Discover published sets by community

A process in which a panel of coworkers or organizational members evaluates a dispute. Advantages: encourages employee engagement, cost-effective, and utilizes internal knowledge. Disadvantages: potential for bias, may not be taken seriously, and confidentiality concerns.

A process where parties come together to discuss the issue and reach a mutually acceptable agreement. Advantages include: privacy, cost-effectiveness, and full control by the parties involved. Disadvantages: may not resolve deep-rooted issues and no formal enforcement mechanism.

Using technology to facilitate the resolution of disputes through the internet. Advantages: greater accessibility, cost-effective, and convenient. Disadvantages: may raise privacy concerns, less suitable for complex cases, and lack of personal touch.

Similar to mediation, but the conciliator plays a more active role in suggesting terms of settlement. Advantages: can provide a framework for future agreements, private, and may be quicker than trial. Disadvantages: not binding, decisions may be seen as less impartial, and may not be suitable for all disputes.

A structured settlement process where each party presents their case to a panel that often includes a neutral third party. Advantages: helps identify strengths and weaknesses of a case, fosters mutual understanding, and could avoid a lengthy trial. Disadvantages: non-binding, time-consuming preparation, and may not lead to a settlement.

A method where a dispute is submitted to one or more arbitrators who give a binding decision. Advantages: quicker than court, expertise of arbitrator, confidentiality. Disadvantages: can be costly, limited appeal options, and may lack procedural protections.

An expert's assessment of the merits of a case, given early in the dispute. Advantages: provides an objective outlook, may resolve disputes early, and educates parties on case strengths. Disadvantages: non-binding, could add to costs if not settled, and the evaluator's opinion may not be fully objective.

A voluntary process where a neutral third-party, the mediator, facilitates communication to help parties reach a settlement. Advantages: maintains relationships, faster resolution, and private. Disadvantages: no guarantee of resolution, may require multiple sessions, and depends on parties' willingness to compromise.

A legal process where parties and their attorneys commit to resolving disputes without court intervention. Advantages: promotes open communication, tailored solutions, and may preserve relationships. Disadvantages: if settlement fails, parties must hire new attorneys, which can increase costs and prolong resolution.

A method where parties agree to resolve disputes by adhering to specific terms outlined in a contract. Advantages: clarity of process, reduces time spent on litigation, and can deter breaches. Disadvantages: potentially limits remedies, might require arbitration, and could be biased if one party had more bargaining power.

Creating a comprehensive approach to managing organizational conflicts. Advantages: proactive conflict management, tailored to organization needs, and fosters a culture of resolution. Disadvantages: requires upfront investment, may be complex to design, and needs continuous adaptation.

A board comprised of experts evaluates project disputes, primarily in construction. Advantages: ongoing project oversight, quick resolution of issues, and reduces litigation. Disadvantages: additional project cost, non-binding recommendations, and can create a perceived bias.

A mock trial with a jury that provides advisory verdict. Advantages: gives a sense of how a real jury might react, prompts settlement discussions, and is less costly than a full trial. Disadvantages: advisory only, still requires significant preparation, and actual jury verdict may differ.

A process where an independent expert decides on a specific issue, often technical or financial. Advantages: quick resolution, expert knowledge applied, and less formal. Disadvantages: final and binding decision, limited to matters within the expert's field, and may be costly.

A non-binding process where a neutral third-party evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of the case. Advantages: educates parties about their cases, potentially avoids trial, and is confidential. Disadvantages: non-binding, might not be accepted by both parties, and requires full disclosure of case facts.

Dispute resolution follows religious principles and is overseen by faith leaders. Advantages: respects religious values, may offer a sense of community, and can be faster than civil courts. Disadvantages: may not be recognized by civil courts, potential for discrimination, and may limit rights and protections.

A third-party helps improve the group decision-making process without offering substantive input. Advantages: encourages participation, enhances group communication, and can make meetings more effective. Disadvantages: no substantive decision-making, outcome depends on group cooperation, and may be seen as unnecessary by some participants.

Parties hire a former judge to hear and decide their case privately. Advantages: faster than public court, flexible scheduling, and parties select the judge. Disadvantages: can be expensive, decision is still legally binding, and public record of judgment may be required.

An independent, impartial person who investigates and resolves individual complaints. Advantages: can offer a fair and independent review, usually free for complainants, and can recommend systemic changes. Disadvantages: recommendations are not always binding, limited authority, and may not be equipped to handle all types of disputes.