File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Convergent views of neutrals and users about alternative dispute resolution

TitleConvergent views of neutrals and users about alternative dispute resolution
Authors
KeywordsAnalytical Techniques
Characteristics
Construction Industry
Dispute Resolution
Issue Date2004
PublisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.pubs.asce.org/journals/me.html
Citation
Journal of Management in Engineering, 2004, v. 20 n. 3, p. 88-96 How to Cite?
AbstractThe success or failure of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) depends heavily on effective implementation, which in turn is founded on a good understanding of the principles and features of ADR. This paper reports a study on the features of ADR based on interviews with practitioners who have experience with using ADR in construction projects with a contract sum in excess of $HK10 million. The interviews were conducted with 20 accredited mediators/arbitrators of the Hong Kong International Arbitration Center (representing the neutrals) and 42 construction practitioners (representing the users). A total of 19 key features, identified and categorized in four categories - nature, neutral, settlement, and benefits - were prioritized according to their relative importance by using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). The inconsistency ratio of the AHP helped ensure the reliability of the ranking scores mathematically. Six of the top eight features as ranked by the neutrals and the users are common to both groups. These are preservation of business relationship, enforceability, neutrality, cost to obtain, speed to obtain, and fairness. These suggest that the neutrals and users have similar expectations from ADR processes. The ranking also assists ADR process designers to focus on the fundamentals and avoid overly complicated processes. © ASCE.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/150279
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 1.84
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.060
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorCheung, SOen_US
dc.contributor.authorSuen, HCHen_US
dc.contributor.authorNg, TSTen_US
dc.contributor.authorLeung, MYen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-06-26T06:02:59Z-
dc.date.available2012-06-26T06:02:59Z-
dc.date.issued2004en_US
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Management in Engineering, 2004, v. 20 n. 3, p. 88-96en_US
dc.identifier.issn0742-597Xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/150279-
dc.description.abstractThe success or failure of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) depends heavily on effective implementation, which in turn is founded on a good understanding of the principles and features of ADR. This paper reports a study on the features of ADR based on interviews with practitioners who have experience with using ADR in construction projects with a contract sum in excess of $HK10 million. The interviews were conducted with 20 accredited mediators/arbitrators of the Hong Kong International Arbitration Center (representing the neutrals) and 42 construction practitioners (representing the users). A total of 19 key features, identified and categorized in four categories - nature, neutral, settlement, and benefits - were prioritized according to their relative importance by using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). The inconsistency ratio of the AHP helped ensure the reliability of the ranking scores mathematically. Six of the top eight features as ranked by the neutrals and the users are common to both groups. These are preservation of business relationship, enforceability, neutrality, cost to obtain, speed to obtain, and fairness. These suggest that the neutrals and users have similar expectations from ADR processes. The ranking also assists ADR process designers to focus on the fundamentals and avoid overly complicated processes. © ASCE.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.pubs.asce.org/journals/me.htmlen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Management in Engineeringen_US
dc.rightsJournal of Management in Engineering. Copyright © American Society of Civil Engineers.-
dc.subjectAnalytical Techniquesen_US
dc.subjectCharacteristicsen_US
dc.subjectConstruction Industryen_US
dc.subjectDispute Resolutionen_US
dc.titleConvergent views of neutrals and users about alternative dispute resolutionen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailNg, ST:tstng@hkucc.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityNg, ST=rp00158en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_OA_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2004)20:3(88)en_US
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-14744284986en_US
dc.identifier.hkuros91795-
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-14744284986&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume20en_US
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.spage88en_US
dc.identifier.epage96en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000228245400003-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridCheung, SO=7202473419en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridSuen, HCH=7004818778en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridNg, ST=7403358853en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLeung, MY=8275258600en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats