ODR for Organizational Conflict - ADRhub - Creighton NCR2024-03-29T06:38:44Zhttp://www.adrhub.com/forum/topics/odr-for-organizational?commentId=4905899%3AComment%3A6612&x=1&feed=yes&xn_auth=noIt is my opinion that ODR for…tag:www.adrhub.com,2010-12-10:4905899:Comment:66122010-12-10T17:42:56.000ZGuy McGuinnhttp://www.adrhub.com/profile/GuyMcGuinn
<p>It is my opinion that ODR forums do not necessarily <em>cause</em> hostile or negative emotions or communication, but they can certainly help to facilitate them. Rather than yielding negative or positive results, the genuine benefit of an ODR process such as this is that it encourages honesty between the disputing parties and the mediator. This honesty <em>could</em> result in a more vitriolic or hostile statement. However, in any case, this emotion and candor should be valued because it…</p>
<p>It is my opinion that ODR forums do not necessarily <em>cause</em> hostile or negative emotions or communication, but they can certainly help to facilitate them. Rather than yielding negative or positive results, the genuine benefit of an ODR process such as this is that it encourages honesty between the disputing parties and the mediator. This honesty <em>could</em> result in a more vitriolic or hostile statement. However, in any case, this emotion and candor should be valued because it more appropriately frames the conflict than a mild-mannered explanation ever could. Separated of the possible reaction of the opposing party, and free from the potential feeling of judgement that may result from a face-to-face meeting with mediator, online intakes (such as the one provided by the Juripax-ODR technology) allow parties to express their true feelings about disputes without fear of retribution. These kind of statements are invaluable because they tell the story to the third party more clearly, and expose the true roots of the conflict between parties, even if those roots are gnarled and knotted.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I see this as being especially helpful in work-related conflicts. It is easy to imagine that a worker with a grievance against his or her employer may not feel comfortable (for a multitude of reasons) bringing up their claim one-on-one with their boss, or even to their company's human resource department. The fear that bringing up a complaint against management may result in disciplinary action, or even termination, may be enough to squelch the complaint and leave the worker without recourse to improve their working conditions. An online-intake device may be just the tool needed to help ameliorate this problem. If, with the help of self-guided technology, a worker were able to write down (in concise and clear terms) the facts of the dispute and his or her testimony on the issue in question, he or she is infinitely more prepared to resolve the problem because the program has systematically designed their claim and bulked up its legal armor.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>With online intakes from both parties to a dispute, the mediator than has an objective set of the facts as perceived by both sides, rather than jumbled facts extricated from a lengthy and circuitous private conference. With these in hand, the mediator can then see the dispute from the viewpoint of both parties, informed by the unrestrained candor that the online intake format allows for, and may arrive at a more informed conclusion as to the true causes of the dispute, and ways in which those causes can be ferreted out, and solved in an open and comprehensive manner.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><cite>May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://adrhub.com/forum/topics/odr-for-organizational?id=4905899%3ATopic%3A3217&page=1#4905899Comment3535"><div>To start the discussion off, let’s relate to the following question:<br/> <br/> People often assume that online communication is often much more hostile than face-to-face communication. Between conflicted parties, online communication may give rise to the expression, or attribution, of more negative emotions. What is your opinion about this?</div>
</blockquote> I feel as though the use of s…tag:www.adrhub.com,2010-10-29:4905899:Comment:43772010-10-29T19:59:51.000ZJoe Sparcohttp://www.adrhub.com/profile/JoeSparco
I feel as though the use of statistics like those presented by Bryan Hanson and Bill Warters could make a profound impact on the current practices of ODR. Resolving conflict through an online process which produces a positive outcome for such a good percentage of people could be very useful in an organizational setting. I am curious, though, to understand the percentage of workers that would elect to utilize ODR to resolve their disputes currently, and how this percentage is expected to change…
I feel as though the use of statistics like those presented by Bryan Hanson and Bill Warters could make a profound impact on the current practices of ODR. Resolving conflict through an online process which produces a positive outcome for such a good percentage of people could be very useful in an organizational setting. I am curious, though, to understand the percentage of workers that would elect to utilize ODR to resolve their disputes currently, and how this percentage is expected to change in the next several years. Nice choice here Bryan in ter…tag:www.adrhub.com,2010-10-28:4905899:Comment:43212010-10-28T21:34:40.000ZBill Wartershttp://www.adrhub.com/profile/BillWarters
