The social science theories have found diverse traits in human beings which influence human disposition to life events on a variety of issues in a variety of ways. For example, traits influence choice among alternatives, reactions to favorable and unfavorable events, general behavior, etc. [19] . The Happenstance Learning Theory (HLT) attempts to explain how and why individuals follow different paths through life’s journey, and in that process identifies and explains how traits in individuals are established. The theory explains why human beings do what they do, behave the way they behave, choose the profession they chose or believe in what they believe etc. [19] [20] . These are essentially the products of hereditary and environmental factors [14] . This theory underscores the fact that human beings are not the same in thoughts, actions, reactions and preferences, but are influenced in one way or the other by certain factors in life that lead to doing different things including their dispositions in conflicts and responses to management strategies. Therefore, when human beings meet or come together for whatever reason, there is that high tendency of traits manifesting in their day to day relational activities. While some traits exhibited by individuals may enhance harmony and smoothen processes of production, others lean towards disharmony and impeding it [21] [22] , this therefore remains an important factor when managing situations. This paper premises that understanding the traits inherent in an individual can enable a better way of dealing with situations surrounding that person. Understanding the traits in construction team members can therefore enable better approach in managing dispute issues among team members.

The presence of impediments necessitates the need for management in process flow. The human factor in management is often accompanied with tendencies of causing impediments to management success. Stakeholders in the construction sector are many and do get involved in the construction production process [23] . Human factors like conflicts have caused management impediments through wrong human interactions or dispositions [1] . The stakeholders interact in a project-based production environment pursuant to a common goal [24] and each with associated traits. These traits manifest and come to bear during production processes. Some stakeholders come into construction business as individuals while others are engaged as organisational clusters (e.g. client cluster, contractor cluster, consultants cluster and various trades’ gang men, etc.), [25] , all in the pursuit of the common goal. The distinct cluster backgrounds often affect one’s traits [11] as such each cluster may equally exhibit distinct traits during interactions in the construction environment. Construction therefore experiences diverse individuals’ traits as well as groups’ traits exhibited in behavioral pattern during procurement process. Such differences [8] [14] are not only sources of dispute in the sector, but could pause difficulty in quick dispute resolution when dispute arises. The clusters have diverse cultures and the individuals are of diverse professional leaning. Still there are those highly educated, poorly educated and those not educated at all. Each group of people has contributions to make and do mingle together during production process. Divakar and Kumar [2] and [25] believe that these backgrounds influence the traits and do also affect the kind of interest and priorities each person places and pursues in construction procurement. These diverse interests are a major source of construction dispute during construction contract implementation. Conflict or dispute therefore is not only a common occurrence in construction production (1) but cuts across the vertical and horizontal construction organizational structure [16] [26] . Five levels of conflict prevailing in construction organisations were reviewed by [16] including intrapersonal, inter-personal, intra-group, inter-group and intra-organizational levels conflicts. The scholars described the intra-personal as a kind of conflict within the mind of an individual, the inter-personal is a conflict that arises between two or more individuals who have divergent or opposite outcomes (goals), attitudes, values or behavior and fail to share the same views, and have different interest or goals. Intra-group conflict refers to conflicts of the same team and group members. Through groups interactions within the same organization inter-group conflicts can arise based on divergence in some variables that are more or less related to the progress of the organization, and the conflict can be formal or informal in nature. Notably, groups differ in goals, work activities, power and prestige. Intra-organizational which varies from organization to organization occurs between parties within an organization and may concern the structure of the organization, the location of formal authority and the way in which jobs are designed. The probability of escalated conflicts increases when people from different backgrounds, ideas and values work together in a social network [26] . For example, quantity surveyors, architects and engineers are different clusters within the same organization that could share different opinions leading to conflicts. The conflict ladder (Figure 1) tries to explain how small conflict could escalate having been influenced by traits and poor management.

As such, [26] described six types of conflicts arising from the differences among disputants. According to [26] , fundamental disagreement can occur from differences in interpretations of verbal or non-verbal communicative acts called interpretation conflicts; but when the disagreeing parties endorse incompatible arguments or see the strength of arguments differently it leads to argumentation conflict. However, parties pursuing different ideals considered of greater value it is called value conflicts. When seeking to achieve different aims at personal or group levels, interest conflicts occur. Role conflicts occur when there is lack of clarity or disagreement about formal or informal roles; and finally, personal conflicts are disagreement grounded in perceptions of unacceptable personality traits or attitudes. Therefore, [27] conflict exists when people differ, or have different ideas about value, as well as different answers to something that requires resolution.

Construction scholars evidence how differences in human nature affect construction conflicts management. In a literature based research, Botha (2000) cited by [28] established how the basic differences in value between people influence dispute management. These include the profession and skills of an individual, kind of expectations by parties, emotions, the educational background and level of the individual. Similarly, [11] examined the relationship between conflict and culture in respect to the multinational construction project outcomes. The scholar understood such projects to consist of workers from various cultural backgrounds. The theory was that the backgrounds determine the traits and affecting behaviours of individuals in construction. It was found that culture plays an important role in achieving understanding and gaining cooperation between participants in construction conflict management, and in turn affecting productivity. This idea was earlier muted by Mohammed et al. (2008) cited in [29] . Narh et al. [29] described Nigeria as a multi-ethnic groupings nation, making the country prone to ethnic related causes of construction conflicts. The ethnic background factor creates differences in individuals leading to differences in behavior. According to [30] , the behavior of an individual is the manifestation of traits. Traits therefore become fundamental in describing one’s personality and often affect not only the consistency but pattern of behavior, feelings and thinking, and such behaviors and feelings have often manifested during conflict management efforts.

