Conflict resolution strategies and approaches

Conflict Resolution

History of the Dispute Resolution Movement

Reasons to Employ Conflict Resolution

Conflict Resolution

Types of Conflict

Family

Business

New Trends in Conflict Resolution

Alternative Dispute Resolution

The Future of Conflict Resolution

Conflict resolution is, in its simplest form an attempt by two or more parties to reach and agreement that meets the needs of all parties, without excluding the voice of either and within the range of the ability of both parties to compromise in the face of any given conflict.

The trend toward settling disputes on every level is moving in the clear direction of conflict resolution as a first and/or even last resort, as a result of the desire of many individuals and entities to clearly outline the nature of the needs of those they represent and allow the other party(s) to do the same, so that confusion and misunderstanding is eliminated from the resolution and both parties enter into an agreement, hopefully amiably understanding the rights and responsibilities of the agreement. This work will describe, briefly the history of the trend, the nature of conflict, a few different types of conflict resolution, and lastly discuss new trends in the movement as it expands through time, to better meet the needs of all and help create a system that allows all parties to knowledgeably settle disputes without further conflict, legal action or worse violence.

A quiet revolution is taking place in the methods Americans have available to them for dealing with conflict. Innovations, almost all of them fewer than fifteen years old, are being developed not only to settle disputes out of court, but to supplement or replace the processes used by legislatures to budget funds, by businesses to manage employees, by therapists to treat families, and by diplomats to respond to global crises. There also are new institutions and new methods for resolving conflicts, such as those between neighboring families or countries, that once could be dealt with only by fighting it out with lawyers, with fists, or with armies.

Formal and informal conflict resolution is becoming a preferred method for resolution on many levels, and in many institutions, a greater understanding of conflict resolution is needed to better serve the needs of those who will likely seek it out as a solid alternative to continued conflict in the future.

History of the Dispute Resolution Movement

According to a leading vocal proponent of conflict resolution the formal systems and subsystems that govern the field of conflict resolution have only been in existence for a short time, even though the movement has a strong precedent and an even stronger following in many settings.

The basic history of conflict resolution as a movement has its origins, according to Singer, in the nature of the individualism that has driven the growth and prosperity of the United States, the ideals that encompassed a frontier America with a strong legal focus on instant and sometimes bloody resolution is antiquated and counter productive in a society, attempting to elicit progress in the modern world.

The way we deal with lawbreakers also reflects our frontier and individualistic heritage. Except for the former Soviet Union and South Africa, we lock up more people, for longer periods of time, than any other country in the world. Our civil as well as our criminal courts have been heavily used throughout our history. The public perception of a litigation explosion is not new. De Tocqueville wrote 150 years ago, "Scarcely any political question arises in the United States that is not resolved, sooner or later, into a judicial question."

Diplomatic resolutions have been attempted by nation and individual since the progressive era in the U.S., as a way in which to resolve problems without violence and retribution. The evolution, of conflict resolution often took place within a civil rights agenda, with proponents of change voicing concern and lobbying for concessions that would have a broader agenda, and then going back home to find that even though laws had successfully been changed minds had not and now illegal acts of discrimination on a very basic level were still taking place. The standard of attempting to make changes through the legal system and the legislative bodies further burdened a ballooning legal system, assigned the task of setting precedent for issues great and small in the definitions of the early nation.

When Americans must use the system -- for example, to handle corporate conflicts over substantial sums or personal problems such as accidents, discrimination, or divorce -- court or administrative action displaces our power over our own disputes. The legal process distorts reality; not only speed and economy but the real issues in dispute and the treatment of disputants by the professional dispute resolvers escape our control. Even top corporate managers feel as if their business problems take on a legal life of their own once they turn them over to lawyers and courts."

Conflict resolution came about as an answer to this system, as a way to resolve conflict, without resorting to legal action as well as with the knowledgeable representation of all parties who wished to participate in resolution, in the hopes that the more people knew about how changes would effect their lives, in an expressive and restrictive manner the more likely they would be to uphold the standards of any agreement. With conflict resolution there is at least the potential for all parties to have some control over delivery of ideas, plan of action for resolution and outcome, where are the legal system offers the individual or entity little voice, as to navigate the system correctly one must appoint a voice and then trust the judgment of that voice, regardless of his or her understanding of the position, desires and needs of the entity, and then allow yet another voice to determine the fate of the conflict, large or small. As a secondary aspect of the growth of conflict resolution even attorneys, the frequent appointed representatives have begun to train in and utilize conflict resolution, as a way to avoid legal action, a promising trend.

Reasons to Employ Conflict Resolution

There are countless reasons why an individual or organization might employ conflict resolution to resolve a problem that can somehow be affected by the actions of another body. Many wish to resolve conflict without the interference of legal issues, unknown to themselves as well as to reduce the overall cost in time and money that is involved with legal action. Additionally, many individuals and organizations have seen conflict resolution elicit results that pale in comparison to those they achieved through legal actions, with the additional positive aspect being an ability to voice its own side of the conflict and needs and to better understand the side of the other party and its needs. Corporate entities and individuals can better represent themselves, as well as feel confident that they understand the various sets of "deal breakers" for the other party.

