|Help

Patterns of ADR Use in CORPORATE DISPUTES - Dispute Resolution Journal - Vol. 54, No. 1

Author(s): 
David B. Lipsky
Ronald L. Seeber
Page Count: 
6 pages
Published: 
February, 1999
Author Detail: 

David Lipsky is a professor at Cornell University and the director of the Cornell/PERC Institute on Conflict Resolution. His research and teaching primarily focus on negotiation, conflict resolution, and collective bargaining.

Ronald Seeber is a professor at Cornell University, and the executive director at the Cornell/PERC Institute on Conflict Resolution. His research has covered a wide range of topics in the field of labor-management relations.

PDF52.64 KB

$40.00
Description: 

Originally from Dispute Resolution Journal

Preview Page


The following article is an excerpt from “The Appropriate Resolution of Corporate Disputes: A Report on the Growing Use of ADR by U.S.
Corporations,” a survey published in 1998 by the Cornell/PERC Institute on Conflict Resolution.

Alternative dispute resolution means different things to different people, and the term is often used so broadly as to be meaningless. In our attempt to gauge the extent of ADR use, it was therefore critical that all survey respondents use a common definition. After considering many options, we chose to define ADR as “the use of any form of mediation or arbitration as a substitute for the public judicial or administrative
process available to resolve a dispute.”

We asked respondents a range of questions designed to gauge the extent of ADR use. Specifically, we wanted to know which ADR processes they used (e.g., mediation) and in what kinds of cases (e.g., employment). We asked about respondents’ experiences not just with mediation and arbitration but also with other processes and techniques that we suspected were less widely used.