Alternative Dispute Resolution Techniques: Design Professional's PerspectiveSource: Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities:;1987:;Volume ( 001 ):;issue: 004Author:James W. Poirot
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(1987)1:4(190)Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
Abstract: Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques offer members of the design‐construct community the opportunity to resolve disputes without having to resort to expensive and lengthy litigation. Disputes inevitably arise because elements of the design‐construct process, such as contracts, specifications, and personnel, are not perfect. Even with a qualified project team that is dedicated to the construction of a quality project, some disputes will occur. Knowing this, a project team's primary objective should be to anticipate circumstances which might generate a dispute and to develop proactive strategies for dealing with such circumstances. When a dispute does occur, internal negotiation should be tried first. This process involves decision makers—those involved financially and those who understand the ultimate impacts of the dispute on the quality and long‐term success of the project. Lawyers should not actively participate in internal negotiation except as a last resort. If this process does not generate a settlement, mediation and arbitration should be tried before commencing litigation proceedings. ADR is an approach to dispute resolution that may be less expensive and time‐consuming, and is more likely to yield “win‐win” settlements than other dispute resolution techniques.
|
Collections
Show full item record
| contributor author | James W. Poirot | |
| date accessioned | 2017-05-08T21:14:13Z | |
| date available | 2017-05-08T21:14:13Z | |
| date copyright | November 1987 | |
| date issued | 1987 | |
| identifier other | %28asce%290887-3828%281987%291%3A4%28190%29.pdf | |
| identifier uri | http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/43837 | |
| description abstract | Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques offer members of the design‐construct community the opportunity to resolve disputes without having to resort to expensive and lengthy litigation. Disputes inevitably arise because elements of the design‐construct process, such as contracts, specifications, and personnel, are not perfect. Even with a qualified project team that is dedicated to the construction of a quality project, some disputes will occur. Knowing this, a project team's primary objective should be to anticipate circumstances which might generate a dispute and to develop proactive strategies for dealing with such circumstances. When a dispute does occur, internal negotiation should be tried first. This process involves decision makers—those involved financially and those who understand the ultimate impacts of the dispute on the quality and long‐term success of the project. Lawyers should not actively participate in internal negotiation except as a last resort. If this process does not generate a settlement, mediation and arbitration should be tried before commencing litigation proceedings. ADR is an approach to dispute resolution that may be less expensive and time‐consuming, and is more likely to yield “win‐win” settlements than other dispute resolution techniques. | |
| publisher | American Society of Civil Engineers | |
| title | Alternative Dispute Resolution Techniques: Design Professional's Perspective | |
| type | Journal Paper | |
| journal volume | 1 | |
| journal issue | 4 | |
| journal title | Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities | |
| identifier doi | 10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(1987)1:4(190) | |
| tree | Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities:;1987:;Volume ( 001 ):;issue: 004 | |
| contenttype | Fulltext |