Mediation in the context of "Arbitrator"

Play Trivia Questions online!

or

Skip to study material about Mediation in the context of "Arbitrator"

Ad spacer

⭐ Core Definition: Mediation

Mediation is a form of dispute resolution that resolves disputes between two or more parties, facilitated by an independent neutral third party known as the mediator. It is a structured, interactive process where the mediator assists the parties to negotiate a resolution or settlement through the use of specialized communication and negotiation techniques. All participants in mediation are encouraged to participate in the process actively. Mediation is "party-centered," focusing on the needs, interests, and concerns of the individuals involved, rather than imposing a solution from an external authority. The mediator uses a wide variety of techniques to guide the process in a constructive direction and to help the parties find their optimal solution.

Mediation can take different forms, depending on the mediator's approach. In facilitative mediation, the mediator assists parties by fostering communication and helping them understand each other's viewpoints. In evaluative mediation, the mediator may assess the issues, identify possible solutions, and suggest ways to reach an agreement, but without prescribing a specific outcome. Mediation can be evaluative in that the mediator analyzes issues and relevant norms ("reality-testing"), while refraining from providing prescriptive advice to the parties (e.g., "You should do..."). Unlike a judge or arbitrator, mediators do not have the authority to make binding decisions, ensuring that the resolution reflects the voluntary agreement of the parties involved.

↓ Menu

>>>PUT SHARE BUTTONS HERE<<<

👉 Mediation in the context of Arbitrator

An arbitral tribunal or arbitration tribunal, also arbitration commission, arbitration committee or arbitration council is a panel of adjudicators which is convened and sits to resolve a dispute by way of arbitration. The tribunal may consist of a sole arbitrator, or there may be two or more arbitrators, which might include a chairperson or an umpire. The tribunal usually consists of an odd number of arbitrators. Members selected to serve on an arbitration panel are typically professionals with expertise in both law and in friendly dispute resolution (mediation). Some scholars have suggested that the ideal composition of an arbitration commission should include at least also one professional in the field of the disputed situation, in cases that involve questions of asset or damages valuation for instance an economist.

The parties to agree on arbitration are usually free to determine the number and composition of the arbitral tribunal. Many jurisdictions have laws with general rulings in arbitration, they differ as to how many arbitrators should constitute the tribunal if there is no agreement. In some legal systems, an arbitration clause which provides for an even number of arbitrators is understood to imply that the appointed arbitrators will select an additional arbitrator as a chairperson, to avoid deadlock arising.

↓ Explore More Topics
In this Dossier

Mediation in the context of Ultimatum

An ultimatum (Latin for 'the last one'; /ˌʌltɪˈmtəm/; pl.: ultimata or ultimatums) is a demand whose fulfillment is requested in a specified period of time and which is backed up by a threat to be followed through in case of noncompliance (open loop). An ultimatum is generally the final demand in a series of requests. As such, the time allotted is usually short, and the request is understood not to be open to further negotiation. The threat which backs up the ultimatum can vary depending on the demand in question and on the other circumstances.

The word is used in diplomacy to signify the final terms submitted by one of the parties in negotiation for settlement of any subject of disagreement. It is accompanied by an intimation as to how refusal will be regarded. English diplomacy has devised the adroit reservation that refusal will be regarded as an "unfriendly act", a phrase which serves as a warning that the consequences of the rupture of negotiations will be considered from the point of view of forcing a settlement. This opens up a variety of possibilities, such as good offices, mediation, the appointment of a commission of inquiry, arbitration, reprisals, pacific blockade and war.

↑ Return to Menu

Mediation in the context of Neutrality (philosophy)

In philosophy, neutrality is the tendency to not take a side in a conflict (physical or ideological), which may not suggest neutral parties do not have a side or are not a side themselves. In colloquial use, neutral can be synonymous with unbiased. However, bias is a favoritism for one side, distinct from the tendency to act on that favoritism. Neutrality is distinct (though not exclusive) from apathy, ignorance, indifference, doublethink, equality, agreement, and objectivity. Apathy and indifference each imply a level of carelessness about a subject, though a person exhibiting neutrality may feel bias on a subject but choose not to act on it. A neutral person can also be well-informed on a subject and therefore need not be ignorant. Since they can be biased, a neutral person need not feature doublethink (i.e. accepting both sides as correct), equality (i.e. viewing both sides as equal), or agreement (a form of group decision-making; here it would require negotiating a solution on everyone's opinion, including one's own which may not be unbiased). Objectivity suggests siding with the more reasonable position (except journalistic objectivity), where reasonableness is judged by some common basis between the sides, such as logic (thereby avoiding the problem of incommensurability). Neutrality implies tolerance regardless of how disagreeable, deplorable, or unusual a perspective might be.

