Essay PreviewMore ↓
How to Cite this Page
"Dispute Resoloution And Its Growing Role In U.S. Business." 123HelpMe.com. 22 Feb 2020
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- WEEK 4 – DISCUSSION. Online Dispute Resolution What do you see as the advantages and disadvantages in applying online Dispute Resolution. Please provide the details of your reasoning for your response. Doing online business is a very convenient way to buy products with just a click of the mouse. However, when we click that mouse, do we know what organization we are purchasing from. When purchasing online, you cannot see the condition of the product. Such as the quality, size, and is it actually what you are purchasing.... [tags: Dispute resolution, Mediation]
885 words (2.5 pages)
- For each of the following scenarios, state whether you believe litigation, ADR, or criminal prosecution is the appropriate response and explain your answer, citing information from the textbook as support for your positions. Adele is a secretary for her company. As part of her responsibilities, she can write checks for the purchase of office supplies. One week, she is short on cash and may not have enough money to buy groceries for herself and her daughter. She writes a check out to herself, intending only to do this once and reimburse the account.... [tags: Dispute resolution, Mediation]
1158 words (3.3 pages)
- This essay will provide a detailed examination of what Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is, particularly mediation, the various techniques of ADR, the advantages and disadvantages of ADR; and whether or not courts should have the authority to compel individuals into undertaking mediation or other forms of ADR. This essay argues against courts having the power to compel litigants into mediation but may be afforded powers to encourage parties to go through mediation at first instance. This essay will base its arguments on whether courts should compel civil litigants to follow the ADR route upon the perceived advantages of ADR and its success rate.... [tags: Alternative Dispute Resolution Essays]
2720 words (7.8 pages)
- Alternative Dispute Resolution: Mini-Trial Disputes are almost unavoidable between people when there are disagreements or misunderstandings. In the construction industry, contractual relationships could lead to dispute. To resolve disputes, construction disputes are most likely encouraged to use Alternative Dispute Resolutions such as arbitration, mediation, and mini-trials to resolve their disputes faster and keep the dispute confidential and at lower cost (Ray, 2000). The construction case presented in this paper first resorted to negotiation; however, it could not give the parties a resolution which led to a mini-trial.... [tags: Dispute resolution, Mediation]
732 words (2.1 pages)
- It can be easy to understand what environmentalists and what Indigenous stakeholders potentially have to gain from mediation but what about the corporations. In, “Dispute Resolution in Environmental Conflicts: Panacea or Placebo?” Jennifer Gerard, explains, “Environmental issues have several distinct characteristics which require high financial and resource commitments. The disputes themselves are becoming increasingly complex, as more scientific knowledge is available, leaving more questions asked and unanswered.... [tags: Dispute resolution, Mediation, Human rights]
1014 words (2.9 pages)
- Alternate Dispute Resolution Alternate Dispute Resolution has many benefits serving as a legal substitute for resolving civil disputes. Most courts prefer the proceedings of an ADR as appose to Litigation. In some counties the option of ADR must be analyzed before attempting to initiate the proceedings of litigation. Most district courts along with appeal courts will oversee the negotiations of an ADR. In some circumstances ADRs do not settle well and in those instances the involvement of the courts will resolve the remaining disputes.... [tags: Alternate Dispute Resolution]
1409 words (4 pages)
- Lawyers’ Role in Dispute Resolution Modern American culture provides an inconsistent vision of the role of lawyers in dispute resolution. Lawyers are alternately portrayed as greedy, corrupt people without morals or as necessary and competent allies in protecting individuals against larger and better-funded opponents. In reality, while lawyers have the definite capability to change the outcome of a dispute in a negative way, they ultimately have a positive effect by allowing citizens access to the legal system.... [tags: Law Legal Lawyer]
1642 words (4.7 pages)
- In Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), the informal dispute resolution process, each involved party mutually agrees to meet with a professional third party to constructively and efficiently resolve their dispute rather than go to court. Through ADR, the parties are encouraged to engage in negotiations that promptly lead to the resolution of their dispute. The most common forms of ADR are mediation and arbitration. Although ADR is usually conducted on a voluntary basis, sometimes the courts require it before the case is taken to court.... [tags: ADR Conflict Resolution]
