IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/conmgt/v17y1999i6p731-743.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To instruct or not? The engineer's dilemma

Author

Listed:
  • K. Yogeswaran
  • M. M. Kumaraswamy

Abstract

A recent research project explored the sources of relatively higher value and/or more frequent construction claims in civil engineering projects in Hong Kong. Fourteen common sources of claims were cited to seek views from the industry as to the perceived frequencies, magnitudes and avoidabilities of claims from such sources. One of the significant sources was identified as 'instructions not being issued', with reference to the provision in most standard civil engineering contracts that 'the engineer' shall issue necessary instructions for the purposes of completion of the Works. The study reported here focuses on the possible responses of 'the engineer' when the contractor requests instructions/information. Also the study examines the possible generation of construction claims therefrom. Eleven practitioners who were familiar with such matters were issued a questionnaire which described ten typical construction problem scenarios (cases) where contractors may request instructions. The responses are summarized and the basis for reaching each of these decisions is analysed. An example of the eleven detailed responses to one of the cases is presented to demonstrate the divergence of perceptions on each issue and the consequent different recommendations. Strategies to minimize the claims and disputes arising from such scenarios are developed, based on resolving the evident conflicts between the reasons for such divergences.

Suggested Citation

  • K. Yogeswaran & M. M. Kumaraswamy, 1999. "To instruct or not? The engineer's dilemma," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(6), pages 731-743.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:17:y:1999:i:6:p:731-743
    DOI: 10.1080/014461999371079
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/014461999371079
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/014461999371079?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:17:y:1999:i:6:p:731-743. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RCME20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.