Assessment of Critical Stakeholders Conflict Factors on Tertiary Educational Trust Fund (TETFund) Building Construction Projects in Southwest Nigeria

: Building construction project are complex, unique, and involved the use of multidimensional stakeholders to execute the project from the design stage through construction and completion. This leads to conflict and if not properly managed affects project performance. This study assessed critical stakeholders conflict factors on TETfund building construction projects performance in southwest Nigeria with a view to ameliorating the problems of dispute, non-performance and project abandonment. Qualitative research approach was adopted and a structured questionnaire was administered to three hundred and ninety-four (394) project stakeholders (client’s representative, consultants and contractors). Two hundred and ninety-seven (297) representing (75.38%) were retrieved from the respondents. The data collected was analyzed using both descriptive and inferential statistics. Mean Score (MS) was used to rank the level and effect of Stakeholders conflict on project performance while Kruskal-Wallis, Anova and LSD post hoc test was used to determine the convergence and divergent views of clients, consultants and contractors. The top three causes of conflicts on TETFund building construction projects are discrepancy between measured work and valuation, errors, discrepancies and omissions in contract documents and delay of task dependency activities. The top three effects of stakeholders conflict on project performance are poor quality of work executed, lag in construction programms and abuse of rule of engagement. It is hereby recommended that discrepancy between measured work and valuation, errors and omissions in contract documents and delay of task dependency activities which are the major causes of conflict should be addressed to improve performance of TETfund building construction projects.


Introduction
Building construction industries are significant to the growth of economic sector as they contribute significantly to the social, economic, and national growth of any country (George, 2015). It is a product-based sector that is determined by the distinctive qualities of each project and the participation of different stakeholders throughout the project life cycle (Shabir & Tauha, 2014). But during the last two decades, the Nigerian construction industry had been in an intense period of introspection, specifically examining how performance and productivity of building projects can be improved by reducing the occurrence of stakeholder's conflicts (Owenaze, 2016). Friction like misunderstanding, personality clashes, petty jealousy and conflicts occurs in nearly every interaction between human beings in a social gathering and are also common among building project stakeholders (Lewis, 2007;Tariq & Gardezi, 2023). Occurrence of conflict on TETfund building construction projects are not left out as resent findings have shown that performance of TETFunds building construction projects delivered by stakeholders is poor due to the activities of the stakeholders engaged on the project (Aghimien & Aigbavboa, 2018;Amaechi, 2016;Ogundu & Nwokoye, 2015;Mangvwat, Ewuga & Izam, (2020). These stakeholders conflict have resulted in building collapse, project abandonment and poor quality of works executed by the industrial players (Adedeji & Ajayi, 2022). TETfund was established in May 2011 to replace the Education Trust Fund (ETF) Act of 1993 to provide physical infrastructural facilities in the university, college of education and polytechnics to positively promote academic excellence, students comfort and safety of both the staffs and students (Onyeike & Eseyin, 2014;Saeed & Kayani, 2019). Carrying out this responsibility on schedule and within budgeted cost allocation and quality will deliver a successful project and promote performance of building constructions (Oluyemi-Ayibiowu & Omolayo, 2022).

Literature Review
A Successful building construction projects are those that are finished on schedule, within budget, profitably for the contractors, and without any conflict. claims, disputes, or legal action and meet clients' requirement or satisfaction (Chitkara, 2012;Osuizugbo & Okuntade,2020). Senaratne and Udawatta (2013), Mbatha, Alkizim and Mbiti (2021) stated that a poorly performed project mostly leads to cost and time overrun, stakeholders conflict, project abandonment and negatively affect the economic development of the nation (Olatunji, Oke & Aghimien, 2016). In addition, Yng, Lean, Wai, Ping and Min (2002); Olamoju & Olakoke-Salami, (2021) stated that project stakeholders' (clients, contractors and consultants) attitude and characteristics affect project performance. A stakeholder is an individual or a group who can affect or is affected by the implementation of a project (Matuleviciene & Stravinskiene, 2015). Therefore, the failure of project management teams in Nigeria to address the concerns of building project stakeholders early had resulted in countless project failures across the country (Bourne & Walker, 2005;Osuizugbo & Okuntade, 2020). According to Aje, Odusami & Ogunsemi (2009), the challenges facing building projects performance are due to behaviors, culture diversity, relationship and structure within the organization which leads to stakeholders conflicts. While also, Sylvester and Kwaji (2017) identify level of cooperation among the project stakeholder as responsible for poor performance of TETFunds building construction projects in Nigeria.