Nice choice here Bryan in terms of some data providing support for the idea that conflict can be "embraced" rather than simply avoided, suppressed or battled out. An old 1970's article by Walter Hobbs on conflict handling in higher education described the dominant model in Higher Ed as analogous to "a defective pressure-cooker: unsuccessful suppression is followed by an unpredictable eruption--producing, more often than not, a genuine mess." We can do better than…
Nice choice here Bryan in terms of some data providing support for the idea that conflict can be "embraced" rather than simply avoided, suppressed or battled out. An old 1970's article by Walter Hobbs on conflict handling in higher education described the dominant model in Higher Ed as analogous to "a defective pressure-cooker: unsuccessful suppression is followed by an unpredictable eruption--producing, more often than not, a genuine mess." We can do better than this!<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<cite>Bryan Hanson said:</cite><blockquote cite="http://adrhub.com/forum/topics/odr-for-organizational?id=4905899%3ATopic%3A3217&page=3#4905899Comment4198"><div>The average amount of hours spent on conflict within the workplace may not be bad if they are resulting in the positive outcomes of conflict engagement that they describe in this report. For example, “Three quarters (76%) of employees have seen a conflict lead to something positive. Four out of ten (41%) found that it led to a better understanding of other people, while a third (33%) experienced improved working relationships, and three out of ten (29%) even found that conflict led to a better solution to some problem or challenge. Indeed, one in ten (9%) say that conflict resulted in the birth of a major innovation or new idea at work.”<br/> <br/> I see many of the options we have discussed throughout this forum, from May-Britt’s Juriprax to Princeton’s conflict coaching tool, easily integrated into an accessible interface that allows disputants to utilize their training in conflict management in an efficient manner. With the investment in ODR processes alongside continued or increased training, I would assume the level of hours spent on conflict would decrease while the positive outcomes would increase. This sounds like a potentially interesting research project to expand on this CPP study.<br/>
<br/>
<br />
</div>
</blockquote> The CPP report provides a lev…tag:www.adrhub.com,2010-10-28:4905899:Comment:41982010-10-28T05:00:53.000ZBryan Hansonhttp://www.adrhub.com/profile/BryanHanson
The CPP report provides a level of data that is compelling for organizational leaders to invest in their employees’ ability to engage in conflict in a more effective manner. The average amount of hours spent on conflict within the workplace may not be bad if they are resulting in the positive outcomes of conflict engagement that they describe in this report. For example, “Three quarters (76%) of employees have seen a conflict lead to something positive. Four out of ten (41%) found that it led…
The CPP report provides a level of data that is compelling for organizational leaders to invest in their employees’ ability to engage in conflict in a more effective manner. The average amount of hours spent on conflict within the workplace may not be bad if they are resulting in the positive outcomes of conflict engagement that they describe in this report. For example, “Three quarters (76%) of employees have seen a conflict lead to something positive. Four out of ten (41%) found that it led to a better understanding of other people, while a third (33%) experienced improved working relationships, and three out of ten (29%) even found that conflict led to a better solution to some problem or challenge. Indeed, one in ten (9%) say that conflict resulted in the birth of a major innovation or new idea at work.”<br />
<br />
I see many of the options we have discussed throughout this forum, from May-Britt’s Juriprax to Princeton’s conflict coaching tool, easily integrated into an accessible interface that allows disputants to utilize their training in conflict management in an efficient manner. With the investment in ODR processes alongside continued or increased training, I would assume the level of hours spent on conflict would decrease while the positive outcomes would increase. This sounds like a potentially interesting research project to expand on this CPP study.<br />
<br/>
<br/>
