• Home
  • RSS Feeds
  • Blog Archives
Subscribe to Disputing
Book an ADR Service
Call Karl Bayer
Karl Bayer's Disputing Blog - Mediator, Arbitrator, Court Master & Technical Advisor
About Karl  |  Book an ADR Service  |  Contact Karl   (214) 891-4505

Menu 
  • home
  • Mediation
  • Arbitration
  • Court Neutrals
  • Online Dispute Resolution
  • Technology
    • Intellectual Property
    • Privacy and Cybersecurity
    • E-discovery
  • Court Decisions
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • Fifth Circuit
    • Third Court of Appeals
    • U.S. Supreme Court
  • More
    • Legislation
      • Texas
      • United States
    • Healthcare
    • Guest Posts
      • John DeGroote
      • John C. Fleming
      • Rick Freeman
      • Professor Peter Friedman
      • Honorable W. Royal Furgeson, Jr.
      • James M. Gaitis
      • Laura A. Kaster
      • Professor John Lande
      • Philip J. Loree, Jr.
      • Michael McIlwrath
      • F. Peter Phillips
      • Professor Alan Scott Rau
      • Professor Thomas J. Stipanowich
      • Professor S.I. Strong
      • Richard Webb
      • Glen M. Wilkerson
    • International arbitration
    • Regulation
    • Sports and Entertainment


College of Commercial Arbitrators (CCA) / Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution Survey on Arbitration Practice (Fall 2013)

0
by Thomas J. Stipanowich

Monday, Jul 14, 2014


Tweet

The CCA-Straus Institute Survey on Arbitration Practice, one of the Straus Institute’s three recent surveys under the Theory-to-Practice Research Project, consisted of 65 multiple-choice and short-answer questions on respondents’ arbitration experiences and opinions on arbitration practices and the future of the arbitration field-at-large.  The Survey asked questions pertaining to both “domestic” (defined in the Survey as “in the U.S. between U.S. parties”) and “international” (all other) arbitrations.  The Survey was sent electronically to 212 individuals, all CCA Fellows, of whom 134 individuals (about 63 percent) completed the survey instrument.  (The Survey and associated data are available from Professor Stipanowich.)

Here is some initial information regarding the respondents of the Survey:

Age and Gender

  • The average age of respondents indicating their age (110 individuals) was around 65.
  • 85% of survey participants indicating their gender (123 individuals) were male.

 

Legal backgrounds

  • Among respondents, 81.9% reported having “litigation” backgrounds, 28.4% of the respondents reported having “transactional-attorney” backgrounds, and 9.5% of the respondents reported having” judicial” backgrounds (these categories were not mutually exclusive).
  • The participant pool had a mean arbitration-career length of more than 20 years (calculated as a weighted average of responses to a multiple-choice question asking respondents to choose among several ranges indicating the length of time that has passed since they first arbitrated a case, and using the lowest-possible value for each range) and 78.7% of respondents reported having practiced as arbitrators for at least 20 years.
  • Further, respondents indicated a mean of at least 170 arbitrations each (calculated using the same weighted-average methodology as described above), and over two-thirds of participants (67.7%) reported having served as an arbitrator over 100 times throughout their career.

 

Professionalization of arbitration practice

  • Nearly two-thirds (65.8%) of participants indicated they spend half or more of their work time as arbitrators.
  • Almost twenty percent (19.8%) of respondents indicated that “over 90%” of their work time is spent as an arbitrator.
  • About three-fourths (74.0%) of respondents indicated that they still worked “full time,” and of those who did not work full time over ninety percent (90.9%) worked “at least occasionally.”

 

International practice

  • The great majority (84.4%) of respondents indicated they had previously arbitrated an international dispute.
  • Of those who had done so, almost half (47.7%) had averaged at least one international case per year for the last five years, and almost one-third (32.7%) averaged at least two international cases per year.

