United States Army Alternative Dispute Resolution Process
Scenario:
The Army Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) process describes techniques to describe and encourage managers to develop and utilize innovative ways of resolving disputes. Techniques used in Alternative Dispute Resolution may be used to prevent dispute, resolve them at earlier stages, or settle them before a formal legal process is executed. The Army as organization understands that disputes will take place. This is not the problem. The ADR process helps determine how to deal with the problem. Should one engage in confrontation? That could result in a bitter dispute, thus damaging a relationship further. A favorable outcome would include the parties reaching an agreement to the dispute.
The 1996 administrative dispute resolution act defines an alternative dispute resolution as “Any procedure that is used to resolve issues in controversy, including, but not limited to, conciliation, facilitation, mediation, fact finding, mini trials, arbitration, and the use of ombuds, or any combination thereof (Office).” This act requires the federal government to adopt alternative dispute resolution programs and processes. The Federal ADR required each agency to implement a policy encouraging use of ADR in an across-the-board range of decision-making, and required the federal trial courts to make ADR programs available to litigants (ADR.gov, 2007).
Throughout the Department of Defense, agencies are employing ADR tools in workplace disputes and contract and procurement disputes, as well as areas of land use and accessibility. The Department reports tangible, timely benefits from ADR use, including time and monetary savings and, perhaps most importantly, a profound impact o...
... middle of paper ...
...ng recreation months, addressing a concern of the homeowners. The state conservation group’s concerns were addressed as it related to the operations (Office)during fish spawning periods, and acceptable releases during power emergencies. There was no agreement on when full generating capacity could be used. There were conflicts as to whether the Governor would accept full generation since he was not present during mediation. the mediator prepared a "single-text" negotiating document that laid out some of the options under consideration. Its purpose was to offer a potential agreement, with each side conceding something in order to come to an agreement. The final agreement, reached in a final negotiating session, provided for a three-month window during which five units could be operated, however as time continued to pass, public interest on the issues dissipated.
Journal of Dispute Resolution, 401-427.
Alternative Dispute Resolution Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is an alternative way for people. to settle disputes instead of going through the courts. There are many different types of ADR, which can be used to settle disputes. The most Common methods of ADR are Tribunals, Negotiation, conciliation. mediation and arbitration of the case.
It has become common to speak of international commercial arbitration since the early 20th century. Development and growth in the interdependence of the global economy and forces of globalization has help boost the concept of international commercial arbitration. Today, economic and business experts, states the fact that no business is purely local, as even the smallest local firms get affected by global events. Globalization has helped eliminate barrier and people are more connected than they were even before. Advanced technology and transportation has also fueled and speed up the connectivity process.
The Norming stage is where conflict is identified and dealt with, and resolution strategies are implemented. Effective Conflict Resolution Strategies There are several effective conflict resolution strategies that can be used to resolve conflicts within a team. One such strategy is to identify the source of the conflict and address it directly. Another strategy is to encourage open communication and active listening among team members. Additionally, compromise and negotiation can be used to find a mutually beneficial solution to the conflict.
The research explores international commercial arbitration with the objective of understanding its global overview, commercial arbitration approach in Islam, and specifically in Saudi Arabia. International commercial arbitration is used to resolve disputes arising due to international commercial contracts. Most of the cases include those transactions that take place between private parties across international borders which allows people to avoid litigation in courts. There are both primary and secondary sources in this area including national legislation, treaties, arbitral awards, arbitration rules, and decisions made by the courts. The decision obtained as a result of the process is usually binding to the involved parties.
A group can only be called a team if the members are actively working together toward a common goal. A team must have the capability to set goals, make decisions, solve problems, and share responsibilities. For a team to be successful, trust must be earned between its members by being consistent and reliable (Temme & Katzel, 2005). When more than one person is working on a particular task, inconsistent views or opinions commonly arise. People come from different backgrounds and live through different life experiences therefore, even when working towards a common goal, they will not always see eye to eye. Major conflict that is not dealt with can devastate a team or organization (Make Conflict Work, 2008). In some situations, conflict can be more constructive than destructive. Recognizing the difference between conflict that is constructive to the team and conflict that is destructive to the team is important. Trying to prevent the conflict is not always the best way to manage conflict when working within a team setting. Understanding conflict, what causes it, and how to resolve conflict effectively, should consume full concentration.
