Dispute boards have become an essential tool for preventing and resolving conflicts in construction and infrastructure projects worldwide. But their effectiveness depends on more than adopting a proven model. It requires understanding how that model works across different markets, legal systems, and construction environments.
As President of the Dispute Resolution Board Foundation (DRBF), I have the opportunity to examine these challenges from three interconnected perspectives: global leadership, regional development, and direct involvement at the country and project levels.
Each offers a different understanding of dispute prevention. Together, they help shape its future.
The Global Perspective: Looking Ahead
At the executive level, the focus is on where dispute boards are headed and how we can ensure they remain relevant and effective as the construction industry evolves.
Their value in preventing costly disputes and keeping projects moving is well established. The challenge is understanding how the model must evolve to meet the needs of different markets.
That requires identifying global trends, evaluating progress, and determining how the DRBF can support the continued development of dispute prevention worldwide.
But global strategy is only effective when informed by what is happening beyond the boardroom.
The Regional Perspective: Understanding Different Markets
Dispute board adoption varies significantly across regions. While some markets have decades of experience, others are still developing the institutional knowledge and contractual practices necessary for successful implementation.
Through my participation in regional DRBF events, including the Region 4 conference in Lima and the Region 1 anniversary conference in Denver, I have seen how legal traditions, construction practices, and regional cultures influence the use of dispute boards.
Understanding these differences helps identify where additional support, education, or adjustments in approach may be necessary.
What works in one region cannot automatically be replicated in another.
The Local Perspective: Learning From Practice
Even within the same region, countries face different challenges.
Peru and Costa Rica, for example, have made important progress in adopting dispute boards. Yet increased adoption can also introduce new challenges, including excessive or improper regulation, particularly when contractual procedures and dispute board mechanisms are implemented without sufficient consideration of local realities. These risks become even greater when markets lack the experience necessary to recognize distortions of the dispute board model and, in some cases, outright misuse or abuse.
My direct involvement in country-level initiatives, including activities in Peru, Costa Rica, and Brazil, provides insight into how dispute boards operate in practice and the positive, real-time impact they can have.
This perspective extends beyond serving as a dispute board member. It includes advising clients, helping develop effective dispute board frameworks, and identifying ways to prevent disagreements before they escalate.
Understanding what happens on the ground is essential to improving the broader model.
Connecting the Three Perspectives
The greatest value comes from connecting these levels.
Global leadership establishes direction. Regional involvement identifies broader trends and challenges. Direct engagement at the country and project levels reveals what works, what does not, and why.
Importantly, information flows both ways.
Lessons learned on individual projects help identify regional challenges, which can then inform decisions at the executive level. Those decisions, in turn, influence how dispute prevention practices develop across markets.
My involvement in international discussions in Rome, regional events in Lima and Denver, and country-level initiatives such as Brazil’s upcoming DRBF event reflects this continuous exchange.
The objective is not simply to expand the use of dispute boards, but to ensure they are implemented effectively.
The Future of Dispute Prevention
There is no one-size-fits-all approach to dispute prevention. Successful implementation requires preserving the principles that make dispute boards effective while adapting them to each market’s legal, institutional, and commercial realities. It also requires a critical mass of talent and experience to stay the course and keep pace with the evolving industry.
For me, the opportunity to connect global strategy with regional developments and practical experience is among the most valuable aspects of leading the DRBF.
Because the future of dispute prevention cannot be shaped from the boardroom alone. It must also be informed by the people, projects, and markets where these mechanisms are put to work every day.