763 words (2.2 pages)
- The Alternative Methods of Dispute Resolution Alternative methods of dispute resolution (ADR) are methods of resolving a dispute without resorting to using the courts. The fundamental principles of Alternative Dispute Resolutions are Negotiation, Tribunals, Conciliation, Arbitration and Mediation. Many of these approaches include the use of a neutral individual such as a mediator who can assist disputing parties in resolving their disagreements. The use of these methods helps in bringing justice to all people concerned with civil matters.... [tags: Papers]
991 words (2.8 pages)
- Alternative Dispute Resolution There are various ways of settling disputes without using the civil courts, these are knows as Alternative Dispute Resolution, or ADR which are used mainly in construction, family, commercial and employment issues. There are 3 main types of ADR: conciliation, mediation and arbitration, this essay will explore how they work and what is involved in each process. Mediation A mediator, a neutral third person is appointed to help both parties reach an agreement, which they will both find acceptable, already we can see an advantage over court hearings because in court hearing only one person can win fully, whereas in mediation both pa... [tags: Papers]
1247 words (3.6 pages)
One reason that ADR has become so important is the rapid increase in the amount of cases being filed to the government for resolution. In the past sixty years, the annual number of cases filed demanding a hearing have increased from about 35,000, to over 250,000, a seven fold increase, while the population has barely doubled. On the appellate level, the number of cases has expanded from 2,800, to 57,000 over the span of the past fifty years, an increase by a factor of twelve (Senger). The government simply does not have the time, nor does it have the resources to present all of these cases in front of a judge and jury. In order to ease the load felt by the court system, the government has began to implement ADR in order to eliminate much of the formality of a trial and pretrial litigation. The proof of the time savings is in the numbers. For example, in cases in civil court in which ADR is contrasted to standard litigation, the cases took an average of six less months to come to a resolution than in traditional hearings. It is also noted that the Justice Department estimated that using ADR saved an average of 89 work hours of attorney and staff time per case versus the normal 260 hours (Bentley). If ADR was to become more common place, the courts would have more room to resolve cases in which litigation has been deemed the appropriate solution, and the only way to resolve the dispute.
The amount of time saved by the parties involved has a direct correlation to the amount of money saved by the use of ADR. A case forced to adjudication can prove extremely costly for all parties involved, often times forced to pay for travel costs, transcripts, expert witness testimony, as well as attorney fees. These costs can stack up quickly, adding to thousands of dollars, in many cases to solve a dispute that has less than that at stake. Another cost is the opportunity cost forfeited by spending so much time in the court room. The longer a case stays in trial, the less a person is able to be working at their profession; ultimately exemplifying the old adage that time is money. The use of ADR often times prevents a case from needing formal adjudication, and an estimate by the Department of Justice indicates that cases solved prior to adjudication save an average of $10,700 in total cost (Bentley).
In a case using ADR, a resolution is not met until both parties involved agree upon the verdict. This is something that is greatly varying from standard litigation in the court room. In a tradition al court, the verdict handed down by the jury, or the judge is the final word, regardless of whether or not both parties’ troubles are appeased by the ruling. The right to dispute this is one that is lost at the time of agreeing to a trial before judge and jury. This comes in stark contrast to ADR where the parties involved can continue to discuss the issue until a solution has been reached, and deemed agreeable by both parties. To a business with a legitimate dispute, leaving the outcome up to a group of jurors can be a nerve racking experience due to the amount of unpredictability in rulings. A panel of jurors can be assembled from a widely varying demographic, with large fluctuations in background, and education, often times leading to unforeseen verdicts. To avoid this, mediation, and arbitration are much more specific to the arena in which the dispute arose. If a dispute about a construction projects boundaries are in dispute, the judge helping with the arbitration will most likely have a significant amount of experience in the field, and a firmer grasp of the laws and issues pertaining to it. This eliminates the potential of a group of jurors misconstruing the law and making a faulted judgment.
