There are various terms that are used to formally address major and minor differences, misunderstanding, and legal disputes between people and nations. One hears the terms Mediation, Arbitration, Transformative Dialogue and combinations of those terms. What ever the descriptive term used to describe the process it will not always follow or be consistent with the descriptions provided here or actually practice There is very little consensus or regulation on what process is used except for those that are court designated.
Generally, when the term resolution is used in the name. it implies that the goal of the process is to gain a lasting result that all parties will be satisfied with the results. the role of the person conducting the session is called a Facilitation or mediator and implies an active role in helping the parties reach resolution.
Arbitration, either binding or non-binding is most often a court designated process, but not necessarily. Here the Arbitrator listens to both sides often in the presence of their attorneys and to the best of her or his ability to weigh the facts or influence the parties perspective, will issue a decision, enforceable by law if previously so stipulated. The results depend on the skill and experience or lack there of by the Arbitrator. to reach a lasting resolution that is satisfying to the parties. There are often winners and losers at the end of the process.
The use of the term Transformative to describe the process implies some kind of major transformation has or can take place, more than one would cause an important and lasting change in someone or something. In the case of both the two practices that use the term Transformative , the goal or objective of the process is to go beyond addressing the he immediate conflict to improve the relationship between the parties and help clarify the overall situation.
- The extensive use of arbitration and other meditation processes were used in labor-management disputes in the 1940s, and have expanded almost to every segment of society. There reasons to read the 1924 book, The New State and work of Mary Parker Follett because it predates by a almost a century most of the thinking, theory and practice of conflict resolution and predates collaborative Dialogue and the seminal work of David Bohm. On Dialogue