Abstract
Construction projects are frequently held in a complex and uncertain nature, alongside claims being unavoidable. Construction projects involve processes that are complex and dynamic which at most result in disputes between the stakeholders. The study investigated the sources of disputes in construction projects in the Mpumalanga Province. The data used in this paper were derived from both primary and secondary sources. The secondary data was collected via a detailed review of related literature. The primary data was collected through a survey questionnaire which was distributed to project participants. Out of the 90 questionnaires sent out, 80 were received back representing 89% response rate. Data received from the questionnaires were analysed using descriptive statistics procedures such as Ms Excel and SPSS software. Findings from the study revealed that payment delays, poor supervision financial incapable of contractors, change of scope, delay in work progress, poor workmanship, incomplete specification design errors, delay in providing information and extension of time were the main sources of construction disputes. Therefore, client should minimise changing scope to avoid cost overrun and extension of time which contribute to dispute. Respondent believed that dispute avoidance strategies such as stakeholders management, alliancing, lean construction and partnering will reduce dispute drastically. Hence, the industry is encouraged to embrace modern management concepts and to avoid the effects of construction disputes such as loss of production, delays and profitability.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Reference
Bvumbwe, C., & Thwala, D. W. (2011). An exploratory study of dispute resolution methods in the South African Construction industry. In International Conference on Information and Finance IPEDR. IACSIT Press Singapore (Vol. 21).
Cakmak, P. I., & Cakmak, E. (2013). An analysis of causes of disputes in the construction industry analytical hierarchy process (AHP). AEI. ASCE, 93–101.
Carnell, N. J. (2005). Causation and delay in construction disputes. (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Diekmann, J. E., & Girard, M. J. (1995). Are contract disputes predictable? ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 121(4), 355–363.
Jannadia, M. O., Assaf, S., Bubshait, A. A., & Naji, A. (2000). Contractual methods for dispute avoidance and resolution (DAR). International Journal of Project Management, 18(1), 41–49.
Kartam, N. A., & Kartam, S. A. (2001). Risk and its management in the Kuwait construction industry: A contractor’s perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 19(6):325–335.
Latham, M. (1994). Constructing the team: Joint review of procurement and contractual arrangement in the United Kingdom Construction Industry (1994).
Love, P., Davis, P., Jefferies, M., Ward, P., Chesworth, B., London, K., & McGeorge, D. (2007). Dispute avoidance and resolution a literature review Report No. 1. Cooperative Research Center for Construction Innovation, 3–62.
Mashwama, N. X., Aigbavboa, C. O., & Thwala, D. W. (2016). Investigation of construction stakeholders’ perception on the effects & cost of construction dispute in Swaziland. Procedia Engineering, 00, 91–99.
Mpumalanga provincial government. Retrieved Nov, 2018 from https://mpumalanga.gov.za.
Ng, S. T., Luu, D. T., Chen., S. E., & Lam, K. C. (2002). Fuzzy membership function of procurement selection criteria. Construction Management and Economics, 20, 285–296.
Semple, C., Hartman, F. T., & Jergeas, G. (1994). Construction claims and disputes: Causes and cost/time overruns. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 120(4), 785–795.
Sinha, M., & Wayal, A. S. (2008). Dispute causation in construction projects. In Second International Conference on Emerging Trends in Engineering (SICETE).
SPSS. (2004). A guide to the processing, analyzing and reporting of (research) data. Wolters-Noordhoff BV: Netherlands.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Professional Development Support Centre & U.S. Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC). (2004). Construction quality management for contractors: Student study guide, (784), 1–22, 2–4, 3–15, 4–6, 5–5, 6–37, 7–5, 8–13, 9–5.
Zack, J. G. (1996). “Risk-sharing” good concept, bad name. Cost Engineering, 38.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Mashwama, N., Thwala, D., Aigbavboa, C. (2021). The Sources of Dispute in Construction Projects in the Mpumalanga Province. In: Ahmed, S.M., Hampton, P., Azhar, S., D. Saul, A. (eds) Collaboration and Integration in Construction, Engineering, Management and Technology. Advances in Science, Technology & Innovation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48465-1_83
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48465-1_83
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-48464-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-48465-1
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)