Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-31T23:14:14.608Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - A three-step model for Online Dispute Resolution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2010

Arno R. Lodder
Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
John Zeleznikow
Affiliation:
Victoria University of Technology, Melbourne
Get access

Summary

Bellucci et al. (2004) and Lodder and Zeleznikow (2005) have developed a three-step model for Online Dispute Resolution. The Online Dispute Resolution environment should be envisioned as a virtual space in which disputants have a variety of dispute resolution tools at their disposal. Participants can select any tool they consider appropriate for the resolution of their conflict and use the tools in any order or manner they desire, or they can be guided through the process. The proposed three-step model is based on a fixed order. In this chapter, we discuss the model in detail. At the end of this chapter we add to the model some considerations on how fairness in negotiation can be obtained.

The three-step model

In considering the principles and theory underlying their integrated Online Dispute Resolution environment, Lodder and Zeleznikow first evaluated the order in which online disputes are best resolved. The system that they propose conforms to the following sequencing, which in our opinion produces the most effective Online Dispute Resolution environment:

  1. (1) First, the negotiation support tool should provide feedback on the likely outcome(s) of the dispute if the negotiation were to fail – i.e. the ‘best alternative to a negotiated agreement’ (BATNA).

  2. (2) Second, the tool should attempt to resolve any existing conflicts using argumentation or dialogue techniques.

  3. (3) Third, for those issues not resolved in step two, the tool should employ decision analysis techniques and compensation/trade-off strategies in order to facilitate resolution of the dispute.

Finally, if the result from step three is not acceptable to the parties, the tool should allow the parties to return to step two and repeat the process recursively until either the dispute is resolved or a stalemate occurs.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×