Our current society is competitive, demanding and complex that conflict has become a part of modern day living. There are squabbles or disagreements among colleagues, neighbours, friends, family members, and even strangers. The common causes of office disaccord are work style differences, personality clashes, and sense of unfairness. Many complaints made to the Police concern noises, fences, trees, rubbish and stray pets that turn neighbours into foes.
According to www.unifiedlawyers.com, the world’s divorce rate has increased by 251.8% since 1960. Nowadays, nearly half of marriages end up in divorce with Luxembourg topping the list (87%) followed by Spain (65%), France (55%), Russia (51%) and the USA (46%). India (1%) and Chile (3%) have the lowest rates. The most common reason given for divorce is incompatibility, which is nearly thrice that of infidelity. When marriage breaks down, in the majority of cases, those concerned knock non-hesitantly on lawyers’ doors and rush to tribunals or courts.
The legal system is long and costly, whereas mediation and arbitration involve much less time and money; but why do many people opt for the former? Why don’t they resolve conflict by mediation and negotiation?
In mediation, a neutral person helps disputants to come to a consensus on their own. Mediators allow conflicting parties to vent their feelings and expose their grievances, but they don’t impose their solution. It’s the conflicting parties that decide on the outcome of the negotiation. The mediators can help them come up with a resolution that is sustainable and nonbinding.
In arbitration, the third party serves as a judge and is responsible for resolving the dispute. This man or woman listens thoroughly and non-judgementally to each side as they argue their cases and present relevant evidence before rendering a binding decision that is usually confidential and cannot be appealed. Then, they prepare and submit a report to the Court.
In mediation and arbitration, the conflict is resolved when the process in completed, i.e. the settlement is agreed and conflict is resolved. Contrary to what some people think, most mediations are confidential.
During mediation the underlying causes of the conflict is examined, and the solutions that best suit needs and interests of both parties are sought. This is done in a flexible manner without strict rules of procedure to make everyone participative in order to attain a win-win solution. As such, it helps end the conflict or problem; not the relationship. It can deal with multiple parties and a variety of issues at one time; for example, a family conflict involving inheritance of children and their relatives.
According to UK’s Citizen Advice (https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/family/ending-a-relationship/how-to-separate/mediation-to-help-you-separate, participants in mediation report higher satisfaction rates than people who go to court. As well, due to their active involvement, «they have a higher commitment to upholding the settlement than people who have a judge decide for them. Mediations end in agreement 70 to 80% of the time and have high rates of compliance”.
Of course, prevention is better than cure. Avoiding conflict is the best principle. However, since we can’t agree with everyone on everything, we should adjust our behaviours to ensure that we are in a peaceful relationship with others and accept responsibility for our actions. If we are respectful of others, mind our manners and apply the golden rule (i.e. treat others how you want to be treated), there’ll be no need for mediation, or expensive and long legal process. As the saying goes, “reconciliation is better than justice”.