ARCOM

Search or browse again.

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 10 results ...

Abedmousa, M (2023) Reframing construction labour productivity in a colonisation context: the West Bank as an example, Unpublished PhD Thesis, , University of Westminster.

Basha, M (2021) Intra-sector firm performance and its determinants in the UK construction industry, Unpublished PhD Thesis, , University of Westminster.

Bowes, D C (2020) An aspirations-led capabilities approach to women's career pathways in quantity surveying, Unpublished PhD Thesis, Department of Organisations, Economy and Society, University of Westminster.

Haddadin, K H (2003) Cultural and institutional barriers to the take-up of construction management in Jordan, Unpublished PhD Thesis, , University of Westminster.

Holborough, A M (2015) Ethnicity, education and the transition to the construction labour market: developing an equality framework using a capability approach, Unpublished PhD Thesis, Business School, University of Westminster.

K'Akumu, O A (2010) The enabling environment for artisanal dimension stone in Nairobi, Kenya, Unpublished PhD Thesis, Westminster Business School, University of Westminster.

McLean, W (2018) Technological innovation in architecture: the role of the aberrant practitioner, Unpublished PhD Thesis, School of Architecture and Cities, University of Westminster.

Michielsens, E (2016) Contextualising diversity management: challenging the effectiveness of the business case, Unpublished PhD Thesis, Westminster Business School, University of Westminster.

Ogunkah, I (2015) Rethinking low-cost green building material selection process in the design of low-impact green housing developments, Unpublished PhD Thesis, Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, University of Westminster.

Sinclair, S (2016) Designing + (dis)assembling disputes: an ethnography of disputes and lawyers in the construction industry, Unpublished PhD Thesis, Law School, University of Westminster.

• Type: Thesis
• Keywords: dispute resolution; ethnography; actor-network theory; relational contract theory
• ISBN/ISSN:
• URL: https://westminsterresearch.westminster.ac.uk/item/9x1qy/designing-dis-assembling-disputes-an-ethnography-of-disputes-lawyers-in-the-construction-industry
• Abstract:
  The UK construction industry is notorious for the sheer amount of disputes which are likely to arise on each building and engineering project. Despite numerous creative attempts at "dispute avoidance" and "dispute resolution", this industry is still plagued with these costly disputes. Whilst both academic literature and professional practices have investigated the causes of disputes and the mechanisms for avoidance/resolution of these disputes, neither has studied in any detail the nature of the construction disputes and why they develop as they do once a construction lawyer is engaged. Accordingly, this research explores the question of what influences the outcome of a construction dispute and to what extent do construction lawyers control or direct this outcome? The research approach was ethnographic. Fieldwork took place at a leading construction law firm in London over 18 months. The primary focus was participant observation in all of the firm’s activities. In addition, a database was compiled from the firm’s files and archives, thus providing information for quantitative analysis. The basis of the theoretical framework, and indeed the research method, was the Actor‐Network Theory (ANT). As such, this research viewed a dispute as a set of associations – an entity which takes form and acquires its attributes as a result of its relations with other entities. This viewpoint is aligned with relational contract theories, which in turn provides a unified platform for exploring the disputes. The research investigated the entities and events which appeared to influence the dispute identity, shape and outcome. With regard to a dispute trajectory, the research took as its starting point that a dispute follows the transformation of "naming, blaming, claiming…", as identified by Felstiner, Abel and Sarat in 1980. The research found that construction disputes generally materialise and develop prior to any one of the parties approaching a lawyer. Once the lawyer is engaged, we see the reverse of the trajectory "naming, blaming, claiming…" this being: "claiming, blaming, naming…" The lawyers’ role is to identify or name (or rename) the dispute in the best possible light for their client in order to achieve the desired outcome – the development of which is akin to the design process. The transformation of a dispute and the reverse trajectory is by no means linear, but rather, iterative and spatial as it requires alliances, dependencies and contingencies to assemble and take the shape it does. The research concludes that construction disputes are rarely ever completely "resolved" as such. Whilst an independent third party may hand down a judgment, or the parties may reach a settlement agreement, this state is only temporal. Some construction disputes dissipate whist others reach a state of hibernation for a period of time only to pick up momentum and energy some years later. Accordingly, this research suggests that the concept of "dispute resolution" does not exist in the UK construction industry. The ultimate goal should be for parties to reach this ultimate and perpetual state of equilibrium as quickly and as cost effectively as possible: "dispute dissolution", the slowing down of the dispute’s momentum. Rather than focusing on the design and assemblage of the dispute, the lawyers’ role therein is, or should be, to assist with the "disassembling" of the dispute.