Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in contracting Term Paper

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in contracting - Term Paper Example In effect, some legal institutions now demand some parties to turn to Alternative Dispute Resolution of some form, normally meditation, before allowing the cases of the parties to be resolved. The escalating reputation of Alternative Dispute Resolution can be described by the rising caseload of conventional courts, the view that Alternative Dispute Resolution inflicts lesser costs than court cases, a preference for privacy, and the need of some parties to have enhanced influence over the choice of the individual or people who will tackle their dispute. Also, a number of the senior judges in certain areas are resiliently favoring the use of mediation in dealing with disputes. The Alternative Dispute Resolution methods are adaptable and flexible to the distinctiveness of each exclusive case and permit the parties to contemplate their individual risks of proceedings. Nevertheless, the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution is a consensual issue and cannot be employed without the agreemen t of the parties in a contract (Sourdin, 2002). This paper will look at Alternative Dispute Resolution in contracting. ... There are also independent techniques, for example, ombuds offices and mediation programs within an organization. Nevertheless, the techniques are identical, whether they are pendant or not and commonly employ the same skill or tool sets, which are largely divisions of the negotiation techniques (Lynch, 2001). In addition, Alternative Dispute Resolution comprises formal tribunals, informal tribunals, formal mediative processes, and informal mediative processes. The typical formal tribunal forms of Alternative Dispute Resolution are private judges and arbitration. The common formal mediative procedure is transfer for mediation before a court appointed mediation panel or mediator. Additionally, common informal techniques include intercession, transfer to non-formal authorities, and social processes (Kellett, 2007). The main variations between formal and informal procedures include the possession or absence of a formal structure for the procedure application and pendency to the procedur e of a court. Requiring the services of an organizational ombudsman’s office is not considered to be a formal process. This is usually voluntary. The International Ombudsman Association Standards of Practice asserts that people should not be compelled to seek the services of an ombuds office. Also, organizational ombuds offices refer individuals to available conflict management alternatives in the organization, both interest-based and right-based, and formal and informal. Moreover, ombuds offices can provide a variety of alternatives themselves because they do not have the decision making authority. This range of alternatives is frequently ignored in existing discussions of Alternative Dispute Resolution (Ruth,