Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice · 2003 · 46 citations · 4 references
Social SciencesConstruction ManagementContract LawConflict ResolutionConstruction ContractsContractsArbitrationConstruction LitigationContract NegotiationDispute ResolutionDispute SettlementNegotiation ProcessAdjudication In Construction DisputesArbitration ProcessContractor Dispute ResolutionContractual Dispute ResolutionHammurabi's CodeMulti-party Dispute SettlementOwner-contractor DisputesTraditional Dispute Resolution
Construction disputes have persisted since antiquity, with the industry adopting a traditional two‑step contract process since the late nineteenth century that has recently been reexamined. The paper investigates how the construction industry has evolved its multistep dispute resolution process. The traditional two‑step dispute resolution involves an engineer’s determination followed by binding arbitration if either party disagrees. The industry’s shift away from civil litigation led to a multistep dispute resolution process that includes loss prevention, direct negotiations, neutral‑facilitated negotiations, issue‑specific negotiations, and binding adjudication.
The construction industry has a propensity to disputes dating back thousands of years, at least to the time of the Hammurabi Code. As a result, the industry devised alternative methods for dispute resolution to avoid the civil litigation. Since the late nineteenth century, the traditional two-step process has been included in standard construction contracts. The engineer first renders a determination, followed by binding arbitration if either the owner or contractor disagreed with the engineer's decision. In the last half of the twentieth century, the industry has reexamined this traditional two-step method. This examination has produced a multistep dispute resolution process consisting of (1) loss prevention and dispute avoidance, (2) direct negotiations, (3) facilitated direct negotiations with preselected standing neutrals, (4) issue specific outside neutral facilitated negotiations, and (5) binding adjudication. This paper examines the evolution of this multistep dispute resolution process within the construction industry.
4