<cite>Bill Warters said:</cite><blockquote cite="http://adrhub.com/forum/topics/odr-for-organizational?id=4905899%3ATopic%3A3217&page=3#4905899Comment4160"><div>May-Britt raises the question about motivation and costs associated with workplace conflict. One of the more interesting reports I have seen on this was produced by CPP Inc, an international firm that focuses on professional development in the workplace. Their July 2008 report Workplace Conflict and How Businesses Can Harness it to Thrive <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.cpp.com/pdfs/CPP_Global_Human_Capital_Report_Workplace_Conflict.pdf" target="_blank">(6 MB pdf)</a> compares attitudes about workplace conflict across 9 countries and provides estimates on time spent on conflict and opinions about the need for training in conflict skills etc. Workplace conflict was defined for the purposes of the study as any workplace disagreement that disrupts the flow of work. Studying workers in nine countries, their goal was to examine how different cultures view conflict; the ways they react to it, its short- and long-term impact on individual and company performance; and what (if any) correlations can be drawn between reactions and results both positive and negative. Here's an image from the report showing time estimates related to conflict handling:<br/><p style="text-align: left;"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2504458596?profile=original" alt=""/></p>
<br/>
<br/>
<cite>May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning said:</cite><blockquote cite="http://adrhub.com/forum/topics/odr-for-organizational?commentId=4905899%3AComment%3A4157&xg_source=msg_com_forum#4905899Comment4060"><div>I am delighted to see the interest in this discussion.<br/> By no means do I want to interrupt the present discussion that relates primarily to the effectiveness. I however take the liberty to introduce a parallel discussion and hope we can elaborate a little on the efficiency aspect:<br/> In order for stakeholders to engage there is always the question of the business model (revenue/cost model): why would we use it? what are the advantages in terms of cost (time and money), who is paying for the ODR-technology or neutral services etc.<br/> I would be interested if any of you can provide other information as to the effectiveness of using ODR in workplace cases (hybrid, in preparation only, or fully online)<br/>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote> May-Britt raises the question…tag:www.adrhub.com,2010-10-28:4905899:Comment:41602010-10-28T00:41:31.000ZBill Wartershttp://www.adrhub.com/profile/BillWarters
May-Britt raises the question about motivation and costs associated with workplace conflict. One of the more interesting reports I have seen on this was produced by CPP Inc, an international firm that focuses on professional development in the workplace. Their July 2008 report Workplace Conflict and How Businesses Can Harness it to Thrive <a href="https://www.cpp.com/pdfs/CPP_Global_Human_Capital_Report_Workplace_Conflict.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">(6 MB pdf)</a> compares attitudes…
May-Britt raises the question about motivation and costs associated with workplace conflict. One of the more interesting reports I have seen on this was produced by CPP Inc, an international firm that focuses on professional development in the workplace. Their July 2008 report Workplace Conflict and How Businesses Can Harness it to Thrive <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.cpp.com/pdfs/CPP_Global_Human_Capital_Report_Workplace_Conflict.pdf" target="_blank">(6 MB pdf)</a> compares attitudes about workplace conflict across 9 countries and provides estimates on time spent on conflict and opinions about the need for training in conflict skills etc. Workplace conflict was defined for the purposes of the study as any workplace disagreement that disrupts the flow of work. Studying workers in nine countries, their goal was to examine how different cultures view conflict; the ways they react to it, its short- and long-term impact on individual and company performance; and what (if any) correlations can be drawn between reactions and results both positive and negative. Here's an image from the report showing time estimates related to conflict handling:<br/>
<p style="text-align: left;"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2504458596?profile=original" alt=""/></p>
<br/>
<br/>
<cite>May-Britt Kollenhof-Bruning said:</cite><blockquote cite="http://adrhub.com/forum/topics/odr-for-organizational?commentId=4905899%3AComment%3A4157&xg_source=msg_com_forum#4905899Comment4060"><div>I am delighted to see the interest in this discussion.<br/> By no means do I want to interrupt the present discussion that relates primarily to the effectiveness. I however take the liberty to introduce a parallel discussion and hope we can elaborate a little on the efficiency aspect:<br/> In order for stakeholders to engage there is always the question of the business model (revenue/cost model): why would we use it? what are the advantages in terms of cost (time and money), who is paying for the ODR-technology or neutral services etc.<br/>
I would be interested if any of you can provide other information as to the effectiveness of using ODR in workplace cases (hybrid, in preparation only, or fully online)<br/>
</div>
</blockquote> Thank you- very helpful idea…tag:www.adrhub.com,2010-10-28:4905899:Comment:41572010-10-28T00:19:19.000ZArthur M. Plitthttp://www.adrhub.com/profile/ArthurMPlitt
Thank you- very helpful idea to getting mediations started online.
