The “standing neutral”—most often exemplified in construction by

the Dispute Review Board—is a modern-day improvement on the

traditional combination of architect’s decision and prompt ad hoc

arbitration of disputes. The process has the advantage off preventing

most disputes and, in the rare case a dispute arises, recommending

solutions to resolve it in real time.

The construction industry has long recognized the need for a speedy

and expert way of addressing problems on construction projects. If left

unresolved, problems are likely to disrupt and delay completion of projects

and possibly interfere with their success. Over 100 years ago, construction

disputes were resolved at the job site by having the project architect or

engineer make non-binding decisions. If either party disagreed with the

architect or engineer’s decision, the problem would be submitted to an

informal ad hoc arbitration convened promptly at the project site. These

two processes complemented each other. The architect or engineer had an

incentive to be scrupulously fair because his or her decision could be

challenged in a prompt arbitration. As a result, relatively few decisions by

architects or engineers needed to be challenged.