Are we ready for a rational discussion? The existence of biases in construction dispute negotiation

Abstract

Embedded in a network constellation of multi-stakeholders with various professional backgrounds and differing goals, the construction industry is featured with adversarial relationships and inevitable disputes. Therefore, high quality communication and negotiation among the parties are essential in achieving speedy and less costly dispute resolution. As rational evaluation underpins quality negotiation decisions, are construction disputing parties rational as they assumed? Are there any biases that could possibly prohibit them from making prudent judgement? This study seeks to understand the existence and impact of bias in construction dispute negotiation (CDN). The existence of four types of bias in CDN were discussed: preconception, self-affirmation, optimism and interest-oriented. Three categories of de-biasing strategy were also suggested to support the efficient settlement of construction dispute. Vast resources would be saved and amicable relationship among the collaborating parties could be developed when the impact of bias was curbed. Stepping into the digital era, construction dispute resolution professionals should develop the capabilities needed to harness the benefits of technologies for innovative ways of designing a bias-free dispute resolution mechanism.