Thank you- very helpful idea to getting mediations started online. I am delighted to see the int…tag:www.adrhub.com,2010-10-27:4905899:Comment:40602010-10-27T14:05:33.000ZMay-Britt Kollenhof-Bruninghttp://www.adrhub.com/profile/MayBrittKollenhofBruning
I am delighted to see the interest in this discussion.<br></br>
By no means do I want to interrupt the present discussion that relates primarily to the effectiveness. I however take the liberty to introduce a parallel discussion and hope we can elaborate a little on the efficiency aspect:<br></br>
In order for stakeholders to engage there is always the question of the business model (revenue/cost model): why would we use it? what are the advantages in terms of cost (time and money), who is paying for…
I am delighted to see the interest in this discussion.<br/>
By no means do I want to interrupt the present discussion that relates primarily to the effectiveness. I however take the liberty to introduce a parallel discussion and hope we can elaborate a little on the efficiency aspect:<br/>
In order for stakeholders to engage there is always the question of the business model (revenue/cost model): why would we use it? what are the advantages in terms of cost (time and money), who is paying for the ODR-technology or neutral services etc.<br/>
Let me start of with telling you what our experience is:<br/>
Our experiences show that, compared to the average length of a face-to-face procedure in labor or divorce disputes (8 to 10 hours of meetings), savings in time and costs of 30% are feasible when using an online intake. Additional savings are possible when the subsequent process is taking place online. The cost of using the Juripax technology varies between 20-50 euro per case<br/>
PS In cases were employees involved in a conflict are also on sick-leave a 'sense of urgency'-approach to resolve the dispute is noticeable amongst employers, as the later (at least in the Netherlands) partly bear the cost of sick-leave/absence<br/>
I would be interested if any of you can provide other information as to the effectiveness of using ODR in workplace cases (hybrid, in preparation only, or fully online)<br />
Dan, as far as I know technology is being applied in many of the NMB cases. Are the geographical distance or the problems related to meeting f-t-f the the dominant factors to use ODR? are there other motives for your organizations or your clients (e.g. economic reasons) to use ODR and if yes, would you be willing to share your experiences Hi,
Before I forget. Graham,…tag:www.adrhub.com,2010-10-27:4905899:Comment:40592010-10-27T13:30:10.000ZMay-Britt Kollenhof-Bruninghttp://www.adrhub.com/profile/MayBrittKollenhofBruning
Hi,<br />
<br />
Before I forget. Graham,<br />
these are the details of the Brett paper:<br />
Brett, J., Olekalns, M., Goates, N., Friedman, R., Cherry Lisco, C. (2004) “Tortoise or Hare? A Study of the Speed to Resolution in Online Disputes.” Study published by the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University, University of Melbourne Business School, the Owen Graduate School of Management at Vanderbilt and SquareTrade.<br />
google link:…
Hi,<br />
<br />
Before I forget. Graham,<br />
these are the details of the Brett paper:<br />
Brett, J., Olekalns, M., Goates, N., Friedman, R., Cherry Lisco, C. (2004) “Tortoise or Hare? A Study of the Speed to Resolution in Online Disputes.” Study published by the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University, University of Melbourne Business School, the Owen Graduate School of Management at Vanderbilt and SquareTrade.<br />
google link: <a href="http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=navclient&gfns=1&q=%E2%80%9CTortoise+or+Hare%3F+A+Study+of+the+Speed+to+Resolution+in+Online+Disputes" target="_blank">http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=navclient&gfns=1&q=%E2%80%9CTortoise+or+Hare%3F+A+Study+of+the+Speed+to+Resolution+in+Online+Disputes</a><br />
