paraphrasing some paragraphs
During the past two decades, serious disputes concerning construction contracts have become increasingly common on construction projects in Saudi Arabia [1, 2]. It is common practice for designers, contractors and owners to negotiate small and uncomplicated disputes, but larger and more complex ones frequently hinder the project through involvement with lengthy legal issues. Typically, if the parties cannot reach a resolution themselves, expensive, time-consuming legal procedures begin, which severely affects all the participants. Disputes are a reality in every construction project. Without the means to address them, minor issues can fester and grow, with crippling consequences for project participants. The rising cost, delay and risk of litigation in construction disputes has prompted the construction industry to look for new and more efficient ways to resolve these disputes outside the courts.
Keep this do not delete the original text
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the number of claims and resulting disputes on construction projects has exploded, the sheer cost and delay of resorting to court systems in any country has led to the emergence of various Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) approaches [4]. The construction industry has shown a marked preference towards ADR instead of Litigation for five principal reasons: Speed, Cost, Expertise, Privacy and Practicality [3]. ADR approaches normally take place outside the legal system.
Keep this do not delete the original text
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are many techniques that can be incorporated in preparing construction contracts so as to avoid disputes and, of course, costly and time-consuming litigation. The contract administration methods covered in this study for dispute avoidance and resolutions (DAR) are:
1. Allocating fair contract risk.
2. Drafting dispute clauses.
3. Team building.
4. Provision of a neutral arbitrator.
5. Binding arbitration.
Keep this do not delete the original text
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The questionnaire determines the attitudes of the respondents about the following contract administration techniques methods: (1) allocating fair contract risk; (2) drafting dispute clauses; (3) partnering as one way of team building; (4) provision of a neutral; (5) binding arbitration. These were distributed to industrial owners, contractors and Architects/Engineers, that form the population of the study with the limitations given in Table 1. The exhaustive population list was taken from the publications of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
The questionnaire statements were devised to measure the respondents' opinions by registering them on a 5-point scale ranging from `always' to `never'.
Keep this do not delete the original text
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
