Advantages And Disadvantages Of Alternative Dispute Resolution
Until very recently, conflict was seen as something negative that had to be avoided. This may be so because we perceive more the destructive consequences that are used to resolve the disputes, and not so much the conflict itself.
On the other hand, we also take it with an attitude of competitiveness, to win everything and obviously at the same time risk it all in case that we lose. So, we treat whatever conflict as a struggle between two mutually exclusive parties.
However, and thankfully this mentality is changing little by little. We see that conflict is an inevitable risk of human relationships. The thing that we have to worry about is that it can take either a constructive course or a destructive one. So, therefore, the question is not so much about what we can do to not have problems, but to know how to treat them, and regulate them or transform them.
Paraphrasing Jonh Paul Lederach, that 'conflict is a natural process to every human person, that can be positive in the change of relationships, or destructive, according to the way to regulate it'.
After studying about the disputes and ways of solving them, I have come to the belief that the conflict is neither destructive, nor inevitable, nor an uncontrollable aspect of human nature. People are finally realizing that discussing and dealing with conflicts can produce satisfactory results. There has been an increase of interest in negotiation, mediation and alternative means of conflict resolution. Searching a non-violent resolution of conflicts can turn out to be pretty satisfactory to all involved. But not to forget that there are always to sides of everything.
Ok, so. There are many types of ADR and in some cases, you may try a combination of different types to resolve a dispute. But we are just going to focus right now on the main ones. For example; the mediation is very useful when the parties want to preserve their relationship, it is also a quick and inexpensive way to resolve disputes. Because in reality it only takes a little time to sit down and discuss, using the mediator as a tool to be able to push somehow some of the emotions away. The complicated part of this means is that all the parties involved have to be willing to cooperate, if they are not, it is just a waste of time. And also, it is sometimes a little complicated when one party has some power or influence over the other.
The advantages of negotiation however are that the parties learn to master their feelings. And so, an agreement can be reached that results in mutual satisfaction of interests. It helps to establish priorities and a fair result can be reached for both parties, leading to a common good. What could be a disadvantage is that both parties have to be willing to discuss and sacrifice part of their interests, if one is not, the negotiation will not be effective. That is why this method is recommended only to those who are aware that it is not easy, and will probably have to yield a little.
And the other one would be arbitration. This one is ideal when the parties want to submit their dispute to the decision of a third party, different from the court. It is much simpler and cheaper than a judicial process. But same as the other methods, the parties must be willing to accept the result.
In conclusion, after making a somewhat general study about what are the alternative methods of conflict resolution, it was possible to see in each case, these methods have a fundamental problem of difficult solution: the good the parties. If the parties do not put their part of the conflicts would inevitably end up in courts or worse still the parties would take justice into. Which is what we are trying to avoid.
Biography
- Lederach, J. P. , 2003. The Little Book of Conflict Transformation. . [En línea] Available at: www. goodbks. com
