Ilter, D and Dikbas, A (2008) The use of key attrıbutes ın alternatıve dıspute resolutıon (ADR) process desıgn. In: Dainty, A (ed.) Proceedings of 24th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2008, Cardiff, UK.
Abstract
After the rapid deployment of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods, the problem in question for the authorities is on how to design the most appropriate ADR implementation model that can fit nicely in the existing nature of the industry that the model is built in, and meet the needs of the actors in it. A theoretical framework based on the use of key ADR attributes is developed to provide a systematic approach to the design of ADR implementation models. As a part of the framework developed, a list of ADR attributes is determined by literature analysis and then, using the qualitative data obtained from the indicator exercise comprising interviews with experts, a set of ADR attributes was selected and structured in a hierarchical scheme. This scheme will be used as a base for the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) survey to identify the key attributes for Turkish construction industry public works in the final stage of the research. The proposed framework based on the use of key attributes may be used by all policy makers and process designers since it provides a systematic and objective approach to the design of ADR implementation models, which will take the requirements of the end users into consideration and focus on the fundamentals avoiding overly complicated processes.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | alternative dispute resolution; alternative dispute resolution attributes; model building; Turkish construction industry |
| Index terms: | survey, implementation, public work, designer, interview, alternative dispute resolution, analytical hierarchy process, construction industry, key attribute, exercise, end user |
| Subjects: | risk assessment, infrastructure engineering, decision-making and optimization, health behaviours and lifestyles, data collection methods, profession, contractual arrangements, stakeholder, contract management, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Health and Safety, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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