Many people confuse mediation and arbitration.  I heard a very interesting story about the two processes at the annual conference of the Association for Conflict Resolution last year.  The keynote speaker related an incident that happened to him on an airplane.  Two people began to squabble about the overhead bin space.  The flight attendant tried to calm the people down, but it didn’t seem to help.  He decided to intervene and use his mediation skills to help them resolve it.  He did so successfully and returned to his seat. The gentleman seated beside him stood up and said “He’s an arbitrator!”  Of course, the speaker was a mediator, not an arbitrator.  This story illustrates how the public often confuses the two processes.

Arbitration involves a neutral third party who listens to witnesses and reviews evidence before making a decision for the parties.  It is less formal than a court trial, but still produces a decision imposed on the parties. Arbitration is often used in civil/commercial matters.

Mediation is different.  A mediator is a neutral third party who doesn’t hear testimony or review documents.  More importantly, a mediator does not make decisions for the parties.  She/He does not act as a judge.  The mediator is there to help the parties communicate in a way that will assist them in resolving their differences.  The parties decide the outcome.  They are empowered to make their own decisions about their future.  They come up with a mutually agreeable resolution to their problems.

So, you can see that the processes are very different.  While they are often grouped under the heading of “Alternative Dispute Resolution”, they are very different in their approach and outcome.

This entry was posted on Monday, June 21st, 2010 at 2:36 pm and is filed under Conflict Coaching, Conflict Resolution Tips, Mediation Info, News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.