As far as I remember right cases subjected were squaretrade/e-bay cases<br />
<br />
<i>May-Britt, has there been any concern shown by senior management in the organisations using your system that the online intake facility has increased the numbers of grievances raised in the first place over what might otherwise have been the case?</i><br />
<br />
no, I am not aware of an increase of grievances. It is to be noted that in the context were we are using the online tool, the participation in the mediation (and the online intake) is upon invitation and subject to prior commitment of both parties to engage in the process. Thus, as such the intake is not a form that can be publicly accessed.<br />
Note: in those projects were complaint/grievance forms are publicly available e.g. on a website, we have indeed noticed an initial increase. This can be streamlined by intelligent self-help “education” tools. Based on the input given, it engages in a self-assessment Q&A to give the complainant a feeling for the legitimacy of the claim and legal position<br />
<br />
For more information see below sample project:<br />
<a href="http://www.odrandconsumers2010.org/2010/10/03/dutch-project-indicates-the-value-of-odr-in-the-resolution-of-e-commerce-complaints-and-disputes/" target="_blank">http://www.odrandconsumers2010.org/2010/10/03/dutch-project-indicates-the-value-of-odr-in-the-resolution-of-e-commerce-complaints-and-disputes/</a><br />
<br />
<i>One final question to May-Britt - is your system used beyond the initial upload of the complaint - ie does the mediator use it to engage in private discussion with the employee? I ask as,if not, it just raises the continuing subject of the definition of what is ODR ( I need to know in order to know whether to add it to the scope of my work with the EMCOD.net 'access to justice' project.)</i><br />
<br />
No, at least it is not common practice. The parties send their respective intake forms to the mediator and they can not see each others intake forms unless the mediator decides to share the information (or part of it) with the other side. Generally this takes place once the formal mediation has started (on- or offline) As such this is similar to pre-caucusing prior to the mediation session. Although it is not 'forbidden' for the mediator to have a private discussion, we do not 'promote' it as the general rule is that it enables the mediator to deal fairly and equally with all concerned and, as such, facilitates an equitable settlement of the dispute.<br />
It is to be said that generally speaking in the Netherlands any type of private discussions (caususing) is very little used and promoted (contrary to e.g. the US) . In workplace disputes there is a growing tendency however to use it prior to the mediation.<br />
The research done so far is entirely based on the Dutch setting but it would certainly interesting to see the effects of changing part of it. For example: the effect of making intake forms visible for both parties, effects of mediator having private discussions prior to start of the mediation etc.<br />
If you are interested in reviewing the configuration (used for those cases that are currently being subjected to the research) see following role-play (select workplace disputes):<br />
<a href="https://roleplay.juripax.com/php/defaultpage.php?lgset=en" target="_blank">https://roleplay.juripax.com/php/defaultpage.php?lgset=en</a><br />
<br />
I hopes this answers your questions Sure Katalien -
A starting po…tag:www.adrhub.com,2010-10-27:4905899:Comment:38472010-10-27T09:39:07.000ZNoam Ebnerhttp://www.adrhub.com/profile/NoamEbner
Sure Katalien -<br></br>
A starting point (I can't write a 'good' starting point for obvious reasons :-) ) for these issues and other differences between face-to-face communication and e-communication (especially email communication) would be:<br></br>
<a href="http://law.hamline.edu/files/7-Ebner_Bhappu_etal--Youve_Got_Agreement_FINAL_May09.pdf" target="_blank">Ebner, N., Bhappu, A., Brown, J.G., Kovach, K.K. & Kupfer Schneider, A. (2009) “You’ve got agreement: Negoti@ing via email.” In C.…</a>
