A Comparison Of Mediation And Arbitration
| Mediation | Arbitration | ||
| • | Expedited negotiation | • | Adjudication |
| • | Parties control the outcome. | • | Arbitrators control the outcome. |
| • | Mediator has no power to decide. Settlement only with party approval. |
• | Arbitrator is given power to decide. Final and binding decision. |
| • | Exchange of information is voluntary and is often limited. Parties exchange information that will assist in reaching a resolution. | • | Often extensive discovery is required. |
| • | Mediator helps the parties define and understand the issues and each side’s interests. | • | Arbitrator listens to facts and evidence and renders an award. |
| • | Parties vent feelings, tell story, engage in creative problem-solving. | • | Parties present case, testify under oath. |
| • | Process is informal. Parties are active participants. |
• | Process is formal. Attorneys control party participation. |
| • | Joint and private meetings between individual parties and their counsel. | • | Evidentiary hearings. No private communication with the arbitrator. |
| • | Outcome based on needs of parties. | • | Decision based on facts, evidence, and law. |
| • | Result is mutually satisfactory—A relationship may be maintained or created. | • | Result is win/lose award—Relationships are often lost. |
| • | Low cost. | • | More expensive than mediation, but less expensive than traditional litigation. |
| • | Private and confidential. | • | Private (but decisions are publicly available). |
Tags: ADRMediator, Jerry Ray Hall