A multi-attribute utility model for dispute resolution strategy selection
Disputes are inevitable in construction projects. Skills in dispute resolution should be part of the toolkit of any practitioner in a managerial position. Dispute resolution procedures such as litigation, arbitration, mediation, dispute adviser and negotiation are widely practised. However, frequently the question is how to systematically determine which dispute resolution strategy to adopt given the nature of disputes. Even though the topic of dispute resolution has been widely discussed and heavily researched, few studies have been conducted with respect to this question. A decision-making model has been developed using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and multi-attribute utility technique (MAUT). The model comprises four parts: selection criteria, dispute resolution strategies, collection of utility factors and selection criteria weightings. These were developed from empirical data collected through an interview survey with selected experts in the field. The model is designed to identify in a systematic manner an appropriate dispute resolution strategy for a given dispute, rather than relying on subjective decisions. The model is tested using a hypothetical scenario in which three case studies are evaluated.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 20 (2002)
Issue (Month): 7 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/RCME20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RCME20|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Patrick Sik-Wah Fong & Sonia Kit-Yung Choi, 2000. "Final contractor selection using the analytical hierarchy process," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(5), pages 547-557.
- Sai-On Cheung & Tsun-Ip Lam & Mei-Yung Leung & Yue-Wang Wan, 2001. "An analytical hierarchy process based procurement selection method," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 427-437.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:20:y:2002:i:7:p:557-568. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Chris Longhurst)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.