When a court hands down a ruling, it is limited in the areas in which it can penalize, and reward businesses. A court is restricted to placing a monetary value on the reward to be given to the plaintiff which creates other problems. When the plaintiff knows that they will only be compensated with money, the logical solution is to ask for as much as possible, leaving other, more fitting options out of the spectrum of feasible outcomes. To the contrary, ADR has the ability to think outside of the box, creating agreements that are much more beneficial to the parties involved than simple sums of money, and in certain cases actually proving advantageous to both parties involved. By allowing the companies to fashion an agreement in suitable terms for both, the people most affected by the verdict have significantly more of an influence in taking the appropriate course of action. By not forcing businesses to attack each other in the court room, attempting to squeeze the largest reward possible from each other, a less hostile way to resolve disputes is in action. Litigation forces the parties to take an object stance and prove that they are right, and attack the opposition’s stance, proving them wrong. This leads to a sense of hostility following trials that can stretch far into the future; negatively impacted the relationships businesses have with each other. When ADR is used to determine an outcome, the two opposing sides are forced to work collaboratively towards a mutually reasonable verdict, fostering a relationship that values communication, and cooperation that can span into the future, setting a tone for any future disputes that may arise. It is also evident that more than a ruling is reached when a mediation or arbitration is in effect. Often times a case is to solve a certain dispute that two parties have, however the problem underlying the case is not reached in the litigation, and allowed to continue to fester and create future hostility between the parties. In alternate dispute resolution, there is less formality than in traditional litigation, allowing a wider view of the problem at hand to be examined, often times leading to an agreement that will set a positive precedence for future disagreements between the parties.
Another advantage of ADR is the increased perception of fairness in justice. When a case is forced to litigation, there is usually a winner and a loser. One party is rewarded a sum of money to compensate for some sort of wrong doing, and the other party is left reeling, and bitter from the loss. In alternate dispute resolution, a verdict is not reached until both parties see fitting, cutting out the place for a winner and a loser, and instead creating the perception of partnering towards a certain outcome. This allows both parties to feel as if they came away from the issue with increased knowledge, and experience, and an overall feeling of satisfaction in the justice system (Senger).
The use of Alternate Dispute Resolution is becoming increasingly commonplace, and for good reason. The ability to generate more fitting verdicts for both parties, the lack of need for time and money draining formal litigation, and the increased perception of justice and satisfaction are just a few ways in which ADR has proved beneficial, and for these reasons will continue to receive more and more attention from all aspects of business and government. The Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1990 sums this up very well in its introduction to the act by saying:
“Administrative proceedings have become increasingly formal, costly, and lengthy resulting in unnecessary expenditures of time and in a decreased likelihood of achieving consensual resolution of disputes; . . . alternative means of dispute resolution have been used in the private sector for many years and, in appropriate circumstances, have yielded decisions that are faster, less expensive, and less con- tentious; . . . such alternative means can lead to more creative, efficient, and sensible outcomes; . . . Federal agencies may not only receive the benefit of techniques that were developed in the private sector, but may also take the lead in the further development and refinement of such techniques; and . . . the availability of a wide range of dispute resolution procedures, and an increased understanding of the most effective use of such procedures, will enhance the operation of the Government and better serve the public”
With ADR being embraced so firmly by the government, and businesses in the private sector it is easy to see how this will continue to grow, and benefit anyone with the need for help in resolving a dispute.
McCallum Jr., Robert D. Interagency Alternate Dispute Resolution. The Steering Department. 2004. 1-2. 24 July 2007
Wallford, Randall. "You Dont Have to Go to Court to Win." ResortLaw.Com. 2001. 24 July 2007
Bentley, Ross. "Taking the Battle Out of Dispute." Personnel Today (2007): 11. 24 July 2007
Senger, Jeffrey M. Federal Dispute Resolution. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004. 1-17.