This article addresses the opinions and attitudes of construction professionals regarding different Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods. In order to achieve this, an industry-wide questionnaire survey has been conducted among construction professionals and the respondents were asked to express their opinions about different ADR methods based on a number of identified criteria. In addition, the participants assigned a weight in terms of importance for each of these criteria, so that more important criteria play more important roles in comparing and ranking ADR solutions. The results of this survey provide the reader with the possibility of comparing different ADR solutions with each other, not only on a general basis, but also in some specific criteria1.

ADR methods have become so diverse and they are being widely used not only in developing countries, but also in developed countries that have efficient litigation systems2. While the existence of various ADR methods might provide users and practitioners with more choices, at the same time, it might result in some confusion and uncertainty, since each method has its own advantages and disadvantages. This confusion might increase in complex large disputes, such as construction disputes, because the disputed amounts are higher. The complexity of the disputes also increases the need for choosing an appropriate method. The growing use of ADR methods in recent years indicates that ADR methods must be categorised in a way that allows users to make the best choice.