On the Selection of Arbitrators
نویسندگان
چکیده
A key feature of arbitration is the possibility for conflicting parties to participate in the selection of the arbitrator, the individual who will rule the case. We analyze this problem of the selection of arbitrators from the perspective of implementation theory. In particular, theoretical analyses document problems with veto-rank, a simultaneous procedure that is commonly used in practice, and develop a new sequential procedure, shortlisting, with better properties. Experimental results are consistent with the theoretical predictions, highlighting both the disadvantages associated with the veto-rank procedure and the advantages associated with the shortlising procedure.
منابع مشابه
Lay Juries, Professional Arbitrators and the Arbitrator Selection Hypothesis
Do civil juries follow the broad dictates of the law? For example, do those plaintiffs who suffer greater damages receive greater awards? Do juries empty “deep pockets,” and, if so, by how much? Are juries consistent? In many states automobile accidents are first tried by a professional arbitrator and then by a jury if one of the litigants is dissatisfied with the outcome. How do the decisions ...
متن کاملThe role of information technology and perceived organizational support on the performance of the referees of the 2018 FIFA World Cup in Russia
Background and Aim: Given the widespread trade in some sports, a misjudging decision can not only have huge financial consequences for competitors, but also affect the event itself. The overall purpose of this study was to determine the role of information technology and perceived organizational support on the performance of the referees of the 2018 FIFA World Cup in Russia: to investigate the ...
متن کاملFrom ideals to deals—The effect of impartiality experience on stakeholder behavior
In this paper, we study a two-party pie-sharing problem in the presence of asymmetries in the stakeholders' private endowments. Both the two stakeholders and third-party arbitrators may influence the outcome. We consider Nash-demand negotiations, where the two stakeholders place demands and share the pie accordingly if demands are compatible, and elicit dictatorial allocations from the stakehol...
متن کاملCausal attribution for interfirm contract violation: a comparative study of Chinese and American commercial arbitrators.
In this study, the authors examined differences between Chinese and American commercial arbitrators. They predicted and found that Chinese arbitrators make higher awards for interfirm contract violations than Americans. This difference is partially explained by differences in attributions. Prior theory suggests, and the authors found, that the Chinese tend to have more internal attributions for...
متن کاملThe Conventional Wisdom of Discharge Arbitration Outcomes and Remedies: Fact or Fiction
This study examines some of the arbitration community’s commonly accepted beliefs about arbitration outcomes and remedies in employee discharge cases, with the findings revealing that some beliefs are likely fact, while others, perhaps, are fiction. With data from 1432 Minnesota discharge awards and 74 arbitrators who decided them, eight truisms are examined pertaining to the following: the fre...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2012