No abstract

The time for performance of a project is usually of the essence to the employer and the contractor. This has made it quite imperative for contracting parties to analyse project delays for purposes of making right decisions on potential time and/or cost compensation claims. Over the years, existing delay analysis techniques (DATs) for aiding this decision-making have been helpful but have not succeeded in curbing the high incidence of disputes associated with delay claims resolutions. A major source of the disputes lies with the limitations and capabilities of the techniques in their practical use. Developing a good knowledge of these aspects of the techniques is of paramount importance in understanding the real problematic issues involved and their improvement needs. This paper seeks to develop such knowledge and understanding (as part of a wider research work) via: an evaluation of the most common DATs based on a case study, a review of the key relevant issues often not addressed by the techniques, and the necessary improvements needs. The evaluation confirmed that the various techniques yield different analysis results for the same delay claims scenario, mainly due to their unique application procedures. The issues that are often ignored in the analysis but would also affect delay analysis results are: functionality of the programming software employed for the analysis, resource loading and levelling requirements, resolving concurrent delays, and delay-pacing strategy. Improvement needs by way of incorporating these issues in the analysis and focusing on them in future research work are the key recommendations of the study

Delays and disruption to contractors' progress are a major source of claims and disputes in the construction industry. Often at the heart of the matter in dispute is the question of the extent of each contracting party's responsibility for the project delay. Various delay analysis methodologies have been developed over the years as aids to answering this question. This paper reports on a study into the factors that influence analysts' selection from these methodologies. Eighteen factors were identified through literature review and pilot surveys and then ranked on their relative importance based on data collected in a nation-wide survey of UK construction organisations. Factor analysis was used to reduce the factors into 6 group factors: project characteristics, contractual requirements, characteristics of baseline programme, cost proportionality, timing of the analysis and record availability.

Modern construction projects commonly suffer from delay in their completions. The resolution of time and cost claims consequently flowing from such delays continues to remain a difficult undertaking for all project parties. A common approach often relied on by contractors and their employers (or their representatives) to resolve this matter involves applying various delay analysis techniques, which are all based on construction programmes originally developed for managing the project. However, evidence from literature suggests that the reliability of these techniques in ensuring successful claims resolution are often undermined by the nature and quality of the underlying programme used. As part of a wider research carried out on delay and disruption analysis in practice, this paper reports on an aspect of the study aimed at exploring pre-construction stage programming issues that affect delay claims resolutions. This aspect is based on an in-depth interview with experienced construction planning engineers in the UK, conducted after an initial large-scale survey on delay and disruption techniques usage. Summary of key findings and conclusions include: representative. Active client involvement is however quite important as it would facilitate quick programme approval/acceptance before construction, a necessary requirement for early delay claims settlement, which otherwise are often left unresolved long after the delaying events with the potential of generating into expensive disputes. The study results provide a better understanding of the key issues that need attention if improvements are to be made in delay claim resolutions. Additional research focusing on the testing of these results using a much larger sample and rigorous statistical analysis for generalization purposes would be helpful in advancing the limited knowledge of this subject matter.

No abstract