In many cases conflict resolution is a win, win situation, as both parties achieve a voice and at least some control over the outcome and the problem is resolved without expensive legal fees and expensive uncontrollable delays.

Conflict Resolution

Types of Conflict

Just as there are many types of conflict resolution, there are many more types of conflict that can be arbitrated through its systems and processes. There are three main types of conflict that are particularly adept to conflict resolution systems and they encompass three broad areas of great importance to the individual and the organization, family, business and law. Each area of interest brings with it a different type of conflict and a different set of needed outcomes, creating a need to have different systems and opportunities for resolution.

Family

Examples of conflicts in each equally important entity include in family, lesser and greater conflicts from a personal to a monetary level, everything from family communication disputes arising from everyday issues to legal disputes about household concerns, separation, divorce and a less than everyday issues inheritance. Though the family is more likely to settle issues, depending on the level of importance through unassisted conflict resolution this is changing as more and more councilors become trained mediators and more and more family law specialists seek to bridge conflicts in families without litigation, brought on in great part by the desire to see families obtain workable resolutions to achieve cohesion rather than to feel as if all decisions are being made for them without regard of feelings, social dynamic and/or context. This is especially true in the case of divorce, child custody arrangements, economic issues and even inheritance issues as in a family all of these issues are emotionally charged as well as fundamentally important to those involved, much more so that in business and/or legal realms. The trend toward mediation, in particular in divorce cases and child custody/support situations has revolutionized the manner in which divorces are sought and settled, as more and more people find it agreeable to resolve problems issues and concerns in a manner that does not further the emotional turmoil involved in separating a family. "Divorce mediation confronts one of the most difficult conflicts that exist on earth, the breakdown and ending of the intimate, complex marriage relationship." The desire of individuals to remove divorce from the adversarial legal arena is fundamental to the growth of conflict resolution options for couples leaving a marriage. There is nothing more frightening than change, especially when the emotional stakes of the outcome of such change are so engendered in the emotions of the individuals involved, seeking a non-adversarial approach, is foundational to managing the situation effectively while attempting to avoid the pitfalls of making life altering decisions in a highly charged emotional situation, while still maintaining a sense of voice and control, a possibility the legal system does not usually allow as once again the individual must appoint a spokesperson and then trust that this spokesperson has the interest of all as their overriding goal.

Business

The types of conflict that arise in business are varied but can include employee conflicts between groups and/or individuals, conflicts between employees and supervisors/managers/owners as well as conflicts between business, between a business and a community and between a business and a government entity. All these types of conflicts usually have negative effects upon the business of the business and reduce the productivity of workers and managers, therefore reducing profitability and resources, which can potentially create catastrophic losses for all, including employees quitting, stopping or slowing work as a way to achieve a voice, conflicts between upper and lower management, institution conflicts with external entities such as the broader community where they do business, and in the case of governmental conflict excessive fines and potential loss of rights to conduct business.

Intrabusiness disputes have the distinct advantage of a representative system, in the form of unions that have embraced alternative resolution techniques, out of necessity, and have along history of doing so. Though unions are not always present even non-union employers sometimes seek to utilize the standards of conflict resolution outlined by unions as abase from which to work through intrabusiness disputes, especially between employers and employees, from open door communication employers and employees can potentially address conflict by allowing each party to air grievances and to attempt to communicate points of need. Unions additionally frequently represent and voice concerns about community issues as they represent the voice of those who work within the community for a given organization, and it is usually in the best interest of all to allow unions to work toward community welfare and corporate change where it is needed, and especially on issues of serious public concern such as environmental degradation. Unions have also become increasingly adept at creative ways to call attention and force resolution on such issues.

There is no greater example of the conflict resolution movement than that which exists in the legal arena. As was noted early in this work the emphasis on legal means to resolve problems between entities has driven social demand for change in the manner in which the system operates. Additionally the continued pressure on the system to incur the cost and time needed to adequately or inadequately resolve more conflicts than it could ever fully resolve has created an internal pressure to find alternatives. The legal system is an inherently overburdened system, in the United States as precedent setting is a final coarse of action for individuals and it can be costly and counterproductive for all parties, large and small. Over dependence on the legal system has created a situation where many parties seek alternatives to legal action, as the system becomes less and less effective given time and resource constraints and is even less likely to adequately resolve problems. It is for this reason that individuals within the system and outside it are pushing for alternatives that better meet the needs of adequate and voice reformation in any given dispute. This is the reason for the current trend of legal authorities mandating conflict resolution procedures as preliminary aspects of case resolution as well as individuals seeking to better resolve their conflicts with alternatives. It has become increasingly clear that even in criminal law some issues and/or concerns can be better resolved outside the court, where all parties have the right of voice, council and are offered a platform to create adequate settlements. The behind the scene work of many attorneys has become an attempt, desired by many, to resolve conflict before it reaches the courtroom, and seeing the courtroom, litigation, argument and eventual sentencing/mandates as a last resort to resolution.

