Decision Making in Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Use in Construction Projects: A Planned Behaviour Approach

Abstract

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is prominent in managing disputes in construction projects. Despite the many positive attributes of ADR, previous studies have discovered that both the appreciation and the actual practice of ADR are disappointingly low, as evidenced by the context of the Malaysian construction industry. Although the literature related to ADR has been growing over the past 30 years and gaining impetus since the mid-1980s, the decision-making process in ADR still remains relatively unknown and under-explored. There is, for example, almost no tested and validated framework to intervene in the use of ADR in the Malaysian construction industry. To address this gap, the main objectives of this doctoral study are fourfold: (1) to perform a systematic review on the factors influencing ADR selection and use, (2) to develop and test an ADR decision-making behavioural model, (3) to determine the factors predicting a decision to use ADR, and (4) to develop and test an ADR intervention framework. To achieve these objectives, a multimethod design study was adopted. The research first addressed objective 1 by systematically reviewing 446 articles from 21 construction-related journals. The synthesized factors influencing ADR selection and use were found to be fragmented and overemphasising utility grounds. The relationship between the factors was never empirically established and tested. However, these factors were found to fit the dimensions of the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) model, which offer a plausible development of an ADR decision-making behavioural framework. To fully address objective 2 of the study, the TPB framework was integrated with and extended by other behavioural theories. In between, a focus group was utilised and a belief elicitation study conducted to reaffirm the robustness of the conceptual model. Following that, 128 respondents specialising in Building and Civil Engineering works were recruited to test the model. The data was then analysed by using Partial Least Squares–Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM). To address objective 3, the ADR decision-making behavioural model was examined. The findings showed that attitude (ATT) is the main predictor of intention to use ADR (INT), while perceived relative advantage (PA) and perceived ease of use (PE) are the significant predictors of attitude (ATT). The findings were used as the basis to address the subsequent objective 4. Six construction professionals were interviewed and these validated the importance of these variables. Drawing on both qualitative and quantitative findings, an intervention framework was then developed. Both normative pressures (NP) and trust (TR) were conceptualised and shown to be effective macro forces that influence the decision-making process. The framework has high predictive accuracy and predictive relevance. The contributions of this study are threefold. Firstly, the study progresses and advances theories in ADR selection behaviour through the refinement and extension of the TPB. Secondly, this study pioneers a decision-making model through a robust theoretical approach. The findings show that the dynamics of decision-making in ADR use actually follow a reasoned process. Thirdly, the study develops an intervention framework and demonstrates how micro conditions can be influenced by macro forces. The outcome of this research is to provide a new and unique model that captivates and extends behavioural and decision-making theories in ADR use in a holistic manner. The results offer practical premises for future interventions in which both the decision-making behavioural model and the intervention framework can be used as possible means to increase and enhance ADR use.