Forensic delay analysis: An investigation of the reasons for disagreements in timerelated disputes

Construction project delays are widespread and persistent. Disputes frequently occur, and their complexity and value has produced a role for experts specialising in Forensic Delay Analysis (FDA). Previous literature suggests that the main problem (and the main generator of escalated disputes) lies with the insufficiency and/or poor quality of available information. In this study, twelve disputes were examined for their key points of disagreement. These cases indicate that there are, in fact, four distinct factors: namely the availability, validity, and disclosure of relevant information, and the approach taken to its analysis. Insufficiency and poor quality of information was indeed a factor in these disputes, but not the only one; the apparently deliberate lack of transparency, the selective interpretation of information, and the subjective adoption of delay analysis method are at least as important in creating and amplifying the dispute. The resulting interplay between the availability of reliable data, the readiness of actors in providing it, and the conflicting motives behind the way it is analysed by experts results in a zero-sum gamble for the parties seeking the resolution of delays and their consequences. This could be partially or fully avoided by (i) exploiting advances in information technology; (ii) the introduction of agreed contractual delay protocols; and/or (iii) radical changes to the concept of 'ownership' of information. The work presented here is part of a wider study examining the impact of advances in information technology on the more efficient resolution (or even avoidance) of contractual disputes.