Textual complexity of standard conditions used in the construction industry

Rameezdeen, Raufdeen; Rodrigo, Anushi

doi:10.5130/ajceb.v13i1.3046

Cited by 15 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, FIDIC revised its standard form five times since its first publication in 1957. Rameezdeen and Rodrigo (2013) showed that clarity has continually improved in each of these new editions. Lack of clarity in contract documents can adversely affect the relationship between the client and the contractor and can even lead to disputes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the improvements to a few clauses, more than 50% of the original and modified clauses are still at the 'very difficult' level of readability, which equates to requiring post-graduate study level to understand. Studies by Rameezdeen and Rodrigo (2013), Ali and Wilkinson (2010), Raj et al (2009) and Bunni (2003) show the majority of FIDIC contract conditions are very difficult to read. Modifications to contact conditions have not brought significant improvements on readability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modifications to standard forms of contract: the impact on readability

Rameezdeen

Rodrigo

2014

CEB

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lack of clarity in contract documents can lead to disputes between contracting parties. Standard form contracts have evolved due to construction business becoming increasingly complex and the difficulty in drafting bespoke conditions of contract for each project. Numerous advantages have been identified in using standard forms of contract. However, clients often modify some clauses in order to include specific requirements for a project. While the consequences of ill-modifications to standard forms have been researched, no study has been done on the impact of these modifications on the clarity and readability of the document. Using 281 modified clauses from large infrastructure projects implemented in Sri Lanka, this study found that on balance modifications generally make the document more difficult to read; 60% of the sample clauses were more difficult to read compared to 40% becoming easier. More than 50% of the original and modified clauses were still at the 'very difficult' level of readability, which requires the equivalent of post-graduate level to understand. The study contends that modifications have not resulted in improved readability. The study highlights the necessity of clear and plain language when modifying contract documents.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modifications to standard forms of contract: the impact on readability

Rameezdeen

Rodrigo

2014

CEB

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This also includes the textual complexity and unnecessary formality in contract wordings of some contract conditions (i.e. FIDIC, 1999 andNEC, 1993) that are very difficult to read, and require at least college-level reading skills to correctly interpret them (Rameezdeen and Rajapakse, 2007;Rameezdeen and Rodrigo, 2013).…”

Section: Propositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is important to emphasise here that lawyers and specialist surveyors are not the primary users of a contract; it is the project parties' ability to capture their meaning which is fundamental for contract performance (Rameezdeen and Rodrigo, 2013).…”

Section: Propositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Institutional Waste within the UK Construction Procurement Context: A Conceptual Framework

Sarhan¹,

Pasquire²,

King³

et al. 2018

EPOJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a broad consensus among social and economic researchers that ‘institutions’ matter. Institutions influence beliefs, norms and actions; thus they shape performance and outcomes. Interestingly, the concept of institutions is not well established in construction economics or management research, specifically in waste-related literature. This paper presents discussions on the impact of imperfect regulations, norms and cultural/cognitive assumptions that exist within the construction procurement context, and how this has translated into the institutionalisation of wasteful behaviours and practices in construction projects. Based on a critical review of extant literature, the ultimate objectives of this study are to: (1) contribute to the overall understanding of waste in construction by suggesting a novel perspective to the generation and persistence of waste in construction projects; (2) demonstrate how the neo-institutional theory, a branch of organizational sociology, can potentially be applied as an analytical lens to deliver a more explicit theory of waste that relates cause and effect within the wider aspects of construction procurement systems and relationships; (3) highlight a number of widely accepted regulations, norms and meanings that impede efficiency and improvement efforts in construction; and (4) formulate propositions on institutional waste in the process of construction procurement that will be fundamental to the future trajectory of this study.

show abstract

“…QSs position outside production has not only hampered their value addition to the project team, but has allowed inefficiencies (termed wastes in lean) in their roles and across the project spectrum. For instance, QSs are not the main users of a contract, however the complexity in which they interpret the onerous document encouraged opportunistic behaviours among parties that leads to severe disputes (Sarhan et al, 2014;Rameezdeen and Rodrigo, 2013).Similarly, how they apportion risk using disclaimer clauses attracts about 8-20% project cost as contingencies (Zaghloul and Hartman 2003). Thus, this creates more rigors that stifle collaboration with a persistent focus on individual party functions, that build more distance among the participants encouraging lots of adversaries (Eriksson, Nilsson and Atkin, 2008).…”

Section: How Qss Position Is Conflicting Collaborative Arrangement Inmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Why Quantity Surveyors Conflict With Collaborative Project Delivery System

Ahmed¹,

Pasquire²,

Emmanuel³

2018

26th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ahmed S.N, Pasquire C., and Manu, E. (2018). "Evaluating why quantity surveyors conflict with collaborative project delivery system" In: Proc. 26 th Annual Conference of the International. Group for Lean Construction (IGLC), González, V.A. (ed.), Chennai, India, pp. 1272-1282 ABSTRACTThe recurring poor performance and lack of collaborative culture in the UK construction industry has been a topic of debate for many years now. This has triggered an industry wide demand for performance improvement and innovation in the construction sector. Several studies over the years have reported and linked these concerns to fragmentation, deep-seated cultural resistance and negative commercial behaviours among project participants. Traditionally, Quantity Surveyors (QSs) within the UK system are popularly known for their commercial management functions i.e., contract advice and cost related roles. But, the lack of evidence on collaborative practice across the commercial roles often performed by the QSs in practice has revealed a separation within the construction model where QSs are formulated outside the core project production team (client, designers, and constructors). This continues with further practical implications like process waste, value loss, conflicts among others. However, recently, there were calls for industry-wide modernisation with an appeal specifically on QSs to create positive link within the value chain as against being a burden to it. Based on a literature review and a case study approach, the study further discovered other commercial factors deterring collaborative practice that is emanating from QSs position outside the production system. These factors among others are: commercial background &training, customer &safeguarding practice, excessive monthly reporting & commercial governance and balancing standards with innovation.

show abstract

Textual complexity of standard conditions used in the construction industry

Cited by 15 publications

References 44 publications

Modifications to standard forms of contract: the impact on readability

Modifications to standard forms of contract: the impact on readability

Institutional Waste within the UK Construction Procurement Context: A Conceptual Framework

Evaluating Why Quantity Surveyors Conflict With Collaborative Project Delivery System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About