Negotiation is usually done party-to-party with no neutral third party such as a mediator or judge. This style of conflict resolution works best when both parties have actual and/or perceived equal amounts of power. An advantage to this process is that the parties feel more in control of the process and the outcomes. A drawback is if one party feels they have less power or authority than the other party, then that party may feel bullied or cohersed into an agreement. I can support your negotiations by facilitating these conversations, identifying/addressing potential power imbalances that may arise, and drafting agreements between the parties.
|
Conflict Resolution Methods
|
|
Mediation |
Facilitation |
Negotiation |
Arbitration |
Litigation |
Positives for parties |
Parties decide the terms of the outcome.
Neutral third party is present.
|
Parties control the direction and terms of the process.
Neutral third party is present.
|
Parties have the authority to limit information sharing. Parties decide the process and outcomes. |
Parties limit the information they share with each other and decide if the final agreement is court-binding.
|
Judge makes a definitive rulling that is enforcable by law. |
Negatives for parties |
Mediator controls the communication process.
|
No unilateral decision making by any one party. |
Neutral third party is not present during this process to level any power imbalances. |
Arbitrators can require findings of facts and will decide the outcome. |
The final decision is a matter of the court; infractions against the final ruling can lead to legal prosecution. |
Cost for parties |
$$ |
$ |
$$ |
$$$ |
$$$$ |
|
|
For more information on negotiation or any other conflict resolution practice, please call 203-215-3553 or email at info@esecrc.com
Use left/right arrows to navigate the slideshow or swipe left/right if using a mobile device