Dispute Prevention The Dispute Resolution Adviser (DRA) System - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dispute Prevention

The Dispute Resolution Adviser (DRA) System Colin J Wall

Global Mediation Services Ltd Prague June 2013

The Genesis of the Dispute Resolution Adviser System

• General research work in the USA in late 1990
• Concept of the DRA born
• First proposed to the Hong Kong Housing

Authority in March 1991

• Drawn from 8 different dispute prevention and

resolution concepts

The Genesis of the DRA System

The Independent Intervenor Project Arbitration Step Negotiation Risk Allocation The Mini -Trial

DRA

Informal Partnering The Dispute Adviser Disputes Boards

Sources – theoretical and actual

• Based on two theoretical models of the

“Independent Intervenor” and “Dispute Adviser” developed in UK

• Combined with elements of Dispute Boards,

Project Arbitration, informal partnering, step negotiation & mini-trial all developed in the USA and for pre-contract dispute avoidance and a sensible allocation of risk

How the DRA System Works

• Not a one person Dispute Board – more akin to a

project mediator or an informal partnering facilitator but a tiered system of techniques

• The DRA anticipates problems and brings them to

the fore, so they can be discussed and dealt with then and there by the parties

• Disagreements are resolved before they become

full blown disputes

• DRA is a “friend” of the project

How the DRA System Works

• Disputes are not evaluated by the DRA as is the

case of a Dispute Board, as the DRA serves for the life of the contract and should not only be neutral but seen to be so

• The DRA works with the parties – especially the

site level representatives and helps them to sort out their own problems before they escalate into disputes

• Eventually the parties realize that they are able to

work together and the DRA’s interventions diminish – however, as a back up ……

The Adviser role

• If there really is a need for an evaluation of some

description – then the “Adviser” role comes into

• play. What is needed to resolve the particular

dispute?

• Evaluative mediation
• Expert opinion
• Early Neutral Evaluation
• Adjudication and
• Ultimately Short-Form Arbitration

Expectations of the DRA System

• Reduced tender price
• Improved cash flow
• Avoidance of long and costly arbitrations
• Close budgetary control
• Active sub-contractor participation at all stages of

the DRA process

• Early resolution of disputes by non binding means
• All expectations were achieved

Conclusion

As at December 2010 DRAs have been used on about 140 building and housing projects and as at July 2011 36 civil engineering projects There has only ever been one dispute which has gone to short-form arbitration on the full DRA system and, so far, no disputes on civil engineering projects using the modified DRA system That is a 99.4% success rate in avoiding disputes!