Advanced Procurement And Dispute Resolution (CW 2)
Within this piece of coursework I will explain and compare various dispute resolution options that are used within the construction industry. The commonly used options that I will be going into further detail are mediation, adjudication, litigation and arbitration. These options will then be evaluated, and then explained of when they should be used. These four options are commonly used within the construction industry to resolve legal arguments that have arisen from various disputes.
Mediation is commonly used within the construction industry when a dispute between parties arises, and legal action is needed. Being used as a consensual process of dispute resolution, in which a third party …show more content…
Where in the process Evaluative mediation is used, the initial mediator will learn all of the facts of the case which has been brought forward. After reviewing the case, the mediator will then express their views on the overall merits as they can see them. Conciliation may initially be a form of evaluative mediation, for example if the conciliator does not reach a settlement acting in facilitative mode, then a recommendation evaluating how, with their views the overall matter should be resolved. Advantages and disadvantages of mediation are as follows;
Quick (Carried out in days)
Does not always result in a settlement agreement
Legal precedent cannot be set in mediation
Mediation has no formal discovery process
Adjudication is a statutory or contractual procedure for quick interim dispute resolution. Adjudication is provided a third party adjudicator which is commonly selected by the parties. Adjudicators can commonly adopt inquisitorial role which may involve taking the overall initiative in ascertaining facts and law. Costs that have been built up over the course of the case
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
These mediation proceedings are not conducted under oath, do not follow traditional rules of evidence and are not limited to developing the facts. Mediators are expected to draw out the parties' perceptions and feelings about the events that have brought them into conflict. It also encourages parties to acknowledge
Should any member refuse to participate in the mediation that member’s action results in a lost position, and the dispute is then resolved. Mediation should not exceed one day. The team leader through directives from the instructor will facilitate the mediation in an attempt to resolve the dispute. Throughout the mediation each team member will be able to state their position and provide any supporting information on their behalf. After each team member has presented their supporting information in regards to the dispute, the instructor will rule on the dispute with the team leader serving as facilitator and witness. The instructor’s ruling is final and shall result in resolution of the dispute.
Traditional approaches to mediation assume that a conflict’s parties and a mediator share one compelling reason for initiating mediation: a desire to reduce,abate,or resolve a conflict.To this end,both sides may invest personnel,time,and resources in the mediation.This shared humanititarian interest maybe the only genuine reason in a few instances of mediation,but normally even this interest intertwines with other, less altruistic,
This type of mediation may be quite similar to mediation that occurs in the civil context such as personal injury or family cases. Prior to commencing mediation, counsel should ensure that the client is prepared to engage in a give and take, mediation requires the agreement from the opposing side thus neither party is going to leave without some concession. Further, the general public has more exposure to the adversarial approach of courtrooms, as such they will need to be prepared for the relaxed and collaborative approach of mediation.
Mediation happens when a 3rd party comes in and helps improve the relationship, enhances communication, and uses effective problem solving techniques. Administrative or managerial approaches and procedures used if conflict is between employees or members of an organization. The 3rd party, who does is allowed to make a decision is doing the mediation and is allowed to make a decision if need be. This approach reminds me of how the military handles conflict within their ranks. Being in the military I have seen this process conducted, they will allow the parties to try to resolve their own conflict, but if they cannot the authority figure does it for them. Arbitration is a private process still including a 3rd party that helps resolve the conflict. Arbitration comes in two forms med-arb and mediation then arbitration. Med-arb uses mediation as the first step to resolve the conflict, if mediation does not work they move on to arbitration, while the mediation then arbitration uses both with a different 3rd party for
“A mediator is a third party who assists interested parties in negotiating a conflict. A mediator controls the mediation process but does not have authority to decide the outcome for the parties” (Barsky, 2007). A mediator, in a given situation, helps to dissolve the conflict and looks to the best interest
Fells (2016, p. 211) wrote “ just as a doctor works to bring a person back to health, so too a mediator works to bring a deadlocked negotiation back to a situation where the parties can reach agreement”. This essay discusses this statement with reference to contemporary research on dispute resolution. In order to comprehend how this is achieved, we must consider the essence of mediation, the different types of mediation and what mediators do. Negotiation and mediation are process used to resolve opposing preferences between parties. Negotiation is defined in Fells (2016, p. 3) as “a process by which two parties with differences that they need to resolve try to reach agreement through
According to the National Law Journal, 88% of lawyers prefer mediation as a way of resolving disputes. Mediation is a popular process to resolve conflicts between businesses (Jennings, 2006).