Stakeholders' conflicts may also arise from the organization structure within the construction firm when no roles are specified for the functional and project managers on the project (London & Mc-George, 2008). Borvorn (2011) linked very complex phasing of design, financing, planning, overlapping and interrelation between parties involved by main contractors and the project owner or its representative as the major causes of claims and conflict. While Wit, Green and Jehn, (2012); Grau and Back (2015) suggested that modern management techniques are the cause of conflicts on large, domestic and international founded project. But Elziny, Mohamadien, Ibrahim and Abdel-Fattah (2016) submit that complex, multidisciplinary and multiorganizational construction projects stakeholders are prone to conflict because of cultural diversity and competition. The project manager is therefore faced with the task of managing different conflicting interest and objectives to finish a project on schedule at the estimated cost and meet clients' requirement (Yousefi, Hipel & Hegazy, 2010). Therefore, as projects become more technical, complex, flexible and interdependent, the principal mechanism for projects claim, cost and time should be developed to give serious attention to conflicts.
Conflict can be destructive or constructive in nature (Mosaic, 2012). While destructive conflict is harmful and affect the root cause of the project, constructive conflict enhances the quality of the project by improving communication among project stakeholders. Instead of viewing the destructive part of stakeholders conflict or sees conflict as a problem, conflict can be managed, resolved and the process of conflict transformed constructively to enhance project performance. That is while researchers and policy makers have encouraged researches on stakeholders conflict as an innovative way of ensuring performance of projects (Wani, Suwirta, & Payeye, 2013;Lederach, 2015;Joseph, 2016). Any attempt that will efficiently resolve stakeholder's conflicts in a cheap and effective manner should start immediately the project is initiated (Goparaju, 2015;Ejohwomu, Oshodi & Onifade, 2016;Molwus, Ewuga & Orih, 2016). But previous researches achy have not produced a clear mission statement, priorities or suggest a framework to manage building projects in a way that stakeholders responsibility will be distributed to reduce Conflict therefore the need for this research.
Assessment of the level of stakeholders conflict in TETFund building projects in Southwest Nigeria was divided into three stages. The first category assessed the level of occurrence stakeholders conflict on building projects in the study area, the second stage assessed the effect of the stated conflict on projects performance while the third stage assess the gap between the level of occurrence and the effect of stakeholders conflict in TETFund building projects in Southwest Nigeria. To assess the level of occurrence of stakeholders conflict in TETFund building projects in Southwest Nigeria, the research identifies forty nine factors (49) factors from the literature. The factors includes; discrepancy between measured work and valuation, errors, discrepancies and omissions in contract documents (Mba, 2013), delay of task dependency activities, misinterpretation of project information (Jimoh, et al., 2019), variation of contract sum (Alejo, 2018), late submission of claims, delayed dispute resolution, discrepancy between bill of quantities drawings and specification (Sylvester and Kwaji, 2017), absence of coordination and team spirit, access to the site for construction (Ramonu et al., 2018), incomplete project document, unclear contractual terms, wrong estimate and inaccurate quantities, allow for inspection, adverse weather condition, selection of nonfeasible projects, cultural background, poor communication between project teams (Osuizugbo & Okuntade, 2020), delay of payment for work executed (Shawa et al., 2018) (Jimoh, Oyewobi, Osajarikre & Adaji 2019), health and safety policy, languages differences, interest rate, wrong selection of construction method, undocumented change order, availability of plants and equipment, noncompliance to building codes and regulations, demographic distribution (Ogunbayo, 2013), unrealistic contract duration (Sylvester & Kwaji, 2017), exchange rate fluctuation, resource management, un-coordinated design architectural mechanical structural and electrical (Jimoh, et al., 2019), change in weather and ground condition, restrictions of women gender inequality, lag in construction programms (Saidu & Shakantu, 2017), contract arrangement, misunderstanding of technical specification (Molwus et al., 2016), defective design, financial capability of contractors, poor quality of work executed, non-appointment of arbitrator, Inflation, pollution, project risk policies and management (Jimoh, et al., 2019), working hour restriction, abuse of rule of engagement, force majeure flood earthquake, construction methodology, religious affliction of the stakeholders (Chaitanya & Nityanaad, 2015) and poor supervision. These factors were analysed to determine the convergence or divergence (views) of the stakeholders (clients, consultants and contractors) on the listed factors as it affects the occurrence of conflict in the construction industry.

