Alternation_Dispute_Process

Alternation Dispute Process An alternation dispute resolution (ADR) is a way to settle dispute before a (court or an in-company) trail accords. There are different types of ADRs that includes the following: arbitration, mediation, medarb aka mediation and arbitration, peer review, mini-trails, and rent-a-judge and early neutral evaluation. The most common used is arbitration and the mediation method comes in a close second (Jennings, 2008). There are two major disadvantages to solving disputes through court action, one is, it is very expensive and the second is time, it can take years before a judgment. In the event that conflict arises among team members, in-which it cannot be settled by individual communication within 24 hours of onset, then the medication method will be enacted. All disputes within the learning team will use a medication process for resolution. Medication, will offer a less intimidating, confidential and more flexible assembly for all involved parties regardless of race, age, or socioeconomic background (California Department of Consumer Affairs, 2009, para. 4). The dispute must be in reference to the guidelines set forth in the learning team charter. The effectiveness of ADR is significant. The conflicts between team members who affect the productivity of the team charter will be subject to the ADR process. Under mediation, when people cannot resolve their differences, a neutral mediator will listens to both sides and tries to arrive at an agreement on a resolution. The conflict must be regarding a team member not following charter guideline, such as completing team assignments, and / or not attending team sessions. Kaskell (2007) mentioned that using mediation for disputes cases that result in resolution after the medication generally fall into the 90% range. As mention, the mediator will be a neutral person selected by the remaining members of the learning team. In the event the there is not neutral party then the instructor will be asked to act as mediator. Mediation will not involve all members of the team. Whereas, in an arbitration method the whole team maybe involve in the process, the team involvement is not needed in the mediation process. The mediator will listen to both parties, and will try to find an agreeable solution. This process will not be formal and the mediator does not have the power to force the involved members to agree to a decision. The task of the mediator is help break down deadlock and to successfully arrive to a mutual resolution (Jennings, 2008). The resolution should not be time-consuming, complex nor should unnecessary cost should occur when ADR principles are applied. ADR therefore can assist in resolving team member disputes in which both parties have a fair outcome and continuing relationships can transpire. References California Department of Consumer Affairs (2009). California Dispute Resolution Programs Act – Statutes. Jennings, M. M. (2006). Business: Its legal, ethical, and global environment (7th ed.). Mason, OH: Thomson. Kaskell, P.H. (2007, March). Is your infringement dispute suitable for mediation' Alternatives to the high cost of litigation, 20(3).