An empirical evaluation of the causes leading to binding dispute resolution mechanisms in the Quebec construction industry

Construction disputes may arise from various situations and have varied consequences throughout the project life cycle. Whilst previous studies examined the leading causes of disputes, there is still a lack of understanding of the differences between the various disputes in terms of severity, probable implications, and outcomes. Specifically, once disputes reach a stage where they must be resolved through binding dispute resolution methods (DRMs), little research has been conducted to understand the impact of these DRMs on project outcomes. The research presented in this paper sought to establish which causes of disputes lead to binding DRMs. A sequential exploratory research design was adopted. First, interviews were conducted with nine construction experts in Quebec, Canada, to evaluate the potential of linking specific causes of disputes with the escalation to binding DRMs. The second phase involved collecting and analysing data from 94 participants through a survey. The findings revealed that unforeseen changes, lack of communication, ambiguities in contract documents, design errors, and work progress delays were the most commonly associated causes of reaching binding DRMs. The paper concluded that alternative approaches such as relational contracts, team integration, and innovative technology and communication tools should be considered to be used as preventative measures.