Traditionally, negotiation and litigation have been the two prevailing methods of dispute resolution. These alternative methods lie at opposite extremes of a spectrum. The negotiation process is private, voluntary, informal, and unstructured, aimed at reaching a mutually beneficial agreement involving only the parties themselves. The litigation (or adjudication) process is public and follows formal rules whereby both sides of the dispute are heard and a binding outcome is determined by a third party (judge or jury).
The last 20 years have seen increased use of alternative methods for resolving disputes-mediation and arbitration, in particular. In mediation, a third party is engaged to help the parties reach a mutually beneficial agreement. In arbitration, a third party hears the dispute and renders a binding decision.
a. Using available reference sources (in print or on the Internet), provide summaries of the mediation and arbitration processes.
b. Provide a critical assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of each method in reaching efficient agreements (and in terms of time and cost). How do the methods compare to the alternatives of negotiation and litigation?