Mediators are neutral and harbor no invested interest in the conflict or with any of the parties involved. The recommendations made by the mediator is not binding unless all parties agree to the settlement. Going into mediation allows the people engaged in an on-going conflict to reach a mutual agreement, settling their differences instead of participating in lengthy and expensive court proceedings.
Adjudication is the administrative equivalent of a judicial trial. Under adjudication, individual cases are heard by law judges within agencies and a body of rules is developed (Kettl, 2015). Adjudication differs from rulemaking in that it applies only to a specific, limited number of parties involved in an individual case before the agency (Vago, 2015). The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) separates adjudication from rulemaking by stating that adjudication is an agency process for the formulation of an order and an order is a final disposition in a matter other than rulemaking. There is formal and informal adjudication. Formal adjudication involves some kind of hearing, whereas informal adjudication takes place in settings that are non-confrontational and often not even face-to-face and is undertaken by non-hearing deciders (Cane, 2009). Adjudications can take many forms, but generally can be grouped into law enforcement adjudications (such as those conducted by the Federal Trade Commission) benefits adjudications (such as those conducted by the Social Security Administration) and licensing and permit adjudications (such as those conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency) (Forte and Spalding,
There are three major conflict interventions: mediation, arbitration, and negotiation. Each of these interventions have pros and cons. Mediation is the one intervention that incorporates creativity in the resolution process so it benefits all disputants involved. Mediation also promotes collaboration and cooperation more so than arbitration and negotiation do. It is also a more cost efficient for the disputants and is more likely to resolve conflicts quicker. Mediators help defuse anger, improve communication, and specifically work on trust building. Mediation ensures that the matter can be handled privately without risk of public reprimand. On the other hand, mediation does not always result in a settlement like arbitration does. Mediation
Nevertheless, certain categories of ADR have been named and understood to involve the use of particular means and methods to produce the desired end result. These procedures include: negotiation, mediation, arbitration, med-arb, early neutral evaluation, settlement conference and conciliation to name a few. However this essay will concentrate on mediation as a form of alternative dispute resolution.
Throughout the years there has been many definitions of mediation. Nevertheless one the most acceptable definition of mediation refers to this procedure as a “…process in which the participants, with the support of a mediator, identify issues, develop options, consider alternatives and make decisions about future actions…” . They also described mediators as the third party assisting the participants in reaching their decision. This process should form a part of the pre-trial civil litigation process as its advantages on the legal system and the community outweigh its disadvantages. The distinguishing models of mediation make it a suitable approach for all or most civil cases.
With all of these acts and statutes being passed, it seemed as though arbitration was the way to go. But as more and more agreements to arbitrate future disputes were executed, other nonarbitral forms of alternative dispute resolution such as mediation and neutral fact-finding became common.
This paper will cover the difference in the negotiation process and the mediation process and explore some of the barriers that hinder the processes. There is a distinct difference between the negotiation process and the mediation process. Negotiation as defined in Essentials of Negotiation is a process by which two or more parties attempt to resolve their opposing interests (Lewicki, Saunders, and Barry, ) The Negotiation process happens when individuals disagree about a situation and there’s no mutual solution that can be attain by the two parties. The disagreement leads to a conflict which involves misinterpretation, miscommunication and hurt feelings. Because the parties cannot reach a mutual agreement on how to resolve their