利益相关者对施工合同“可重复性”的认知

IF 1.8 Q3 MANAGEMENT IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review Pub Date : 2020-03-07 DOI:10.1177/2277975219885285
Murali Jagannathan, V. K. Delhi
{"title":"利益相关者对施工合同“可重复性”的认知","authors":"Murali Jagannathan, V. K. Delhi","doi":"10.1177/2277975219885285","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Disputes in construction projects have become an integral part of the construction process. In addition to reducing their productivity, disputes create mistrust between the involved parties. A variety of reasons that contribute to the occurrence of disputes in construction projects have been discussed in the literature. One among them is the nature of the construction contract that exists between the parties. A review of the existing literature brings to the fore two schools of thought regarding the drafting of construction contracts. While the traditional school considers the contract as those documents that contain inherent incompleteness and hence prone to disputes, the liberal school believes that construction contracts can be drafted in an efficient manner to prevent disputes. In this exploratory research, we conducted semi-structured open-ended interviews with experts in contractual decision making and contract drafting in construction organizations to understand their perspective on contract drafting/redrafting process and to classify them under the respective school of thought. The study reveals some interesting insights about the perceptions and motivations of the contract drafters and the senior management of construction organizations in India, when it comes to drafting dispute-free equitable contract documents. We believe that the findings of our study will pave the way for further research in drafting efficient construction contracts that can be practicable and dispute-resistant in the Indian context.","PeriodicalId":43330,"journal":{"name":"IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review","volume":"9 1","pages":"152 - 161"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2277975219885285","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perceptions of Stakeholders on the ‘Redraftability’ of Construction Contracts\",\"authors\":\"Murali Jagannathan, V. K. Delhi\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/2277975219885285\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Disputes in construction projects have become an integral part of the construction process. In addition to reducing their productivity, disputes create mistrust between the involved parties. A variety of reasons that contribute to the occurrence of disputes in construction projects have been discussed in the literature. One among them is the nature of the construction contract that exists between the parties. A review of the existing literature brings to the fore two schools of thought regarding the drafting of construction contracts. While the traditional school considers the contract as those documents that contain inherent incompleteness and hence prone to disputes, the liberal school believes that construction contracts can be drafted in an efficient manner to prevent disputes. In this exploratory research, we conducted semi-structured open-ended interviews with experts in contractual decision making and contract drafting in construction organizations to understand their perspective on contract drafting/redrafting process and to classify them under the respective school of thought. The study reveals some interesting insights about the perceptions and motivations of the contract drafters and the senior management of construction organizations in India, when it comes to drafting dispute-free equitable contract documents. We believe that the findings of our study will pave the way for further research in drafting efficient construction contracts that can be practicable and dispute-resistant in the Indian context.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43330,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"152 - 161\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2277975219885285\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/2277975219885285\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2277975219885285","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

建设工程纠纷已成为建设过程中不可分割的一部分。争端除了降低生产力外,还造成有关各方之间的不信任。文献中已经讨论了导致建设项目中发生纠纷的各种原因。其中之一是双方之间存在的施工合同的性质。对现有文献的回顾突出了关于建筑合同起草的两个学派。传统学派认为合同是那些固有的不完整性,因此容易引起争议的文件,而自由主义学派则认为,可以以有效的方式起草施工合同,以防止争议。在这项探索性研究中,我们对建筑组织的合同决策和合同起草专家进行了半结构化的开放式访谈,以了解他们对合同起草/重新起草过程的看法,并将他们分为各自的学派。这项研究揭示了一些关于印度建筑组织合同起草人和高级管理层在起草无争议公平合同文件时的看法和动机的有趣见解。我们相信,我们的研究结果将为进一步研究起草有效的建筑合同铺平道路,这些合同在印度的背景下是可行的和抗争议的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Perceptions of Stakeholders on the ‘Redraftability’ of Construction Contracts
Disputes in construction projects have become an integral part of the construction process. In addition to reducing their productivity, disputes create mistrust between the involved parties. A variety of reasons that contribute to the occurrence of disputes in construction projects have been discussed in the literature. One among them is the nature of the construction contract that exists between the parties. A review of the existing literature brings to the fore two schools of thought regarding the drafting of construction contracts. While the traditional school considers the contract as those documents that contain inherent incompleteness and hence prone to disputes, the liberal school believes that construction contracts can be drafted in an efficient manner to prevent disputes. In this exploratory research, we conducted semi-structured open-ended interviews with experts in contractual decision making and contract drafting in construction organizations to understand their perspective on contract drafting/redrafting process and to classify them under the respective school of thought. The study reveals some interesting insights about the perceptions and motivations of the contract drafters and the senior management of construction organizations in India, when it comes to drafting dispute-free equitable contract documents. We believe that the findings of our study will pave the way for further research in drafting efficient construction contracts that can be practicable and dispute-resistant in the Indian context.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
31.20%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
Fintech Innovation Adoption in the Digital Payments Landscape Amidst the Pandemic: Empirical Evidence and Future Outlook Do Tragic Events Make Investors More Pro-social? Evidence from Japan Alliance or Association? Exploring the Effect of Work–Family Balance on Workplace Well-being, and the Mediating Effect of Work Attitudes Do Retail Evolution Theories Explain Wholesalers’ Responses in Emerging Economies? Evidence from a Wholesale Market in Northern India Systematic Review of Green Banking Adoption: Following PRISMA Protocols
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1