ºÃÉ«ÏÈÉúTV

ODR refers to dispute resolution processes assisted by IT, particularly the internet. This can include facilitative processes such as mediation, advisory processes such as case appraisal and determinative processes such as arbitration and adjudication. ODR costs depend on the circumstances and technologies involved. Some of the websites listed on the right do indicate a generic rate. Various commentators have included the following advantages and disadvantages of ODR:

What are the advantages?

Scheduling problems can be avoided, as most ODR sites are open 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

ODR increases the availability of expertise. Parties are not restricted to the ODR services in their locality and they can choose services best suited to their particular dispute.

Going online is also believed to level the playing field as the consumer is less likely to feel intimidated while using the service compared to using a process such as litigation.

And the disadvantages?

The risk of hackers is a threat and the prospect of unauthorised persons intercepting private documents might be enough to deter some from using ODR.

It is also thought that people who are involved in adjudication or mediation might have an aversion to ODR owing to the fact that the interactions available through face-to-face processes are lost.

The risk of hackers is a threat and enough to deter some from using ODR

Privacy of a hearing is imperative for many parties involved in a dispute, and the internet is an open network of communications and platforms, this may be inherently less secure than mail, fax or telephone.

While online communication eliminates some hierarchies, it creates others, for example individuals who are more comfortable in the online environment have a distinct advantage over the lay user.

ODR does not accommodate disputes involving several parties as many present platforms restrict the number to two principal disputants. Negotiation, mediation or arbitration involving many parties would be difficult to control online.

Most ODR platforms allow parties to submit false personal details, paving the way for deception. Although a genuine email address is required this does not necessarily point to a genuine identity. Also even deleted details are never entirely lost and are always retrievable; hence a party may be constantly reminded of previous conversations.

Overall, the research provided a sound argument for the application of ODR, in some capacity, within construction industry disputes. The respondents showed a real enthusiasm of the process although it is questioned whether their lack of knowledge of ODR prevents cognisance relating to the suitability and the dangers that using ODR would pose to the industry?

However, there is also an inherent complexity with construction disputes that may not lend itself to this kind of dispute resolution service. ODR needs to evolve and in such away that it eliminates all its current incompatibilities and dangers.

Despite these concerns there does seem to be some genuine belief and enthusiasm that combined with various encouraging factors, such as guaranteed document security, the ability to access case details and to communicate with other and neutral parties 24 hours a day, ODR could appeal to many.