Materials and Methods
Post-empiricism research paradigm involving the use of hard numerical fact-finding quantitative cross-sectional data was employed for this research. The study covers the six southwest sates of Ekiti, Lagos, Ogun, Ondo, Osun and Oyo state. Forty-seven (47) higher institutions and two hundred and fifty-four (254) TETFund projects in the six Southwest states was covered. The primary study population is a list of project oriented clients, contractors and consultants associated with Tertiary Education Trust Funds (TETFund) sponsored projects within the last ten years (2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013) in all the institutions of higher learning (colleges of education, polytechnics and universities) in South west Nigeria. Preliminary investigation shows that there are two hundred and fifty-four (254) of such projects distributed among fortyseven (47) higher institutions. The two hundred and fifty-four (254) projects will have (254) clients, (254) contractors and 1524 consultants (project managements, architects, builders, quantity surveyors and engineers as the project stakeholders and will constitute the research population. Proportionate probability sampling method was adopted because of availability and accessibility of the project stakeholders across the higher institutions in Southwest Nigeria (Amare, 2015). Three hundred and ninety-four (394) copies of well-structured questionnaire was distributed to the TETFund project stakeholders by the use of proportional random sampling technique. Two hundred and ninetyseven questionnaires were retrieved from the respondent (75.38%) and the remaining ninetyseven (97) representing (24.62%) was not retrieved from the respondent as a result of the time frame given. The collected data were presented and examined with Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) versio 23 and Excel 2013. Mean Score (MS), Kruskal-Wallis test, Anova and LSD post hoc test were used to determine the convergence and divergent views of clients, contractors and consultants as they assessed critical. Stakeholders conflict factor on TETFund building construction projects. Factor analysis as data reduction method via principal component extraction was used to classified stakeholders conflict factor into categories.

Information of the Respondents
Three hundred and ninety-four (394) questionnaires were administered to clients. Consultants and contractors which are project respondents, two hundred and ninety-seven (297) of the questionnaire were retrieved and this represent 75.38% of the total questionnaires administered on the respondents to the survey. The percentage was considered sufficient for his study based on the claim by Kothari (2004) that the result of any survey that is more than 20-30% retrieved respondent should be accepted. From the result of the survey in Table 2, 86.2% of the respondents are males while 13.8% of the respondents are female. These respondents are from various academic institutions with university having the highest percentages of 51.9%, polytechnic 27.6% while college of educations is the least with 20.9% response rate from the respondents. Regarding the type of building construction projects, it is evident that 51.9% of the respondent's construct building projects, 31.0% of the respondents execute both building and civil engineering projects while only 17.2% execute only civil engineering projects. On the positions of stakeholders on construction project, consultant have the highest number of respondents 41.1%, while 38.4% of the respondents are contractors. client/client representative with 20.5% have the least percentage of respondents. Regarding the academic qualification category, it is evidence that most of the respondents' least represented academic qualification was Ph.D. with 4.4%. From the study 38.0% and 31.3% of the respondents have been contractors, client's / clients representative or consultants who have executed TETFund project for over 10 to 15 years, while 13.5% of the stakeholders have executed TETFund project for less than 5 years which is the least percentage. In terms of respondents' professional qualification, it was shown from Table 2 that builders have the highest representation with 35.0%, project managers with a representation of 28.3% and the least represented was architects with a percentage of 4.4%. Based on the forgoing, the information provided by these categories of construction stakeholders, having worked on TETFund project from 2004 to 2013 was considered adequate and reliable for further analysis upon which inferences was draw.    Table 4 represents the level of stakeholders conflict in TETFund building projects in Southwest Nigeria from 2004 to 2013. The respondent from the clients stakeholders regards late submission of claims, discrepancy between measured work and valuation and variation of contract sum as the major factors that leads to stakeholders conflict when executing TETFund building projects in the study area with mean scores of 4.164, 3.967 and 3.951 respectively while project risk policies and management of the project with mean score of 2.967 took the last position. This finding is in agreement with the studies by Mba (2013) Table 4, it is evidence from the kruskal wallis test that the respondents had convergence views on thirty eight (38) factors out of forty nine (49) factors listed. Late submission of claims, absence of coordination and team spirit, wrong estimate and inaccurate quantities, selection of non-feasible projects, poor communication between project teams, languages differences, demographic distribution, resource management, inflation, project risk policies management, poor supervision, construction time predictability, quality of work rendered by the contractor, project administration, project risk avoidance or reduction, accuracy of cash flow forecast and number of defect are the eleven factors that the respondents had divergent views upon in predisposing the level of stakeholders conflict in TETFund building projects in Southwest Nigeria. The implication of these is that there are significant differences in the opinions of the respondents (p value <0.05), pertaining to the eleven (11) listed factors, form the client, consultants and contractors. All the listed fortynine (49) factors recorded high mean scores with the least been 3.074 and an average mean of 3.537. Therefore, all the factors are to be reckoned with in deciphering the order of susceptibilities the level of stakeholders conflict in TETFund building projects in Southwest Nigeria. Table 5 shows the post hoc test carried out to further determines where the actual different lies among the respondents based on their position as stakeholders (client/client representative, consultants and contractors) on conflict in TETFund building projects in Southwest Nigeria. Analysis of the LSD Post hoc test, reveals a significant different between the pairs of contractor-client (p-value = 0.01) and consultant-client (p-value = 0.05) based on the perceptions of the respondent on the level of stakeholders' conflict in TETFund building projects in Southwest Nigeria. Therefore, the position of client, consultants and contractor varies on the eleven listed items. Further test was then carried out to reduce that factors using a reliability test.  .000 Table 6 shows the result of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) for the 49 loaded items. The KMO value for the 49 items is 0.727 while the (KMO) for each group is 0.837, 0.841, 0.782, 0.703, 0.645, 0.618, 0.621 and 0.550 respectively. The Bartlett's text of shericity for the eight factors loading is significant (p= 0.000). The reliability test was conducted for the eight factors ranging between 0.540 to 0.837, which is higher than 0.5 hence, the eight factors loaded are reliable. The result of the factor analysis was presented in Table 7. From the result in Table 7, the eight (8) items were loaded into the first group (technical conflict), namely misinterpretation of project information, errors, discrepancies and omissions in contract documents, unrealistic contract duration, unclear contractual terms, misunderstanding of technical specification, noncompliance to building codes and regulations, incomplete project document and poor quality of work executed. The reliability test of the 8 drivers of technical conflict formed indicates an alpha value of 0.837 which is greater than 0.5 (p= 0.000) and is deemed reliable for further analysis significant. Detailed description for individual loading and Cronbach alpha values are presented in Table 7. From the result of the reliability analysis, the forty-nine (49) items loading results into eight (8) factor solutions, namely technical conflict, financial conflict, management conflict, logistics conflict, environmental conflict, design conflict, cultural conflict and legal conflict. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) value for all the groups are above 0.7 while the Bartlett,s text of shericity for the eight factors loading is greater than 0.5 (p= 0.000 < 0.05) and therefore significant. The Eight (8) stakeholders conflict drivers are loaded into the technical conflict group which includes misinterpretation of project information, errors, discrepancies and omissions in contract documents, unrealistic contract duration, unclear contractual terms, misunderstanding of technical specification, noncompliance to building codes and regulations, incomplete project document and poor quality of work executed. Six (6) items were loaded into the second group (Financial conflict) namely discrepancy between measured work and valuation, variation of contract sum, exchange rate fluctuation, interest rate, wrong estimate and inaccurate quantities and financial capability of contractors. Also six (6) items were loaded into the third group Management conflict, namely resource management, project risk policies and management, absence of coordination and team spirit, poor communication between project teams, poor supervision and contract arrangement. The four (4) factors loaded in the fourth group logistics conflict includes delay of task dependency activities, delay of payment for work executed, lag in construction programms and working hour restriction. Three (3) items were loaded into the fifth group Environmental conflict are change in weather and ground condition, adverse weather condition and force majeure due to flood or earthquake. The factor analysis result of the three (3) items were loaded into the sixth group Design conflict are uncoordinated architectural mechanical, structural and electrical design, discrepancy between bill of quantities, drawings and specification and defective design. Also (4) items are loaded into the seventh group Cultural conflict which includes languages differences, cultural background, restrictions of women gender inequality and religious affliction of the stakeholders. Lastly the eight group Legal conflict have the following two (2) items namely delayed dispute resolution and non-appointment of arbitrator. Detailed description for individual loading and Cronbach alpha values are also presented in Table 7. Table 8  Using the types of stakeholders as the basis to test the convergence or divergence in the opinions of the respondents regarding the effect of stakeholders conflict in TETFund building projects in Southwest Nigeria, it is evidence from the kruskal wallis test that the respondents had convergence views on thirty (30) factors out of forty nine (49) factors listed. Poor communication between project teams, undocumented change order, nonappointment of arbitrator, resource management, absence of coordination and team spirit, working hour restriction, misinterpretation of project information, interest rate, health and safety policy, discrepancy between measured work and valuation, availability of plants and equipment, defective design, languages differences, uncoordinated design architectural mechanical structural and electrical, restrictions of women gender inequality, incomplete project document, allow for inspection, discrepancy between bill of quantities, drawings and specification and errors discrepancies and omissions in contract document are the nineteen (19) factors that the respondents had divergent views upon in predisposing the effect of stakeholders conflict in TETFund building projects in Southwest Nigeria. The implication of this is that there are significant differences in the opinions of the respondents (p value <0.05), pertaining to the 19 listed factors, form the client, consultants and contractors. All the listed forty-nine (49) factors recorded high mean scores with the least been 3.303 and an average mean of 3.651.  