Effective wording to improve risk allocation in lump sum contracts

Francis Hartman, Patrick Snelgrove, Rafi Ashrafi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This is the second paper addressing the results of an investigation into the subjective nature of contract interpretation. The first paper presented the findings of the investigation which showed how contracting parties interpret contract clauses differently. This paper reports the testing of a revised Canadian Standard Lump Sum Contract against its predecessor. The intent of this study was to measure the improvement of the wording-not in legal terms, but in terms of what the potential signatory to, or administrator of, the contract understood. The measure, as in the previous study, was the extent to which there was a "meeting of the minds" in interpretation of who was bearing particular risks. Unlike many contracts used today that are written by the owner or its representative, this standard form contract was drafted by a committee representing contractors and consultants, but not owners. An interesting observation was that owners were generally prepared to assume more risk than they perceived was being allocated to them while contractors wanted less risk.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)379-387
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume123
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1997

Fingerprint

Contractors
Bearings (structural)
Risk allocation
Testing
Owners
Contracting
Consultants

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Civil and Structural Engineering
  • Building and Construction
  • Industrial relations
  • Strategy and Management

Cite this

Effective wording to improve risk allocation in lump sum contracts. / Hartman, Francis; Snelgrove, Patrick; Ashrafi, Rafi.

In: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 123, No. 4, 1997, p. 379-387.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{89326e3a4bc04b84a2741819cc86fe8c,
title = "Effective wording to improve risk allocation in lump sum contracts",
abstract = "This is the second paper addressing the results of an investigation into the subjective nature of contract interpretation. The first paper presented the findings of the investigation which showed how contracting parties interpret contract clauses differently. This paper reports the testing of a revised Canadian Standard Lump Sum Contract against its predecessor. The intent of this study was to measure the improvement of the wording-not in legal terms, but in terms of what the potential signatory to, or administrator of, the contract understood. The measure, as in the previous study, was the extent to which there was a {"}meeting of the minds{"} in interpretation of who was bearing particular risks. Unlike many contracts used today that are written by the owner or its representative, this standard form contract was drafted by a committee representing contractors and consultants, but not owners. An interesting observation was that owners were generally prepared to assume more risk than they perceived was being allocated to them while contractors wanted less risk.",
author = "Francis Hartman and Patrick Snelgrove and Rafi Ashrafi",
year = "1997",
doi = "10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1997)123:4(379)",
language = "English",
volume = "123",
pages = "379--387",
journal = "Journal of Construction Engineering and Management - ASCE",
issn = "0733-9364",
publisher = "American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effective wording to improve risk allocation in lump sum contracts

AU - Hartman, Francis

AU - Snelgrove, Patrick

AU - Ashrafi, Rafi

PY - 1997

Y1 - 1997

N2 - This is the second paper addressing the results of an investigation into the subjective nature of contract interpretation. The first paper presented the findings of the investigation which showed how contracting parties interpret contract clauses differently. This paper reports the testing of a revised Canadian Standard Lump Sum Contract against its predecessor. The intent of this study was to measure the improvement of the wording-not in legal terms, but in terms of what the potential signatory to, or administrator of, the contract understood. The measure, as in the previous study, was the extent to which there was a "meeting of the minds" in interpretation of who was bearing particular risks. Unlike many contracts used today that are written by the owner or its representative, this standard form contract was drafted by a committee representing contractors and consultants, but not owners. An interesting observation was that owners were generally prepared to assume more risk than they perceived was being allocated to them while contractors wanted less risk.

AB - This is the second paper addressing the results of an investigation into the subjective nature of contract interpretation. The first paper presented the findings of the investigation which showed how contracting parties interpret contract clauses differently. This paper reports the testing of a revised Canadian Standard Lump Sum Contract against its predecessor. The intent of this study was to measure the improvement of the wording-not in legal terms, but in terms of what the potential signatory to, or administrator of, the contract understood. The measure, as in the previous study, was the extent to which there was a "meeting of the minds" in interpretation of who was bearing particular risks. Unlike many contracts used today that are written by the owner or its representative, this standard form contract was drafted by a committee representing contractors and consultants, but not owners. An interesting observation was that owners were generally prepared to assume more risk than they perceived was being allocated to them while contractors wanted less risk.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0000381332&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0000381332&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1997)123:4(379)

DO - 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1997)123:4(379)

M3 - Article

VL - 123

SP - 379

EP - 387

JO - Journal of Construction Engineering and Management - ASCE

JF - Journal of Construction Engineering and Management - ASCE

SN - 0733-9364

IS - 4

ER -