Additionally, internal recognition of the futility of some legal proceedings, as well as the desire to see outcomes that actually meet the individual needs of the parties, such as settlements that are not completely eaten up in legal cost for individuals as well as issues such as tort reform, a public outcry has created a sense of dire need for change.

When considering the inequities of our trial system, it is facile and convenient to blame individuals or particular circumstances, and then move on. That leaves unsettled, even unexplored, the issue of whether the system within which these individuals and circumstances operate is fundamentally rational and fair. I contend that our system of trial court dispute resolution is gravely flawed; that it has, as Adams, Holmes and others have averred, much irrationality and injustice; and that it, not simply its practitioners, is greatly in need of thoughtful and future-oriented remediation.

The value of remediation, and court-less conflict resolution is immense in the process of both analysis of system flaws as well as finding best practices for the future, and this is a point that all parties, even the most legal minded find value in.

Conclusion

Many people and organizations have been aware for some time that conflict resolution research and practices are of value to our culture, as a shifting mindset about the ability of a ballooning legal system and the overall experience of legal action have been recognized as flawed for some time. Families, businesses and legal professionals would ultimately like to see a legal system that has the time to adequately resolve issues through a reduction in case loads and reform movements. With this understanding it is therefore important to create a sense of urgency to create systems that meet the various needs of these three main seekers of conflict resolution alternatives.

New Trends in Conflict Resolution

Conflict resolution, in its infancy had lofty goals based on ideals that are difficult to meet and just as with any movement these ideals have been both enforced and questioned with regard to the development of universal systems that work to solve conflict by alternative means. The resulting experience will likely continue to drive change and specialization within the field of conflict resolution to better meet the needs of individuals and entities needing conflict resolved.

Alternative Dispute Resolution

One of the new buzz phrases on the lips and minds of professional who advocate conflict resolution is alternative dispute resolution. ADR simply refers to the body of practice and research surrounding conflict resolution and identifies the basic similarities and differences in different types of resolution. It is the umbrella term, if you will to describe the whole of the movement and help insiders and outsiders understand the needs of the broader community.

They all exist somewhere between the polar alternatives of doing nothing or of escalating conflict. They are less formal and generally more private than ritualized court battles. They permit people with disputes to have more active participation in and more control over the processes for solving their own problems than do traditional methods of dealing with conflict. Most of the new methods have been developed in the private sector, although courts and administrative agencies now are borrowing and adapting some of the more successful techniques.

The trend now referred to as ADR is beginning to establish a set of academic and practical guidelines to define and further the cause of conflict resolution and move it from an ideal or good idea to a practical and teachable process, regardless of the area of interest of the parties involved. It seeks to group together the commonalities and allow individuals and organizations the opportunity to better understand conflict resolution and its various systems and sub-systems.

The Future of Conflict Resolution

Conflict resolution no doubt has a promising future. Individuals and organizations are becoming much more aware of alternatives to legal action and are utilizing and creating a fluid growth of best practices for creating systems and providing opportunities fro alternatives to legal quagmire. The umbrella recognition of Alternative Dispute Resolution training and research will likely help those who are entering in the legal, counseling and business world to better understand alternatives and resources that can change the manner in which future disputes are settled. Specialization will also clearly continue in the future as more and more varieties of entities and individuals come tot the round table to meet and discuss solutions to conflict.

Works Cited www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=105950196

Aureli, Filippo and Frans B.M. De Waal, eds. Natural Conflict Resolution. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2000. Book online. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=105950220.Internet. Accessed 20 April 2007. www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5002446516

Cosens, Barbara. "Water Dispute Resolution in the West: Process Elements for the Modern Era in Basin-Wide Problem Solving." Environmental Law 33, no. 4 (2003): 949+. Database online. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5002446516.Internet. Accessed 20 April 2007. www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=106905408

Erickson, Stephen K., and Marilyn S. Mcknight. The Practitioner's Guide to Mediation: A Client-Centered Approach. New York: Wiley, 2001. Book online. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=106905421.Internet. Accessed 20 April 2007. www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=91846659

Frankel, Noralee and Nancy S. Dye, eds. Gender, Class, Race, and Reform in the Progressive Era. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky, 1991. Book online. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=91846822.Internet. Accessed 20 April 2007. www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=23391858

Guttman, Reuben a., and Kathryn D. Wagner. "5 the Asbestos Model: Labor and Citizen Groups and a Multipronged Approach to Regulatory Change," in Conflict Resolution and Public Policy. Edited by Mills, Miriam K., 77-96. New York: Greenwood Press, 1990. Book online. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=23391956.Internet. Accessed 20 April 2007. www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5001338140

Lin, Xiaohua, and Richard Germain. "Sustaining Satisfactory Joint Venture Relationships: The Role of Conflict Resolution Strategy." Journal of International Business Studies 29, no. 1 (1998): 179+. Database online. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5001338140.Internet. Accessed 20 April 2007. www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5009817252

Rhode, Deborah L. "Frivolous Litigation and Civil Justice Reform: Miscasting the Problem, Recasting the Solution." Duke Law Journal 54, no. 2 (2004): 447+. Database online. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5009817252.Internet. Accessed 20 April 2007. www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=85998075