Sure Katalien -<br/>
A starting point (I can't write a 'good' starting point for obvious reasons :-) ) for these issues and other differences between face-to-face communication and e-communication (especially email communication) would be:<br/>
<a href="http://law.hamline.edu/files/7-Ebner_Bhappu_etal--Youve_Got_Agreement_FINAL_May09.pdf" target="_blank">Ebner, N., Bhappu, A., Brown, J.G., Kovach, K.K. & Kupfer Schneider, A. (2009) “You’ve got agreement: Negoti@ing via email.” In C. Honeyman, J. Coben & G. DiPalo (Eds.) Rethinking Negotiation Teaching: Innovations for Context and Culture. St Paul, MN: DRI Press.<br/>
[Reprinted (2010) Hamline Journal of Public Law and Policy, 31(2), 31(2), 427-458]<br/>
</a><a href="http://law.hamline.edu/files/7-Ebner_Bhappu_etal--Youve_Got_Agreement_FINAL_May09.pdf" target="_blank"></a><br/>
Also, see:<br/>
Lam, S.S.K. and Schaubroeck, J. 2000. Improving group decisions by better pooling information: A comparative advantage of group decision support systems. Journal of Applied Psychology 85: 565-573.<br/>
Nunamaker, J.F., Dennis, A.R., Valancich, J.S. and Vogel, D.R. 1991. Information technology for negotiating groups: Generating options for mutual gain. Management Science 37(10): 1325-1346.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<cite>Katalien Bollen said:</cite><blockquote cite="http://adrhub.com/forum/topics/odr-for-organizational?commentId=4905899%3AComment%3A3846&xg_source=msg_com_forum#4905899Comment3846"><div>Noam, thank you for sharing your ideas! You mention research in multiparty conversations: While face to face it is easy for one dominant party to take over the conversation, text conversations such as email simply do not follow the same rules; => do you have any references of this research?<br/><br/><br/><cite>Katalien Bollen said:</cite><blockquote cite="http://adrhub.com/forum/topics/odr-for-organizational?id=4905899%3ATopic%3A3217&page=2#4905899Comment3833"><div>Graham already posted some interesting and intriguing questions with regard to the use of online tools, mediation and hierarchy. For the third day of discussion, I want to address the following relationship: Is there any relation between hierarchy, the use of online tools, and the expression of (negative) emotions? If so, what are the reasons to assume this?</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote> Noam, thank you for sharing y…tag:www.adrhub.com,2010-10-27:4905899:Comment:38462010-10-27T09:07:21.000ZKatalien Bollenhttp://www.adrhub.com/profile/KatalienBollen
Noam, thank you for sharing your ideas! You mention research in multiparty conversations: While face to face it is easy for one dominant party to take over the conversation, text conversations such as email simply do not follow the same rules; => do you have any references of this research?<br />
<br></br>
<br></br>
<cite>Katalien Bollen said:</cite><blockquote cite="http://adrhub.com/forum/topics/odr-for-organizational?id=4905899%3ATopic%3A3217&page=2#4905899Comment3833"><div>Graham already posted…</div>
</blockquote>
Noam, thank you for sharing your ideas! You mention research in multiparty conversations: While face to face it is easy for one dominant party to take over the conversation, text conversations such as email simply do not follow the same rules; => do you have any references of this research?<br />
<br/>
<br/>
<cite>Katalien Bollen said:</cite><blockquote cite="http://adrhub.com/forum/topics/odr-for-organizational?id=4905899%3ATopic%3A3217&page=2#4905899Comment3833"><div>Graham already posted some interesting and intriguing questions with regard to the use of online tools, mediation and hierarchy. For the third day of discussion, I want to address the following relationship: Is there any relation between hierarchy, the use of online tools, and the expression of (negative) emotions? If so, what are the reasons to assume this?</div>
</blockquote>