Search results
1 – 10 of over 22000Nam‐Hyeon Kim, Dong‐Won Sohn and James A. Wall
The first of two exploratory studies investigated the conflict management approaches of 310 South Korean leaders. Each recalled the most recent dispute they had encountered either…
Abstract
The first of two exploratory studies investigated the conflict management approaches of 310 South Korean leaders. Each recalled the most recent dispute they had encountered either between two subordinates or between a subordinate and a person outside the workgroup (i.e., an outsider). Subsequently, they reported the techniques used to manage the dispute. As predicted, the leaders were more assertive in managing subordinate‐subordinate conflicts. Unexpectedly, they also pressed their own subordinates quite forcefully in the subordinate‐outsider disputes. The second study investigated subordinates' interventions in their leaders’ disputes. In these conflicts, subordinates adopted a low‐key shuttle diplomacy; meeting separately with the parties, listening to their opinions, transmitting these to the other side, and calling for each side's empathy and understanding.
Peipei Wang, Peter Fenn and Kun Wang
This paper aims to devise a case-controlled method combined with Bradford Hill criteria for causal inference of contractual disputes in construction projects. It is a genuine…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to devise a case-controlled method combined with Bradford Hill criteria for causal inference of contractual disputes in construction projects. It is a genuine attempt in a systematic method from research design to execution for causal issues where only observational data is available.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors located insufficient top management support as the putative pathogen of construction disputes based on a literature review, an interview and Delphi surveys. A questionnaire survey was then conducted to collect case-controlled data to ensure comparability, in which for each disputed project put in the experimental group, the authors sought for a dispute-free project of similar characteristics. The incidence rates of insufficient top management support in the experimental and control groups were then examined by Bradford Hill criteria as an alternative to the test of intervention effect.
Findings
The association of insufficient top management support and construction disputes was tested to conform with the Bradford Hill criteria with case-controlled data where applicable and logical deduction where statistical tests were not applicable. With a clear, positive, reasonable and statistically significant association, while excluding methodological biases, confounding and chance, the authors reached a causal verdict of insufficient top management support causing contractual disputes.
Originality/value
This paper supports the validity of applying a case-controlled method combined with Bradford Hill criteria in investigating causal issues in project management, especially the verdict of causal inference based on empirical data. In addition, the located root cause of contractual disputes could inform project management personnel with reasoned strategies for dispute avoidance.
Details
Keywords
There has been considerable research into different approaches to workplace dispute resolution in the United States (US), the United Kingdom (UK), and to a lesser extent other…
Abstract
There has been considerable research into different approaches to workplace dispute resolution in the United States (US), the United Kingdom (UK), and to a lesser extent other English-speaking countries. This chapter considers what guidance this research can provide into the practical implications of these different approaches.
One frame of reference for evaluating different approaches to workplace dispute resolution is provided by Budd’s three objectives of the employment relationship: equity, voice and efficiency.
While dispute resolution procedures can contribute to all three objectives, there can be negative consequences for employees who make use of formal workplace dispute resolution procedures. It is desirable that workplace disputes be resolved quickly and informally.
Such an approach places considerable weight on the skills of line managers. Unfortunately, there is evidence of a preference among line managers to replace pragmatic approaches to conflict resolution with a rigid adherence to process and procedure. This is partly due to a lack of skills, but is often compounded by inadequate support from senior management.
While it is important for organisations to have formal workplace dispute resolution procedures, the focus should be on line managers. The role of human resources staff and senior management should primarily be to monitor the dispute resolution system, ensure that it is operating effectively and deal with any emerging issues. They should ensure appropriate training is in place and provide appropriate support to line managers. Only when line managers have failed to resolve disputes should they become directly involved.
Details
Keywords
Christopher Amoah and Hlatshwayo Nkosazana
Contract risk management has become a critical mission, as contract issues may lead to a loss of vast amounts of money to parties involved or cause project failure. This study…
Abstract
Purpose
Contract risk management has become a critical mission, as contract issues may lead to a loss of vast amounts of money to parties involved or cause project failure. This study sought to identify effective management strategies to mitigate construction contract issues that might emerge during construction.
Design/methodology/approach
A quantitative research approach was adopted for the study. Structured questionnaires made up of close-ended questions were distributed to construction professionals in South Africa via the SurveyMonkey platform. The data were then analysed using descriptive statistics.