Alternative Dispute Resolution or ADR refers to a number of various processes that can be used to resolve legal disputes other than by litigation. Recently, methods of dispute resolution which focus on arbitration, mediation and negotiation as an alternative to adjudication have gained notoriety. This notoriety may have been caused by the public perception that ADR methods are less expensive, more efficient, and more satisfactory than the normal traditional course of litigation. The goals of establishing these processes to resolve disputes as an alternative to more formal legal processes include: 1) to make the regular court system more efficient, less costly and more responsive to the needs of the litigants; 2) to offer alternative methods of dispute resolution in addition to the regular court system; and 3) to provide public education about the available alternatives.
workplace include greater total resources, greater knowledge band and a greater source of ideas. However, these advantages can also bring on conflict within teams and the entire workplace. Varney (1989) reported that conflict remained the number one problem within a large company. This was after several attempts were made to train management in conflict resolutions and procedures. However, the conflict remained. The conflict possibly remains because the managers and leaders did not pay attention to the seriousness of the issue. In order to maintain an effective team, leaders and team members must know and be proactive in the conflict resolution techniques and procedures.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) involves dispute resolution processes and techniques that fall outside of the government judicial process. There has been moves against ADR in the past by entities of many political parties and their associates, despite this, ADR has gained inclusive acceptance among both the broad community and the legal profession in past years. In fact, many courts now entail some parties to remedy to ADR of some type, usually mediation, before allowing the parties' cases to be tried. The increasing attractiveness of ADR can be clarified by the increasing caseload of traditional courts, the perception that ADR imposes fewer costs than litigation, a preference for confidentiality, and the desire of some parties to obtain larger control over the selection of the individual or individuals who will decide their dispute.
Grimsley. S. 2003-2015. Third Party Conflict Resolution: Strategies, Lesson & Quiz. Retrieved from the world wide web on 7 February 2015. http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/third-party-conflict-resolution-strategies-lesson-quiz.html
Both forms of ADR have several common characteristics. However, one must consider that a neutral side in both procedures fulfils distinct from one another duties. Mediators do not have the objective to make decision, whereas arbitrators determine an outcome of the case. Upon the termination of the procedure, an arbiter renders a binding award that cannot be later avoided by disputants. During mediation, parties are not contingent upon the third side and enjoy freedom of actions needed for dispute resolution. In contrast, in case of failure to reach an agreement, parties are not legally bound for actions afterwards. By considering the true qualities of arbitration and mediation taken individually, legislation and scientists suggest that in single arbitration, arbitrators may use mediators’ functions to promote amicable settlement and functions of both arbitrators and mediators have incongruous
Mediation can provide significant advantages over litigation in interstate water disputes. Mediators can be invaluable in resolving disputes. For example, meditators can assist by setting reasonable deadlines, sidestepping aggressive tactics, and finding creative solutions for states to consider. Mediation also involves creating win-win situations, where all states can expect to benefit more than they would in litigation. In addition, water cases involve complex issues, and mediators can help manage those complexities and keep the process moving forward. Specifically, mediation has three major advantages over litigation in water disputes: 1) it saves time, 2) it saves money, and 3) it builds long-term relationships,
Mediation is a form of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Mediation is a process which it assists disputed parties to arrive to a mutually agreed resolution without going to court. As the out of court problem solving approach, mediation is a more convenient way for parties which trying to avoid the hassle and loving some flexibility from the more rigid court procedure. Mediation can be said as an informal process of which parties during this process is encouraged to work together among the disputed parties in good faith in order to solve their problems and disputes at a lower financial cost and it consume lesser time as opposed to the court procedure. Mediation recently has become more common as one of dispute resolution process especially for disputes which have relations to divorce matter, child custody or even for child visitation especially for its privacy and confidentiality.
It is argued that the key factor in ADR application is that all it’s’ method are designed to assist the disputing parties resolve their differences in a manner that is creative and most suited to the particular dispute. Yet these achievements are not sweeping enough to conclude that the adversarial procedures are irrelevant. Though some people see ADR methods as supplanting the adversarial system, but these thoughts could only hold water where the courts in many jurisdictions are unable to resolve all disputes in a manner appealing to litigants, but until then ADR methods will be designated as collaborative dispute resolution system with the conventional litigation system.
This model distinguishes six possible sources of conflict that may arise: incompatible goals, differentiation, interdependence, scarce resources, ambiguous rules, and communication problem (McShane and Von Glinow 332-333). Incompatible goals involves that “the goal of one person or department seem to interfere with another person’s or department’s goal” (McShane and Von Glinow 333). Differentiation is described as the “difference among people, departments, and other entities regarding their training, values, beliefs, and experiences” (McShane and Von Glinow 333). Interdependence “occurs where individuals operate interdependently except for reliance on a common source or authority” (McShane and Von Glinow 335). Scarce Resources are a source of conflict when several persons or units require the same recourse to fulfill their goals. Ambiguous Rules occur as a source of conflict because “uncertainty increases the risk that one party intends to interfere with the other party’s goals” (McShane and Von Glinow 335). Communication Problems are a source of conflict “due to the lack of opportunity, ability, or motivation to communicate effectively” (McShane and Von Glinow 333).