Predicting construction disputes: an aetiological approach

There is considerable interest in construction disputes among both researchers and practitioners; however, most of that interest is in the techniques used to resolve disputes. Practitioners are understandably interested in efficiency in resolution; human nature perhaps allows them to expect that disputes are inevitable. However, there seems to be little interest among researchers in considering the wider issues associated with disputes, which might allow explanation and prediction. There is little empirical evidence in the literature and anecdote abounds. This paper aims to generate debate by proposing that an aetiological approach to construction disputes is to be welcomed since it may lead to explanation or prediction of construction disputes. The work is theoretical and it is argued that the lack of an empirical base means that there has been little scientific consideration of construction disputes. Although it is commonly accepted that disputes need to be avoided, the absence of any empirical data dictates that structured prediction and avoidance are unlikely. An aetiological approach to construction disputes will help develop a mature and sophisticated research base, which may help industry performance. Prediction allows avoidance or at least informed management action if avoidance is not preferred.