International Construction Law Review
THIRD PARTY INTERVENTIONS IN CONSTRUCTION DISPUTE NEGOTIATION
SAI ON CHEUNG
KENNETH T W YIU
ESTHER M Y LEUNG
Construction Dispute Resolution Research Unit Department of Building and Construction City University of Hong Kong *
Abstract
The increasing use of a third party to facilitate dispute resolution, especially in the construction industry, has drawn the attention of both academics and practitioners in trying to understand how the process works and succeeds. The techniques used by a third party in an assisted negotiation are often termed as interventions. In dispute negotiation, an amicable settlement depends on the desire of the disputants. In this regard, it has been suggested that the success or otherwise of a negotiation is influenced by the approaches taken by the negotiators. In these contexts, this paper reports a study that seeks to explore the impacts of intervention by a third party on construction dispute negotiation. To achieve this, six forms of intervention are identified from previous studies:
- (a) Reflexive
- (b) Contextual [Trust]
- (c) Contextual [Agenda]
- (d) Substantive [Press]
- (e) Substantive [Face-saving] and
- (f) Substantive [Suggestions].
Secondly, Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventory—II (ROCI—II) was used to identify negotiation approaches of disputants. The results showed that a dominating approach is generally applied under Contextual [Agenda], Reflexive, Substantive [Face-saving] and Substantive [Press] forms of intervention. The obliging and compromising approaches are generally applied under Contextual [Trust] and Substantive [Suggestions] interventions, respectively. The common use of the dominating approach is attributed to the entrenched confrontational behaviours of the construction industry. Moreover when a third party intervenes by enabling trust building and making suggestions, a more positive response will be obtained.
[2005
The International Construction Law Review
504