Construction arbitration has evolved significantly over the years. As the industry continues to change, so do the trends and practices within construction arbitration. Compared with traditional litigation, arbitration offers speed, privacy, and flexibility—all critical in an environment where deadlines are tight, reputations matter, and prolonged disputes can carry significant financial consequences.
An experienced arbitrator with construction industry-specific expertise can bring to a case a deeper understanding of the technical complexities at issue. This can lead to more informed, practical, and fair decisions, helping parties resolve conflicts efficiently while keeping projects on track.
Michael R. Powell, Regional Vice President of the American Arbitration Association’s Construction Division, sets the stage:
“Construction disputes aren’t just legal questions—they’re practical problems with financial, scheduling, and technical impacts. Industry professionals bring perspective that keeps the focus on resolution and real-world outcomes.”
To explore this, Powell connected with three AAA panelists—Charles Boland, Cherrie K. Fisher, and Dennis Bolazina—about the benefits of leveraging industry expertise as arbitrators or mediators and why hands-on construction experience drives efficient and equitable outcomes.
Why Industry Professionals Matter
“Everyone wants to feel the process was fair and that any award reflects the terms of the original agreement,” says Charles Boland, whose career spans projects from environmental remediation to power plants and dredging. “To achieve this, there’s real power in leaning into those who know the work best. It might be the parties’ first arbitration—but it’s not mine. I want them to know they’re not alone and that facts will lead the way.”
Cherrie K. Fisher, a civil engineer with roots in the field and founder of CKF Consulting Inc., brings more than three decades of construction and claims experience, including time spent with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers managing billion-dollar projects.
“I bring a boots-on-the-ground perspective,” says Fisher. “Having been in the field, I know what it takes to deliver a project—and how quickly things can go off track. That insight helps me cut through complex documentation and get to the heart of a dispute.”
While her early work centered on claims, Fisher now focuses heavily on supply chain issues, contract fairness, and force majeure disputes—especially in the post-pandemic landscape.
“I strongly believe in dispute avoidance through construction partnering,” she adds. “If you build relationships early, parties are more likely to talk through issues instead of escalating them. Ultimately, everyone wants the project done right—and the earlier we can resolve problems, the better for cost and schedule.”
Fisher also sees new tools, including AI, as part of the solution: “Once you've gone through a dispute, you have more knowledge—and we should use that to improve how we write contracts and manage risk. Tools like AI are helping analyze data and tighten up language to prevent problems from recurring.”
Dennis Bolazina, who combines architectural, legal, and ADR experience, emphasizes balance:
“I understand the pressures and responsibilities of every party. ADR allows me to bring technical knowledge and legal reasoning together to achieve fair, efficient outcomes.”
When to Choose an Industry Neutral
Powell offers guidance: “When disputes turn on how the work was done—not just what the contract says—industry professionals offer unmatched value. They understand the technical, logistical, and scheduling realities that a purely legal neutral might miss.”
From design coordination and schedule impacts to environmental compliance, having a neutral who speaks the language of construction accelerates proceedings, builds confidence, and fosters durable resolutions. Boland emphasizes: “Across the lessons learned in this industry, there’s great value to the parties. Experience matters—and it shows in the results.”
Arbitration vs. Litigation: Key Considerations for Project Stakeholders
Beyond choosing the right neutral, parties must weigh whether arbitration or litigation best fits their dispute. Industry professionals often help guide this decision to ensure alignment with project realities and long-term business interests.
- Type of Dispute: Not all disputes are alike. For complex technical issues or claims requiring detailed evidence, arbitration offers a private, efficient, and focused alternative.
- Stakeholder Interests: Arbitration tends to preserve relationships better than adversarial litigation, which is important in construction where collaboration may continue across multiple projects.
- Cost Implications: Litigation can involve prolonged legal fees and court expenses. Arbitration with an experienced neutral can reduce costs and expedite resolution.
- Future Business Relationships: A swift and fair resolution prevents lingering conflicts that might affect operations, partnerships, or future collaborations.
- Enforceability of Arbitration Agreements: Clearly defined arbitration clauses in construction contracts minimize risk and provide a roadmap for resolving disputes if conflicts arise.
The Bottom Line
Whether managing a multi-billion-dollar infrastructure project or a high-end residential build, all parties involved in a dispute benefit when their ADR process includes professionals who understand the practical realities of the business of construction, its risks and its rewards.
By combining technical insight, contractual knowledge, and neutral judgment—and carefully evaluating whether arbitration is the right path—industry experts help transform complex disputes into efficient, fair, and actionable outcomes, keeping projects moving and relationships intact.
About the Panelists
Charles Boland, PE, is Managing Director at Greyhawk. He brings decades of experience in construction management, focusing on disputes related to construction delays, cost overruns, and complex project scheduling.
Dennis A. Bolazina, Esq. is both an architect and attorney. His practice centers on construction contract disputes, including design responsibility, warranty claims, and performance bond issues—drawing on his dual expertise to evaluate both the legal and technical sides of conflict.
Cherrie K. Fisher, PMP is a civil engineer and AAA construction neutral with more than 30 years of experience in the industry. Her arbitration practice covers a wide range of disputes, from negotiating claims to resolving complex construction defect matters.