Putting the Cart Before the Horse: The Benefits of Arbitrating Before Mediating

The authors examined the impact of 2 hybrid dispute resolution procedures (mediation-arbitration [med-arb] and arbitration-mediation [arb-med]) and 3 disputant dyadic structures (individual vs. individual, individual vs. team, and team vs. team) on various dispute outcomes. Consistent with W. H. Ros...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of applied psychology 2002-10, Vol.87 (5), p.978-984
Main Authors: Conlon, Donald E, Moon, Henry, Ng, K. Yee
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Arbitration
Biological and medical sciences
Conflict (Psychology)
Conflict Resolution
Dyads
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Human
Humans
Mediation
Negotiating
Occupational psychology
Organization and management. Professional relation
Psychology
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychology. Psychophysiology
Random Allocation
Statistical analysis
Studies
Teams
Third parties
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The authors examined the impact of 2 hybrid dispute resolution procedures (mediation-arbitration [med-arb] and arbitration-mediation [arb-med]) and 3 disputant dyadic structures (individual vs. individual, individual vs. team, and team vs. team) on various dispute outcomes. Consistent with W. H. Ross and D. E. Conlon (2000) , the authors found that disputants in the arb-med procedure (a) settled in the mediation phase of their procedure more frequently and (b) achieved settlements of higher joint benefit than did disputants in the med-arb procedure. These results suggest that arb-med may be a dispute resolution procedure with broader applicability than originally imagined.
ISSN:0021-9010
1939-1854
DOI:10.1037/0021-9010.87.5.978