Ascertaining the Reasons for Escalation of Disagreements over Extension of Time Assessments from Construction Delay Claims into Disputes

Disputes over delay assessments are costly, persistent, prevalent worldwide, often funded by taxpayers, and negatively impact productivity in the construction sector. The identified academic literature argues that the main causes of the escalation of disagreements over delay assessments from contract claims into disputes (or factors) are objective factors, particularly unavailability and/or inadequacy of relevant project data. However, those findings are not based on comprehensive investigations of all factors involved, employing research methodologies that rely upon real-life project data. This article contributes to the fulfilment of the aforementioned knowledge gap. Published literature and twenty-one case studies were evaluated to identify the factors. The research findings revealed that although data-related issues were often important factors, they were not the main and/or most frequently identified ones. Subjective factors, including manipulation of programme activity completion dates, reliance on biased assumptions when data is unavailable, misinterpretation of material records, and self-serving delay analysis, were the main factors. The findings suggest that the root cause of this issue is the exploitation of systemic flaws, including the unavailability of good/best practice guidance on assessing the impact of delays, deficient contract provisions, inadequate impartiality, divergent priority of interests, unexploited technologies, and the confidential nature of dispute resolution methods.