Findings
The findings indicate that the critical sources of contract-related disputes are ambiguous definitions of the contract parties' scope of their rights and obligations, lack of precise arrangements regarding the calculation of contractual penalties for failure to meet the deadline, lack of detailed specification of the works and specific milestones, lack of provisions regulating changes to the project documentation during the construction stage, an excessive amount of contractual penalties on contractor's side and lack of provisions regarding the rules of performing additional and replacement works and their settlement. However, for these disputes to be effectively managed, strategies such as reduction uncertainties in project's phases, setting up contingency plans, construction guarantee, extension of time claims, payment guarantee, retention and escalation clause should be implemented by the parties involved.
Research limitations/implications
Even though the empirical study focused on construction professionals in South Africa, the findings could be applied to other countries outside of South Africa.
Practical implications
To effectively manage and prevent contract disputes from averting project failures and losses to parties involved in the contract, construction professionals need to be aware of strategies that must be implemented before and during the project execution. If well implemented, these strategies will help a construction project be successful and experience fewer contractual disputes.
Originality/value
The study has identified the knowledge gap concerning suitable contract risk management strategies available for implementation to effectively prevent any contract parties from losing money, time and project failure.
Details
Keywords
Zalailah Salleh and Jenny Stewart
This paper aims to report the findings of semi‐structured interviews with management, external auditors and audit committee members in Malaysia concerning the role of the audit…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to report the findings of semi‐structured interviews with management, external auditors and audit committee members in Malaysia concerning the role of the audit committee in resolving auditor‐client disagreements.
Design/methodology/approach
An exploratory case study method was applied in seven publicly listed companies in Malaysia. In each company interviews were conducted with an audit committee chair/member, the finance manager/CFO and the external auditor.
Findings
The study finds that, when the issue is very material, the audit committee plays a mediating role as a third‐party intermediary who provides assistance to resolve the dispute. The authority of the committee to act as a mediator comes from its oversight responsibilities, its understanding and awareness of possible issues and the members' accounting and business expertise. Mediation techniques used include controlling the agenda, gathering information, advising and solving problems. With two exceptions, the interviews indicate that the audit committee does not take sides when helping to resolve a dispute. The outcome from the mediation process is generally a compromise solution.
Research limitations/implications
The study is based on 21 interviews undertaken in Malaysia. Hence, the findings may not be generalizable to other cultures and jurisdictions. Further, while a number of mediation techniques used by audit committees are identified, the paper does not examine in‐depth the mediation processes used in resolving disagreements.
Originality/value
The study extends the auditor‐client negotiation literature by examining whether the audit committee plays a mediating role to help resolve disagreements. The findings demonstrate that audit committee effectiveness can extend beyond a pure oversight role to more active involvement in resolving contentious accounting issues.
Details
Keywords
It is necessary and useful to differentiate destructive from constructive conflict and avoidable from necessary claims; and also to minimize disputes arising from unresolved…
Abstract
It is necessary and useful to differentiate destructive from constructive conflict and avoidable from necessary claims; and also to minimize disputes arising from unresolved conflict and claims in construction projects. This paper analyses such needs and proposes means of meeting them through an appropriate classification of construction claims; an estimation of their relative significance in terms of magnitude and frequency; and an identification of the proximate and root causes of the significant claims. A hierarchy of such claims, proximate and root causes is presented, based mainly on data collected from 61 projects and on 46 responses to questionnaires in Hong Kong. Measures of the relative significance of the claims categories are also presented. The results are reinforced by observations from parallel studies in Hong Kong and elsewhere, as well as from the literature. Strategies are suggested to avoid the avoidable and mitigate the unavoidable or unavoided claims, through controlling the controllable causes. Management focus is also recommended on controlling the causes of those categories of claims and disputes that are seen to be significant in terms of higher impact and/or probability of occurrence.
Details
Keywords
This chapter explores the adoption and implementation of a conflict management system (CMS) in a hospital setting. In particular, it uncovers the different motivations and…
Abstract
Purpose
This chapter explores the adoption and implementation of a conflict management system (CMS) in a hospital setting. In particular, it uncovers the different motivations and challenges associated with a CMS across various stakeholders within the organization.
Methodology/approach
The chapter is based on qualitative research conducted in a large American hospital that adopted and implemented a CMS over the course of 15 months. The author conducted extensive interviews with stakeholders across the organization, including top management, union leaders, middle managers, clinicians, and frontline staff. Findings are also based on an array of observations, including stakeholder meetings and conflict management sessions.
