Lee, C K; Yiu, T W and Cheung, S O (2021) Predicting intention to use alternative dispute resolution (ADR): An empirical test of theory of planned behaviour (TPB) model. International Journal of Construction Management, 21(1), pp. 27-40. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) has gained prevalent interests among practitioners and researchers. To better explain the factors underpinning the use of ADR, Theory of planned behaviour (TPB) model was applied to predict behavioural intention to use ADR. In general, the TPB model posits that attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control explain actual behaviour. Therefore, this study investigates the role of attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control towards the prediction of intention in ADR use. Data were collected from 128 ADR decision makers from Malaysian contractor firms. Both measurement and structural assessment of the model were performed by using Partial Least Squares (PLS) modelling. The results showed that TPB model provides excellent predictive accuracy and relevance for intention. The model was again examined in two distinctive scenarios. Attitude was found to be the sole predictor of intention in the occurrence of dispute; and before negotiation fails. The findings indicate a plausible future empirical investigation in the attitudinal dimension.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | alternative dispute resolution; theory of planned behaviour |
| Index terms: | partial least square, alternative dispute resolution, practitioner, accuracy, negotiation, planned behaviour, modelling, subjective norm, dimension, investigation, dispute, contractor firm |
| Subjects: | professional development, contract management, behavioral psychology, statistical analysis, social justice, conflict resolution, practitioner, dispute resolution, organization, data collection methods, analytical methods, health monitoring assessment and metrics |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Ethics, Contract Administration, Organizational Design, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here