Concepts and Terms Quiz BSHS/441 C.W 10-15-2012 1. Describe 2 of the various types of conflict resolution. Advocates and Mediators are the two main types of conflict resolution used in many professions today. To prevent situations from spiraling out of control, mediators are used to keep an equal balance between two conflicting parties. Advocates can often do the same, but are more for one side then both.
In this case it can be heard, and it can be resolved quickly and fairly, with an outcome agreeable to all parties. There several phase to the Alternative dispute resolutions process. The following is the keys in the process: Negotiations The first phase of the ADR process is bilateral, interest-based negotiation. The negotiation phase involves collaboration between the respondent and an ADR Specialist. Negotiations are often conducted on the phone with the ADR Specialist.
“Mediation is presently the most popular form of ADR in use by agencies in employment-related disputes. Mediation is the intervention in a dispute or negotiation of an acceptable impartial and neutral third party, who has no decision-making authority. The objective of this intervention is to assist the parties in reaching a mutually-acceptable resolution of the issues in dispute” (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2014). Second alternative is Peer Review.
Despite being restrictive of the responsibility of the defendant most of the time, it does, however, also extend the liability of the defendant in certain cases. Both will be considered in this essay in further details. The encounter of novel cases necessitates the courts to invoke the Caparo 3-stage test to determine the existence and extent of duty of care not yet established by the authorities. The ‘fair, just, and reasonable’ stage, under which matters of policy are to be considered, is what must always be faced when using the test. Andrew Robertson proposed two categories of policy considerations: ‘justice between the parties’1 and ‘justiciability, community welfare and other non-justice considerations’2 which concerns the effects that recognition of the duty may have on legal system or on people’s behaviour.4 Even when no public policy matters are said to be concerned and the decision reached on the basis of foreseeability and proximity proves desirable, the decision actually conforms to the former sense of policy where it is thought to be fair among the parties to do so.
Mediation is based more on gathering information to find the parties common interests, to negotiate the needs and then come to a mutual agreement, whereas counselling looks at the person, their perceptions and feelings to bring about self-exploration and change. Mediation and counselling employ some of the same processes and techniques such as, active listening, reframing, paraphrasing and summarizing, however these skills are used in counselling to look at underlying emotional issues, but mediation is purely for resolving conflict (Hodges, 2009). Mediation is time limited whereas counselling can be over many sessions, counselling relies on exploration of emotions and interpretation of these emotions whereas mediation works more on negotiation to reach a solution (Messing, 1993). In this essay it will be shown that there is link between counselling and mediation and that some of the methods used can be useful in a therapeutic approach but will also raise an awareness of good practice in both professions. Mediation is usually a step taken to help avoid legal matters such as going to court, but mediation does have a more formal structure similar to what one may see in a legal framework the
Team C Week Three Reflection Sharon Douglas, Crystal Faison, Deone Francois, and Wanzie Fugler LAW/531 July 2, 2012 Haley Major Green Team C Week Three Reflection In civil cases, a settlement is the alternative to pursuing litigation. Litigation is the process for solving civil or commercial disputes through the courts. A settlement typically occurs when the defendant agrees to the claims of the plaintiff and decides not to fight the matter in court, which is also known as settling outside of court. Settlements are more popular because defendants do not want to pay the cost of litigation; therefore a settlement ends litigation. It occurs during the early stages of the trial.
You can’t simply say negotiation is the best conflict solution that applies; you have to show how Mrs. X used an assertive style when a collaborative style would have been appropriate because……. 4. Be thorough. It is better to give a thorough, explicit analysis focused on one or two primary conflict resolutions than it is to barely touch upon six conflict resolution
The theory of cognitive dissonance can be relative in a various ways when applied to use. For example, a 1998 article in the Washington Post written by Deborah Tannen addresses how society is compelled to quarrel about everything. Tannen expresses how the majority of society holds value to being aggressive and contentious in contrast to cooperation and conciliation. She further explains that society has become an argument culture that assumes that opposition is the best way to address issues (Tannen, 1998). If two conflicting issues collide into each other, only one issue could prevail because it is the most sensible.
As a general rule of thumb, ALL parties are entitled to appeal the first trial determination of a case. Further and subsequent appeals usually require the leave of the court which is frequently granted. Nonetheless, these appeals are rare. A reasonable guess is around 1% or lower. Again, the most obvious function of appeal court is to correct errors”.
The main purpose of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is to solve quickly any dispute, eliminate stress on the other members of the group. To have a flexible compromise decision that will promote and reflect consensus between the team members involved. Mediation If the dispute will not be settled, a neutral third party, or a mediator will be asked to mediate the situation. With mediation, those team members who are involved were given a chance together to talk face to face about their disagreements, with the mediator working to help the two members communicate so that they can formulate a possible solution. No one has the power to impose a solution with mediation – rather they must work out their own agreement voluntarily.