (1997) Claims prevention: offense versus defense. Cost Engineering-Morgantown 39(7):23–27

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fanavaran Jeghato Co.,, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran

    A. Saeb

  2. Faculty of Built Environment, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

    M. S. Mohd Danuri & O. Mohamed

Authors
  1. A. Saeb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. S. Mohd Danuri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. O. Mohamed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Saeb.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Saeb, A., Mohd Danuri, M.S. & Mohamed, O. Selecting the Appropriate Method for Resolving Construction Disputes in Iran. Iran J Sci Technol Trans Civ Eng 45, 2017–2033 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-020-00553-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-020-00553-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation