Claims and Project Performance between Traditional and Alternative Project Delivery Methods

Abstract

Claims and disputes are common in construction projects and the costs associated with these adversarial relationships can reach up to $4–$12 billion per year. While previous studies have indicated that project delivery methods (PDMs) might impact the frequency and severity of claims and disputes in highway projects, none provided any empirical evidence to support this perception, especially as related to the claim types in different project delivery methods. To address this issue and explore the different variables that might affect claims and disputes among many other project performances metrics, this empirical study was initiated. Data were collected by distributing a questionnaire to DOTs across the transportation sector. The data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Results showed that while PDMs, procurement, and contractual methods have no significant impact on the claim and dispute performance, PDMs can impact other factors (e.g., contractor’s performance and trust). These significant findings provide opportunities for further research in other areas such as trust and partnering, which were proven to strategically act as indirect mitigation practices on claim and dispute occurrence in construction projects. The study can also be used by practitioners to further understand the real reasons behind claims and disputes, avoid their triggers, and build a good model of trust for claim and dispute avoidance.