Show simple item record

contributor authorJohn W. Hinchey
contributor authorJeffrey H. Perry
date accessioned2017-05-08T21:20:54Z
date available2017-05-08T21:20:54Z
date copyrightApril 2008
date issued2008
identifier other%28asce%291052-3928%282008%29134%3A2%28231%29.pdf
identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/47923
description abstractFor over 2 decades, and in response to complaints that arbitration was too expensive and too time consuming, the American construction bar has been energetic and innovative in developing a broad array of dispute resolution tools for resolving construction disputes. These “tools” have included “partnering,” mandatory negotiations, interim decision making by design professionals, mediation, standing neutrals and dispute resolution boards, minitrials, early neutral evaluation, and expert determinations, all developed as alternatives to arbitration and litigation. More recently, in 2006, a voluntary “fast track” process for resolving construction disputes within
publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
titlePerspective from the United States: Tensions between “Getting It Done” and “Getting It Right”
typeJournal Paper
journal volume134
journal issue2
journal titleJournal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2008)134:2(231)
treeJournal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice:;2008:;Volume ( 134 ):;issue: 002
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record