Efficacy of Mediating Construction Disputes during Economic Recession: Case Study of Mediator Style

The potential of achieving the desired outcomes via mediation is less researched, particularly in public sector projects where construction as a market is somewhat volatile in many parts of the world. Moreover, multicriteria decision-making methods are a rare application in this type of study. Hence, this study is to address this knowledge gap by proposing the most appropriate mediation style to settle construction disputes when construction as a market takes the form of sluggishness where the parties tend to compromise their positions for mutual survival, with particular reference to the Sri Lankan context. A list of factors inspiring mediation was identified through a systematic literature review and focus group discussion followed by the use of an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) tool for the selection process. At the final step, the priority of each mediation style was determined against four key criteria, namely mutuality, empowerment, autonomy, and creativity. It is found that the parties prefer to see that the mediator takes an evaluative style while acknowledging quasi-imposition as a necessary supplement in mediating construction disputes.