A Framework for Understanding Consensus-Building Initiation

The potential of consensus building is dependent upon overcoming difficulties associated with the challenges in getting parties to the table. This article builds a framework for understanding the factors and variables most fundamentally involved in the initiation of consensus-building efforts. Nine factors involved at the beginning of a consensus-building process are identified and outlined. The framework is structured on three major functions of the initiation phase: the definition of the problem, the structure of negotiation, and the motivation to participate.     

Bringing Horses to Water? Overcoming Bad Relationships in the Pre-Negotiating Stage of Consensus Building

This article uses a case-study methodology to explore the impact of problematic relationships on the initiation of consensus-building efforts. The article notes that poor relations hinder the initiation process, while the expectation of benefits likely to result from the effort fosters the involvement of parties. The association between poor relations and expected benefits is explored with a focus on the appeal of collaboration. Strategies are then outlined to help facilitators to deal with problematic relationships by mitigating poor relations, highlighting incentives for participation, and building on the appeal of collaboration. Facilitators can use these strategies to increase their chances of success in initiating consensus-building efforts.     

The Negative Impact of Attorneys on Mediation Outcomes: A Myth or a Reality?

Mediators often do not welcome the presence of attorneys at the mediation table. Because of the apparent contradictions between both professions, many mediators believe that the presence of attorneys is prejudicial to the mediation process. Using empirical data collected from workplace mediation cases, we have explored the actual impact of the presence of attorneys. Our results indicate that the presence of an attorney does not significantly affect the outcome of a mediation, with two exceptions. First, the presence of attorneys in a mediation process reduces the parties' level of satisfaction with the mediator. Second, the presence of an attorney would appear to hinder the level of reconciliation possible between the parties.     

Enhancing Efficiency or Crying over Spilled Milk: The Benefits of Reform

We analyze the welfare gains from the reform of existinggovernment-induced distortions. Our results provide support forpolicies aimed at eliminating monopoly and other types of economicdistortion. Welfare gains over the status quo exist wheneverderegulation occurs. The threat of deregulation can induce amonopoly or cartel to modify its behavior, so a reform policy canprove beneficial even if reform does not actually occur. Optimalpolicy with commitment in fact allows a monopoly to deterderegulation. The possibility of reregulation does not reverse ourresults; the per period welfare gain from reform remainsundiminished.     

An Interdisciplinary Case Management Protocol for Child Resistance or Refusal Dynamics†

High‐conflict parental separation cases associated with child's estrangement or contact refusal take an unusually large amount of court time and generate high emotional costs for parents and children. This paper reports on a study of a research‐based pilot project and protocol, called the Parenting Conflict Resolution (PCR), which is intended to reduce parental conflict, improve interparental communication, and support or restore the parent–child relationship. The protocol was developed at the Superior Court in Quebec City (Canada), and involves single judge case management, and lawyers' commitment to have the child's best interests as their primary consideration and to guide their clients to trust the process. The assigned judge and lawyers have the ongoing involvement of a mandated psychotherapist, taking a family systems approach with the case. The PCR also requires the parents to participate in a psycho‐educational, introspective group program to work on co‐parenting and communication skills. Ongoing communication between the professionals involved in the PCR is required to ensure cohesion and accountability. This pilot project was implemented with 10 high‐conflict families, 6 of which presented with the child's resistance or refusal to see one parent. A qualitative data study was undertaken into the experiences of all the participants. The most salient result is the resumption of parent–child contact in all six contact refusal cases. Discussion highlights key elements to successfully address these cases: (a) interdisciplinary program delivery, (b) systemic understanding of the contact problems, (c) focus on the child's best interest, (d) single judge assigned to the case, (e) lawyers' support of the parents' participation, and (f) psychotherapist reporting to the court.     

A Study of the Emergence of Cooperation in Mediation

All mediators confront the challenge of how to encourage cooperation among parties in a mediation. Based on a phenomenological study of workplace mediation, this article explores the variables that are linked to the emergence of cooperation between parties. In the first part of the study, factors influencing the desire to cooperate are identified and categorized, based upon whether they help or hinder cooperation. The second part of the study compares the characteristics of cooperative and antagonistic mediation climates in order to better understand how cooperation is established during the mediation process. Based on the findings, strategies are proposed to help mediators facilitate the transition of an antagonistic climate into a cooperative one and thereby encourage the emergence of cooperation.     

The Political Economy of Automobile Safety Inspections

Studies of traffic safety typically assumethat policies are adopted to further thepublic interest, thereby ignoring thepolitical motives for policy. Sincepolitical motives can influence the designor enforcement of policies, accounting forpolitical motives has relevance forevaluating policy effectiveness. Weexamine the political motives concerning afrequently-studied traffic safety policy: state-mandated vehicle safety inspection. We distinguish between public interest andspecial interest explanations for safetyinspection. Our econometric models examinethe incidence of inspection across states,and determinants of regulated inspectionfees. The evidence strongly rejects apublic interest explanation, but specialinterest hypotheses also do not proveentirely satisfactory. Since recentstudies find that inspections fail toimprove highway safety, we attribute thecontinued existence of inspection programsto political transaction costs rather thanto the demands of interest groups.     

The Paradox of Accepting One's Share of Responsibility in Mediation

Mediators generally avoid the issue of whether parties accept their individual share of responsibility for a conflict. But the results of this study demonstrate the important role that taking responsibility for the conflict can play to encourage the emergence of cooperation within the mediation process. In this article, the author first explores the role of responsibility within the context of various mediation approaches and styles. Next, he reports the results of a quantitative study that examined the attitudes of disputants involved in workplace conflict mediations. His results indicate that acceptance of responsibility can play a parodixical role in the mediation process: it seems to be effective only when both parties jointly acknowledge responsibility. When responsibility is acknowledged unilaterally, it seems to have a negative effect on the emergence of cooperation. Finally, the author proposes an intervention strategy for mediators that is designed to encourage the joint acceptance of responsibility and thus facilitate the emergence of cooperation in mediation.     

A unified model of settlement and trial expenditures: The Priest–Klein model extended

Settlement and trial expenditures are crucially interrelated. The literature on settlement, however, takes no account of models of trial. In this paper, we develop a unified model of settlement and trial expenditures. We do this by discarding the usual assumption of settlement models that trial costs are constant across cases. Instead, we follow the literature on trial by permitting trial costs to vary with the legal merit of the plaintiff's case. Our approach can be used to extend standard models of settlement such as the well-known Priest–Klein model as well as models based on asymmetric information. As a demonstration, we extend the Priest–Klein model and generally overturn that model's canonical results. In particular, we show that even in a fully symmetric model, predicted win rates at trial can deviate substantially from 50 percent. Furthermore, win rates will vary in response to legal reforms that shift the decision standard.     

What Makes Parties Trust Mediators?

The relationship of trust between mediators and parties is a key element of the mediation process. This article reviews the trust relationship from the parties' perspectives. A qualitative research methodology was used to identify five key factors explaining why parties trust their mediator: degree of mastery over the process, explanation of the process, warmth and consideration, chemistry with the parties, and lack of bias toward either party. The theoretical and practical implications of the results are discussed.