Originally from Dispute Resolution Journal

Many believe that having a dispute review board available to hear construction disputes when they arise, and issue a nonbinding recommendation, is a superior way of resolving—and even avoiding—disputes. To determine whether the anecdotal information about DRBs has any foundation, author Kathleen Harmon, conducted a survey of construction professionals and construction attorneys as part of her Ph.D. dissertation, to find out their attitudes toward disputes and DRBs. Her findings confirm the positive view about the DRB process.

God’s creation of the world in seven days is the oldest construction project and a miracle of efficiency. However, construction projects undertaken by mere mortals tell a quite different story. Most cannot be completed without lots of paperwork and the involvement of numerous parties with different agendas and financial restraints. By and large, construction projects are a breeding ground for disputes of all kinds. They result from many factors, including among other things, unfair allocation of risk, multiple prime contracts, unrealistic expectations and schedules, poorly prepared contract documents, financial issues, communication problems, and even the economy.1

The construction industry has been on the forefront of the alternative dispute resolution movement. The recent trend is to look for methods of resolving disputes other than traditional processes (such as litigation, arbitration and mediation), which typically begin after the conflict has escalated and the parties’ positions have hardened. One of these methods is the dispute review board (DRB). This is a panel, made up of three experienced construction professionals (often engineers), formed at the beginning of a project to hear disputes when they arise and make non-binding recommendations regarding their resolution. Using a DRB is usually a condition precedent to the commencement of binding dispute resolution processes, such as litigation or arbitration.

Although DRBs are generally considered to be highly effective, there is little, if any, empirical evidence to validate that opinion. Moreover there is also a dearth of data concerning the impact of disputes on the project and the parties’ relationship. This study attempts to partially fill that void.

This is the first national study exploring how the construction community, which places a high value on both time and money, perceives disputes and DRBs. The primary issues addressed in the study are: (1) how disputes affect the project; (2) how disputes affect the party’s relationship; (3) the impact of a DRB on the project; and (4) the effectiveness of DRBs in resolving disputes.