ADR Strategies in Organizations

Alternative Dispute Resolution Strategies in Organizations

            Within organizations, there exists a need for the usage of alternative dispute resolution strategies.  How an organization chooses to approach the dispute, problem-solve, and determine resolutions depends on the nature of the establishment.  “In particular, relationships and power distribution can encourage individuals to take either direct or indirect approaches, to use either formal or informal procedures, and to take either collective or individual actions to address conflict” (Moffitt & Bordone, 2005, p. 233).  When dealing with varying personalities, hierarchy systems, differing groups and positions, utilizing the proper strategy is key.  “Maintaining productive ongoing relationships in the context of conflict is a skill critical to success…inevitably, parties to every relationship will face some disagreements or confront somewhat incompatible interests and needs” (Moffitt & Bordone, 2005, p. 97).  Therefore, it is vital for organizations to pursue the options tailored to fit the structure of the circumstance and the disputants involved in order to “increase the chances of value-creating resolutions and…maintain or even enhance the prospects for dealing with each other productively in the future” (Moffitt & Bordone, 2005, p. 97).

            These alternative strategies; direct versus indirect, formal versus informal, and individual versus collective, require certain resources within their respective processes:

1. Direct- face to face negotiations, group discussions, formal procedures; arbitration and mediation
2. Indirect- active evasion, avoidance, passive tolerance, limited interaction
3. Formal- mediation, ombuds offices, peer view panels
4. Informal- direct negotiation, informal mediation, conflict avoidance, tolerance of the situation
5. Individual- one on one assessment and resolution, possible mediation
6. Collective- unionization, boycotts, social movement demonstrations, petition generation, team interventions (Moffitt & Bordone, 2005).

The benefits associated with alternative dispute resolution strategies in organizations

are as follows:

1. Direct- guarantees that everyone involved recognizes and participates in the resolution process.
2. Indirect- N/A: avoiding an issue only prolongs the disturbance and has the potential to escalate the conflict out of control. Problems do not solve themselves.
3. Formal- ensures due process protection, creates a systematic structure for conflict resolution which improves fact-finding and reduces bias, deters violations
4. Informal- disputants have complete control over the circumstance / dispute, time and cost efficient
5. Individual- limits confusion, maintains a direct focus on the issue, time efficient
6. Collective- generates social power (Moffitt & Bordone, 2005).

References:

Moffitt, M.L. & Bordone, R.C. (2005) The Handbook of Dispute Resolution.

            San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Alternative Dispute Resolution

ADR

           Currently, on a global scale, alternative dispute resolution processes are utilized throughout business and government alike.  “Increasingly, the international business community is using arbitration to resolve commercial disputes arising in the global marketplace” (American Arbitration Association, 2010).  The American Arbitration Association created The International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR), which “is premised on its ability to move matters forward, facilitate communications, ensure that qualified arbitrators and mediators are appointed, control costs, understand cultural sensitivities, resolve procedural impasses, and properly interpret and apply its International Arbitration and Mediation Rules” (American Arbitration Association, 2010).  “Companies that engage in domestic mediation to solve problems want the same options for dispute resolution with overseas customers or clients” (Moffitt & Bordone, 2005, p. 443) as well.

In addition, globalization has led to standardizing terms of arbitration, negotiation, and litigation thus increasing judicial cooperation.  Arbitration, whose roots developed from international commercial dispute resolution, continues to serve as a method “for dealing with commercial disputes across borders when domestic laws” (Moffitt & Bordone, 2005, p.446) are differing and obscure.  International diplomacy, international relations, and foreign affairs utilize dispute-settlement negotiation and deal-making negotiation in order to settle hostage situations and foreign arrests, or to craft treaties.  Also, international mediation “has become even more institutionalized and promoted as an alternative to warfare” (Moffitt & Bordone, 2005, p.444).

In the future, alternative dispute resolution practices will continue to resolve business and commerce issues, border conflicts, etc.  As the world continues to connect, varying individuals, businesses, and government, through globalization and increased communication technologies, conflict will increase requiring ADR to be utilized in abundance on a grand scale and force these strategies to evolve in the process.

References:

American Arbitration Association. Dispute Resolution Services Worldwide. Retrieved

            May 27, 2010, from http://www.adr.org/icdr.      

Moffitt, M.L. & Bordone, R.C. (2005) The Handbook of Dispute Resolution.

            San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.