|
ADR is a broad term for resolving active or potential conflicts in a
focused, positive, neutral setting. Mediation, arbitration, negotiated
rule-making, facilitated negotiations and collaborative decision-making
are all approaches to help resolve disputed issues. These terms all have
different specific meanings, applications and techniques, but there are
common elements:
- The process is led by a qualified neutral third
party to the dispute or issue;
- The neutral assesses the issue to identify appropriate
participants and, as much as possible, the issues and scope of the dispute;
- The neutral provides a safe, impartial process that
helps the parties identify the different interests, helps them generate
and explore possible options and move toward a positive outcome;
- It is a voluntary process (it does not replace any
due process).
- It provides a viable alternative to more traditional
approaches to resolving conflict such as litigation or contentious public
hearings before a governing body.
It is widely acknowledged that the benefits of ADR are positive whether
or not formal agreement is reached. ADR can save the disputing parties
time and money. Just as mediation can reduce overburdened courts, mediation
or other ADR techniques can reduce the number and length of emotional
and contentious public hearings allowing more to get done in less time
and most often with better results.
Where agreements are reached, the parties are more likely to be satisfied
with, and willing to comply with, provisions of agreements they have participated
in negotiating. Even when a dispute does not reach agreement, the process
results in people being more accurately informed about facts, processes
and procedures. Misconceptions and expectations are clarified and alternatives
to a negotiated solution are better understood. Face-to-face meetings
usually reduce personal animosity and make the disputes more issue-orientated
and less confrontational.
A "conflict assessment" is undertaken before formally convening
a case to determine if the issue is appropriate and "ripe" for
mediation or other ADR approach. Some issues are not and parties should
never be forced into a process that frustrates all involved.
- All directly affected parties are identified and
are willing to participate in good faith.
- The parties are willing to openly discuss options
(vs. win/lose battle).
- There is a willingness to talk and listen.
- The issues themselves are identifiable and negotiable.
- All parties have the authority to make decisions
(or have them ratified quickly).
Examples of poor candidates for ADR include:
- All affected parties are not involved;
- If one or more of the parties are not willing to negotiate in good faith;
- Issues are based on deeply held personal beliefs
or values;
- Mediation has already been tried once and failed;
- There are no reasonable points to negotiate;
- When the dispute is at the end of another legal process.
While these characteristics individually do not guarantee impasse, they
may indicate that another process would be more appropriate.
Mediation, facilitated negotiation and collaborative problem solving
are effective tools for resolving disputes on a variety of public and
private issues. Watson & Associates is prepared to provide these services
to help projects and issues proceed more smoothly from the outset and
help resolve rough spots before they become major conflicts.
|