Table 9 presented the results of analysis of variance (Anova) of the effect of conflict on TETFund construction project. the f-Statistics (4.345) is greater than the f-critical (K=3 groups and a total sample of N ≥ 30 = 3.354) indicating a significant difference between the opinions of the stakeholders (client, consultants and contractors) on the effect of conflict on TETFund building construction projects in Southwest Nigeria.    Table 11 was a test carried out to investigate the relationship between the level of occurrence of stakeholders' conflict and its effect on building project performance using paired sample t-test. The result of the paired sample t-test between level of occurrence of stakeholders conflict and its effects on project performance shows a significant difference (p-value 0.019 < 0.05) between the level of occurrence of stakeholders' conflict and its effect on TETFund building construction projects performance in Southwest Nigeria. gap analysis was used to determine conflict factors that mostly affect building construction project performance in southwest Nigeria in Table 11.  Note: ECM = Effect of conflict mean, LCM = Level of conflict mean Table 12 presents the mean gap analysis between the occurrence of stakeholders conflict and the corresponding frequency of effect on project performance taking cue from the fact that the steps in terms of the different between future/ anticipated and present /currency is referred to as gap analysis. Out of the forty-nine (49)

Discussion
The study assessed critical stakeholders' conflict factors on (TETFund) building construction projects in Southwest Nigeria using Kruskal Wallis, Anova and LSD post hoc test was used to determine the convergence and divergent views of clients, consultants and contractors.
The result of the Anova shows a significant difference between the opinions of the stakeholders (client, consultants and contractors) on the level of occurrence of conflict on TETFund building construction projects in Southwest Nigeria. Kruskal-Wallis test shows that the respondents had convergence and divergence views on some listed items while the analysis of the LSD Post hoc test, reveals a significant different between the pairs of contractors-client (p-value = 0.01) and consultant-client (p-value = 0.05). Sample ttest between level of occurrence and effects of stakeholders conflict shows a significant difference (p-value 0.019 < 0.05) between the level of occurrence of stakeholders' conflict and its effect on TETFund building construction projects performance in Southwest Nigeria. The clients regard late submission of claims, discrepancy between measured work and valuation and variation of contract sum as the major causes of stakeholders conflict. This finding is in agreement with the studies by Mba, (2013), Shawa et al. (2018) and Jimoh, et al. (2019). The consultants' viewed discrepancy between measured work and valuation, misinterpretation of project information and omissions in contract documents as the major causes of conflicts. This finding is also in agreement with the studies by Junaid & Gardezi, (2023), Mbatha (2021) and Jimoh, et al. (2019). The contractors ranked discrepancy between measured work and valuation, delay of task dependency activities and delayed dispute resolution as the major causes of conflicts on TETFund building construction projects. These findings are also related to the work of Alejo, (2018) and Mbatha, (2021). The top three causes of conflicts by the stakeholders (clients, consultant and contractors) are discrepancy between measured work and valuation, errors or omissions in contract documents and delay of task dependency activities. This study represents the views of all the stakeholders on TETFund building construction projects on the causes of stakeholders conflict in the study area.

Conclusion
The main aim of this study was to assess critical stakeholders' conflict factors on TETFund building construction projects in southwest Nigeria. The study found that there are fortynine main stakeholders' conflict factors affecting the performance of TETFund construction project in southwest Nigeria. The top three causes of conflicts on TETFund building construction projects based on the perceptions of the respondents are discrepancy between measured work and valuation, Errors, discrepancies and omissions in contract documents and Delay of task dependency activities. The least among the listed factors are construction methodology, religious affliction of the stakeholders and poor supervision of the project.
Based on the findings from the study, it is recommended that: -Detail designs, good specification, accurate cost estimate and adequate project planning should be carried to reduce stakeholders conflict enhance project performance.
-Poor quality of construction work, lag in construction programms, abuse of rule of engagement and poor communication between project teams which are the major effects of stakeholders' conflict on construction performance also have positive mean gaps and should be avoided to enhance project performance -Attention should be given to the eight critical stakeholders conflict factors to enhance project performance.