Chong, H Y and Zin, R M (2012) Selection of dispute resolution methods: Factor analysis approach. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 19(4), pp. 428-443. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose -The purpose of this research is to discover the behavior of dispute resolution in the Malaysian construction industry by analyzing factors that affect the selection of dispute resolution methods using factor analysis approach. Design/methodology/approach -Preliminary interviews and a questionnaire survey were conducted. Dispute resolution methods were grouped and discussed together, based on the similarity of their characteristics, and used for the questionnaire survey. This research approach is different from the earlier studies that mostly focused on a single dispute resolution method. The data were further analyzed with factor analysis. This improved the data interpretation. Findings -Seven latent factors were extracted and revealed that the contractors and developers preferred alternative dispute resolution (ADR). However, the appreciation of the outcomes of ADR was perceived to be very low. Arbitration and litigation were in part accepted and agreed upon by the respondents. Originality/value -The combined results from the literature review on the stages of dispute resolution and the latent factors affecting the selection of dispute resolution methods could assist in decision making. The selection of ADR or non-ADR itself is not a major issue; rather, there is a concern for increased efficiency and an appreciation of the methods in the construction industry are more demanding.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction industry; construction management; dispute resolution; factor analysis; Malaysia |
| Index terms: | factor analysis, construction industry, resolution, arbitration, efficiency, Malaysia, dispute, litigation, methodology, decision-making, questionnaire, alternative dispute resolution, interview, literature review, survey |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, dispute resolution, data analysis and analytics, performance management, research methods, contract management, Geography, decision analysis, conflict resolution, statistical analysis, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Legal Issues, Contract Administration, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management |
| 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