BUSINESS AND TRAINING 17
Before a‘ dispute’ becomes a“ dispute”( Part 1)
By
Uwe Putlitz
Each construction project is‘ unique’. This article is the first in a two-part series.
A similar project may have been executed many times before – this can be on a different site, by the same or another group of people, to common specified standards of quality and performance – but achieve results significantly different to those in previous projects. This can result in delays and disagreements about the final quality achieved and / or at an actual cost higher than the initial offer.
‘ Forewarned is forearmed’ is the strap line of the annual HKS Crux Insight Survey Report of‘ common’ project disputes or failures internationally. According to the report, between 15 – 35 % of projects, depending on their complexity, result in claims due to:
• Delayed access to site( sometimes due to late statutory and other approvals).
• Late scope changes.
• Late issue of design information, errors in or incomplete design information.
• Poor contract administration and construction management.
• Poor interpretation of contractual issues, often resulting in cashflow and payment issues.
• Poor subcontractor / supplier management.
• Poor workmanship and latent defects.
• Unforeseen site conditions.
Can we‘ fix’ the process? Yes, for example, by using prefabricated building systems that resemble industrial production lines. The system can be tweaked to eliminate repeat faults and defects, but this only applies to a small sector of the construction industry.
By not dealing with any disagreement promptly before it develops into a dispute, such events will typically demand attention before routine tasks. This can result in emotional stress to all those involved and possibly delaying execution of the works, or – as soon as practical in the project life cycle – create a‘ conflict avoidance triage team’ comprising the employer, the end user( if possible), the architect or engineer, the construction project manager and, appointed for this task only, an independent senior industry practitioner as facilitator to optimally guide the conflict / dispute avoidance or dispute resolution process, if applicable.
In the United Kingdom, a‘ conflict avoidance toolkit’ was published under the auspices of nine principal consultant and national employer organisations around a decade ago. This was created to proactively guide the project implementation process by anticipating events that may lead to failures or disputes by‘ stopping the smoking embers of a dispute by bringing them to the attention of people who can do something about it’.
This can be achieved by: 1. Pre-contract preparation 2. Dispute avoidance( To be discussed in part two) 3. Early intervention( To be discussed in part two) 4. Amicable resolution( To be discussed in part two) 5. Dispute resolution( To be discussed in part two)
The three-step model:
• Step 1: Define the problem. This involves acknowledging the conflict, establishing common ground or goals( such as‘ we both want what is best for the organisation’) and separating the‘ problem’ from the‘ people’.
• Step 2: Explore and evaluate alternatives. This is a‘ diverge’ phase where many alternatives are explored and discussed.
• Step 3: Select the best alternative. This is the‘ converge’ step, where everyone agrees on the best way forward.
Pre-contract preparation Procurement: 1.1 Determine the appropriate method and time required to acquire consulting services:
• At project inception, certain employers appoint only essential core consultants to limit expenditure before a project has formally been given the go-ahead. This may result in avoidable rework later to accommodate specialised skills( typically those of the acoustics and / or landscaping consultant that may significantly influence the final design solution) – most of whom are happy to give such input on condition that they will be appointed when the project is formally given the go-ahead.
Uwe Putlitz is a registered professional Architect and Construction Project Manager, a Fellow of the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors( RICS) and is a visiting lecturer at the School of Construction Economics and Management at the University of the Witwatersrand. Having recently retired as the Chief Executive Officer of the Joint Building Contracts Committee( JBCC) he specialises in the avoidance of construction disputes by way of lectures, technical articles dealing with aspects of contract administration for various industry publications arising from the use of Standardform Contracts including the Federation Internationale des Ingenieurs-Conseils( FIDIC), the General Conditions of Contract( GCC), the JBCC or the New Engineering Contract( NEC) to find an acceptable settlement without resorting to legal processes, where possible.
More info: info @ buildstrat. co. za
“ In the United Kingdom a‘ conflict
avoidance toolkit’ was published under the auspices of nine principal consultant and national employer organisations”
July 2026 Volume 32 I Number 05 www. plumbingafrica. co. za