More succinctly summarised, construction is complex due to its project-based activity which demands contributions from multiple parties, among numerous organizations and individuals, but each party also focusing on unique interests during the implementation of a project [25] . The backgrounds create various traits among individuals and often complicate construction conflict management. Construction related conflict therefore [5] is of unusual difficulty and more complexity to manage. This narration however presents a template so prone to conflicts.

Dispute or conflict in construction is not entirely a disadvantage, rather, it is the poor management that causes greater concern. This has made researchers to document ways in which dispute can best be managed to either avoid or derive benefits from it. For example, [18] believed that avoiding dispute is better and attempted to list steps to avoid conflict in construction business entirely. According to the scholar, good management, clear contract terms, partnering and alliance, good project planning and management and also good management of stakeholders remain the key. Believing also that structural interventions in conflict can enhance organizational learning and effectiveness [15] set out to diagnose the appropriate methods of interventions. Through wide literature diagnoses the scholar indicated the need for intervention including a proposal of the kind of intervention needed in diverse kinds of organizational conflicts. The styles of conflicts management that fit different situations have been analysed in line with supervisor’s traits in the handling of organizational conflicts [26] [31] [32] . These include dominating, integrating, obliging, compromising, evading, sentimental and optimistic (see Table 1). However, these factors have been viewed beyond mere strategies to include managers’ attitudes [33] [34] . Norby [26] argued strongly that it is not all about managers’ acumen, understanding of the situation and style employed in dispute management, but the content inclusive. More succinctly, it is not only the manager’s knowledge of how best to address conflict and using the best handling technique but the underlying nature of the conflict in question affects management. Further, the content of dispute encompasses everything related to it including the behavior, attitudes or traits of disputants in a management scenario.

In a dispute management model, [26] rather focused on the parties in dispute and asked three questions to guide dispute resolution. That is, if parties have -inconsistent values, incompatible interests or do they disagree about role distribution and areas of responsibility? The essence is to find a common core between disputants as bases of managing the conflict, however, it underscores an emphasis on differences inherent between disputants in diversion from the management styles most researchers do emphasize.

Ige [35] summarized how the outcomes of conciliation are dependent on the willingness of the parties to engage in negotiation and make compromise. According to [35] , more recent studies have focused on the attitudes of the parties towards each other, the level of their tolerance of the involvement of an independent third party, and how the action of the parties determines the process and outcomes of dispute resolution. Naismith et al. [14] observed that individual differences in conflicts are a major concern that will shape the conflict resolution process.

The kind of challenges relating to construction dispute calls for a proactive approach as best way to manage it [17] . Managing construction dispute requires both proactive approach and a mindset, which must be implemented as early as possible [13] . Groton and Haapio [36] believed that the standard alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”) process is an inadequate dispute management systems because they deal only with the symptoms of disputes that have already

Source: (Rahim, 2002b; Ogunbayo, 2013, Norby, 2018).

developed and need only to be resolved. In contrast, the proactive/preventive methods should be emphasized. The scholars described proactive as preventing problems from occurring, the control of problems and the differences in opinion so they don’t escalate into dispute, conflict and legal action. Nguyen [37] developed a model to handle conflicts between joint ventures partners from different backgrounds before the conflict happens and also curing it after it has occurred.

Table 2 reports the results of the demographic analysis of respondents to the research. It describes the quality of respondents. The percentage of each item is obtained by dividing the frequency by the total value of each category and divided by 100. In accordance with the research design, the questionnaires were distributed and retrieved from clients’ organizations about (20.16%), consultants’ (50.78%) and contractors’ (29.07%). This is in accordance with the research design. All the respondents, irrespective of the organization were educated in the basic construction background driven from architecture (6.20%), quantity surveying (53.10%), engineering 26.36%) and the building profession (14.34%). The highest group of participants was quantity surveyors who responded on behalf of the organisations they work. From the responses, only 14.3% of the organizations have existed between 1 to 5 years. The organizations that have existed above 10 years are about 65.88% while less than 20% have existed between 5 to 10 years. Also, the years of experience of respondents show that most of them are long in service within the construction sector. Only 18.60% have served below 5 years. The number that have served above 10 years cumulatively are about 52.62%.

Cumulatively, 74.81% were either top or mid management personnel, and still 8.53% are at lower management level. The major part of the respondents was at varying management levels in the organizations they serve. This finding matches rightly with the years of experience of respondents which expectedly might have risen to such positions within the organizational hierarchies through long years of service. Therefore, more respondents are educated and experienced construction practitioners. This research can therefore rely on the responses as valid.

This section determines the likely common traits of construction team members during dispute matters in construction undertaking in line with the objectives of the research. Table 3 identifies three teams as initially scoped in this work. The choice of teams was based on their dominance on the role played in construction procurement process. They are the client’s team, contactor’s team and consultants’ team. These teams often engage in conflict during procurement activities. This therefore, is to establish the dominant traits in each team, the traits which constitute important factors that influence dispute management between parties. Seven possible traits were identified from literature. Respondents rated themselves on a Likert’s scale of 1-highly disagree, 2-disagree, 3-neutral, 4-agree, 5-highly agree, regarding the extent to which the identified traits exist within the affected team. Table 3 depicts the results of the analyses.