 

Forthcoming analyses

In the coming months, we will be offering in-depth analysis of a range of topics covered by the survey, including:

  • Incidence of settlement of arbitrated cases
  • Arbitrator attitudes toward and roles in settlement
  • Arbitrators’ experience as sole arbitrator in cases of various sizes;
  • Experience with streamlined or fast-track procedures; with “baseball” or “final offer” arbitration, or bracketed awards; with procedures for interim/emergency relief; with appellate arbitration rules
  • Experience as non-binding arbitrator or “early neutral evaluator”
  • Administered vs. non-administered arbitration rules, and ad hoc arbitration
  • Experiences with and perceptions of party-appointed arbitrators on tripartite panels
  • Tailoring of arbitration procedures
  • Non-lawyers as arbitrators
  • Handling of motions for summary disposition
  • Management of discovery in arbitration
  • Management of arbitration hearings
  • Standards for arbitrator decision making; handling of legal issues
  • Experiences with med-arb or mixed roles
  • Experience with arbitration provider organizations
  • Trends currently affecting practice and the field-at-large

 

The first fruit of these studies is the just-completed article Commercial Arbitration and Settlement: Empirical Insights into the Roles Arbitrators Play, which leads off the new Penn State Yearbook on Arbitration and Mediation.   The role of arbitrators in setting the stage for settlement has received relatively little attention despite the fact that, as our survey shows, the rate of pre-award and pre-hearing settlement is increasing.  Moreover, different arbitrators are experiencing very different rates of settlement and have different attitudes toward their roles in settlement.  However, the survey shows that many arbitrators are engaged in activities that have an impact on settlement.

Read more on the Straus Institue Theory-to-Practice Research Project.

Read more on the survey of experienced mediators.

Read more on the survey of corporate counsel.

 

Related Posts

  • Part One:  Reflections on the State and Future of Commercial ArbitrationPart One: Reflections on the State and Future of Commercial Arbitration
  • Part Three:  Arbitration in EvolutionPart Three: Arbitration in Evolution
  • Part Two:  Arbitration in EvolutionPart Two: Arbitration in Evolution
  • Part One:  Arbitration in EvolutionPart One: Arbitration in Evolution
  • The Straus Institute Theory-to-Practice Research ProjectThe Straus Institute Theory-to-Practice Research Project
  • Commercial Arbitration and Settlement: Empirical Insights into the Roles Arbitrators PlayCommercial Arbitration and Settlement: Empirical Insights into the Roles Arbitrators Play

Like this article? Share it!


  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
    LinkedIn

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
    X

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
    Facebook

  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
    Pinterest

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
    Email
About Thomas Stipanowich

Thomas J. Stipanowich is William H. Webster Chair in Dispute Resolution and Professor of Law at Pepperdine University, as well as Academic Director of the Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution. The Straus Institute was ranked number one among academic dispute resolution programs each of the last seven years by U.S. News & World Report. He was co-author, with Ian Macneil and Richard Speidel, of the groundbreaking five-volume treatise Federal Arbitration Law: Agreements, Awards & Remedies under the Federal Arbitration Act, cited by the Supreme Court and many other federal and state courts, which was named Best New Legal Book by the Association of American Publishers. He also co-authored Resolving Disputes: Theory, Law and Practice, a law school course book supplemented by many practical exercises. He is the author of many other much-cited publications on arbitration and dispute resolution, and has twice won the CPR Institute's First Prize for Professional Articles (1987 and 2009)--most recently for "Arbitration: The 'New Litigation.'" In 2008, he was given the D'Alemberte/Raven Award, the ABA Dispute Resolution Section's highest honor, for contributions to the field.

Legal Research

Legal Research

Connect with Disputing

Visit Us On LinkedinCheck Our Feed

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

Recent Posts

We're Back!!!!
Feb 24, 2025
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
May 28, 2024
Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements: The Twenty-First Century Arbitration Battleground and Implications for the EU Countries
Nov 27, 2023

Featured Posts

Tips on Taking Good Remote Depositions From a Veteran Court Reporter

Online Mediation May Allow Restorative Justice to Continue During COVID-19

Remote Arbitration Best Practices: Witness Examination

Search

Legal Research

Legal Research


© 2025, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy