Explaining Time Performance of Construction Arbitration

Abstract

By referring their disputes to arbitration, users expect a speedy, economical, and satisfactory resolution. While some cases may have achieved these objectives, others have not. It is not uncommon to come across a mix of cases, some that have taken a short time, and others that have taken considerably longer to resolve. The factors contributing to this varied time performance have remained underexplored in construction arbitration. It remains unclear why cases of similar characteristics take varying duration to conclude, making it difficult for participants in the arbitral process to intensify the positive effect of the factors while attenuating their negative impact on time performance. To address this gap, the researchers conducted a qualitative multiple-case study involving 22 semistructured in-depth interviews and documentary analysis in eight concluded cases involving construction arbitration. The findings attribute variations in the time performance to the interaction between distribution of control, competence of the tribunals, approaches to the presentation of evidence, and complexities of the disputes. Thus, among the identified factors, only the perceived adequacy of the size of the tribunal did not influence time performance. Through a structural model, these findings provide a nuanced understanding of the interactions among the factors influencing the time performance of construction arbitration.