In moderation and mediation, neutrality is often expected to make judgments or facilitate dialogue independent of any bias, emphasizing on the process rather than the outcome. For example, a neutral party is seen as a party with no (or a fully disclosed) conflict of interest in a conflict, and is expected to operate as if it has no bias. Neutral parties are often perceived as more trustworthy, reliable, and safe. Alternative to acting without a bias, the bias of neutrality itself is the expectation upon the Swiss government (in armed neutrality), and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (in non-interventionism). The Oxford English Dictionary documents that, by at least 1897, "neutral" meant applying the rules to the facts, as in football "Neutral linesmen shall officiate in all games." In the Supreme Court decision Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System v. Southworth based on the United States Constitution's First Amendment, the court decided some funding decisions should be made through a neutral viewpoint.

↑ Return to Menu

Mediation in the context of Chief of staff

The title chief of staff (or head of staff) identifies the leader of a complex organization such as the armed forces, a government institution, or body of persons and it also may identify a principal staff officer (PSO), who is the coordinator of the supporting staff or a primary aide-de-camp to an important individual, such as a president, or a senior military officer, or leader of a large organization.

In general, a chief of staff provides a buffer between a chief executive and that executive's direct-reporting team. The chief of staff generally works behind the scenes to solve problems, mediate disputes, and deal with issues before they are brought to the chief executive. Often chiefs of staff act as a confidant and advisor to the chief executive, acting as a sounding board for ideas. Ultimately the actual duties depend on the position and the people involved. In an organization, the chief of staff may play a role that is metaphorically akin to an “air traffic controller for the leader and the senior team; as an integrator connecting work streams that would otherwise remain siloed; as a communicator linking the leadership team and the broader organization; as an honest broker and truth teller when the leader needs a wide-ranging view without turf considerations; and as a confidant without an organizational agenda.”

↑ Return to Menu

Mediation in the context of Ombudsman

An ombudsman (/ˈɒmbʊdzmən/ OM-buudz-mən, also US: /-bədz-, -bʌdz-/ -⁠bədz-, -⁠budz-) is a government official who investigates and tries to resolve complaints, usually through recommendations (binding or not) or mediation. They are usually appointed by the government or by parliament (often with a significant degree of independence).

Ombudsmen also aim to identify systemic issues leading to poor service or breaches of people's rights. At the national level, most ombudsmen have a wide mandate to deal with the entire public sector, and sometimes also elements of the private sector (for example, contracted service providers). In some cases, there is a more restricted mandate to a certain sector of society. More recent developments have included the creation of specialized children's ombudsmen.

↑ Return to Menu

Mediation in the context of Conflict resolution

Conflict resolution is conceptualized as the methods and processes involved in facilitating the peaceful ending of conflict and retribution. Committed group members attempt to resolve group conflicts by actively communicating information about their conflicting motives or ideologies to the rest of group (e.g., intentions; reasons for holding certain beliefs) and by engaging in collective negotiation. Dimensions of resolution typically parallel the dimensions of conflict in the way the conflict is processed. Cognitive resolution is the way disputants understand and view the conflict, with beliefs, perspectives, understandings and attitudes. Emotional resolution is in the way disputants feel about a conflict, the emotional energy. Behavioral resolution is reflective of how the disputants act, their behavior. Ultimately a wide range of methods and procedures for addressing conflict exist, including negotiation, mediation, mediation-arbitration, diplomacy, and creative peacebuilding.

↑ Return to Menu

Mediation in the context of Xeer

Xeer (pronounced [ħeːr]) is the traditional legal system used by Somalis in Somalia, Djibouti, Somali Region of Ethiopia, and the North Eastern Province in Kenya. It is one of the three systems from which formal Somali law draws its inspiration, the others being civil law and Islamic law. It is believed to pre-date Islam. However, Islam influenced it, with Xeer incorporating many Islamic legal principles. Under this system, the elders, known as the xeer begti, serve as mediator judges and help settle court cases, taking precedent and custom into account. Xeer is polycentric in that different groups within Somali society have different interpretations of xeer.

↑ Return to Menu

Mediation in the context of Community practice

Community practice, also known as mezzo social work, is a branch of social work that focuses on larger social systems and social change, and is tied to the history of social work. The field of community practice social work encompasses community organizing and community organization, community building, social planning, human service management, community development, policy analysis, policy advocacy, mediation, electronic advocacy and other larger systems interventions.

In the UK the term is often used for community work or health visitors.

↑ Return to Menu

Mediation in the context of Peacemaking

Peacemaking is a practical conflict transformation focused upon establishing equitable power relationships robust enough to forestall future conflict, often including the establishment of means of agreeing on ethical decisions within a community, or among parties, that had previously engaged in inappropriate (i.e. violent) responses to conflict. Peacemaking seeks to achieve full reconciliation among adversaries and new mutual understanding among parties and stakeholders. When applied in criminal justice matters, peacemaking is usually called restorative justice, but sometimes also transformative justice, a term coined by the late Canadian justice theorist and activist Ruth Morris. One popular example of peacemaking is the several types of mediation, usually between two parties and involving a third, a facilitator or mediator.

↑ Return to Menu