Findings
The case study demonstrates the centrality of underexplored, generalizable, and industry-specific pressures that may lead organizations to reconsider their use of traditional dispute resolution practices and to institute a CMS. It also highlights the inherent organizational ambivalence toward the design and adoption, initiation and implementation, and routine use of a CMS and it documents the different types of outcomes delivered to various stakeholders.
Originality/value
The chapter provides a nuanced portrait of the antecedents to and consequences of the transformation of conflict management within one organization. It contributes to the existing body of research exploring the 30-year rise of alternative dispute resolution and CMSs in a growing proportion of firms in the United States. The use of an in-depth case-study method to examine this CMS experience offers a number of important insights, particularly regarding different stakeholder motivations and outcomes.
Details
Keywords
MICHAEL P. O'REILLY and MICHAEL J. MAWDESLEY
Disputes frequently occur on engineering and construction projects. In this paper it is argued that these disputes need to be evaluated and managed, with proper attention being…
Abstract
Disputes frequently occur on engineering and construction projects. In this paper it is argued that these disputes need to be evaluated and managed, with proper attention being paid to planning of time and money. Since the way in which dispute management is approached will depend on the perceived self‐interest of the parties, it is imperative that disputants have a sensible measure of their self‐interest. ‘Traditional’ probabilistic risk assessment techniques are shown to be of assistance and can be used to compute appropriate dispute management strategies. By way of example, a Monte Carlo simulation of a dispute is performed and discussed.
Details
Keywords
Fodhla McGrane, John Wilson and Tommy Cammock
Leaders are challenged with the efficient and effective management of their own and their employees’ disputes. These are often managed inadequately using “fight”, “flight”, or…
Abstract
Purpose
Leaders are challenged with the efficient and effective management of their own and their employees’ disputes. These are often managed inadequately using “fight”, “flight”, or management intervention. This paper aims to present the findings of a study into an effective alternative, “one‐to‐one dispute resolution”. The method involves two employees resolving their dispute through face‐to‐face communication and without direct intervention by management.
Design/methodology/approach
Using the Critical Incident Technique, incidents of one‐to‐one dispute resolution (n =249) were reported by 88 employees. The contents were analysed, and skill‐related findings were validated using a questionnaire (n =106).
Findings
The findings are presented in a descriptive model of the skilful process of one‐to‐one dispute resolution. The model is built on eight skill‐sets that were central to the dispute resolution process.
Research limitations/implications
How and when to effectively coach employees in the use of one‐to‐one dispute resolution, and the resulting personal and organisational outcomes, need to be examined. In addition, research into the practical application of the model, and in specific organisational contexts, is required.
Practical implications
The study highlights the potential for more employees (including both the leaders and the led) to effectively “face” their own disputes without using “fight” or “flight”. It challenges those leaders, who often act as third‐party interveners, instead to coach their employees in the one‐to‐one resolution of disputes, while modelling the method themselves.
Originality/value
Employees are offered a research‐based model of dispute resolution that differs from problematic models in the dispute resolution literature and skills‐training programs. A workable alternative to the methods of fight, flight and intervention is provided.
Details
Keywords
Edwin H.W. Chan and Henry C.H. Suen
Unfamiliar with the Chinese culture and ways of doing business, foreign architects/engineers/contractors (AEC) firms will encounter differences with the local parties. With…
Abstract
Purpose
Unfamiliar with the Chinese culture and ways of doing business, foreign architects/engineers/contractors (AEC) firms will encounter differences with the local parties. With reference to the characteristics of Chinese culture on disputes, this paper studies the problem areas of dispute and of resolving disputes in international construction projects in China. The objectives are to: examine the fundamentals of Chinese culture and ways of doing business; examine the characteristics of international projects and investigate any differences in the dispute problems arising from China International Projects; identify the most popular dispute resolution mechanism(s) for international projects in China; and recommend possible ways to reduce and resolve disputes of these projects.
Design/methodology/approach
After literature review, a questionnaire was designed for face‐to‐face interviews with 40 practitioners to collect their opinions.
Findings
The results show that the problem areas giving rise to disputes are mainly related to contractual matters. To reflect the characteristics of international projects in China, cultural and legal matters are also found to be the sources of problem. Arbitration is the most popular method, after negotiation, for resolving disputes in international construction projects in China.
Research limitations/implications
The number of interviewees in this study could be improved and further study could include experts in Mainland China.
Originality/value
There is not much literature on dispute resolution management for international construction projects in China, with particular reference to cultural differences. This paper offers an invaluable reference for those foreign AEC firms interested in joining international projects in China.
Details