Question

1.         Please describe the five conflict handling modes as set forth in the Thomas-Kilman Conflict Mode Instrument. In doing so, please be sure to discuss the ramifications of underusing and overusing each.

2.         Please describe and distinguish between the following alternative/appropriate dispute resolution methodologies: mediation, fact-finding, arbitration

3.         Please describe and distinguish between the three models of mediation

Answer 1

Answer-1
One of these modes is known as the competing option. This option is placed at the top left section of the model. It means that one takes a wholly uncooperative and assertive approach when it comes to conflict resolution. It also means that aggressively defending a position whereby one feels is correct. It could also be summed up as simply trying to beat the other side through whichever means necessary. If one overuses the competing mode, he or she is likely to end up with an impasse on his hands and a conflict that is not resolved. This is because there will be no room for compromise within the dialogue. On the other hand, if one underuses this mode, there is a likelihood of ceding too much ground leading to a resolution that one feels shortchanged.
   Accommodating is yet another mode. This option lies at the bottom right section of the model and it means that one takes a wholly co-operative and unassertive approach. This particular model could take the form of selfless charity or generosity. It may also entail giving in to another individual's wishes when one clearly does not prefer to. Overusing this mode will thus lead to yielding and easily buckling to pressure from the other side in a bid to accommodate their wishes. It is the polar opposite of the competing option. On the other hand, underusing this option reduces the likelihood of conflict being resolved but at the same time, it ensures one's wishes are factored in at the final resolution.
   The avoiding option is located at the model’s bottom-left section. This option means that one takes on an uncooperative and unassertive approach to the particular conflict and does not tackle it. This option could take the form of sidestepping the issue at hand, putting it off to be handled on a later date or simply moving away from a threatening situation. If one overuses this option, none of the conflicts will get resolved since there will not be an opportunity to tackle it or argue it out. Underusing this mode is healthy since it means attempts are made to deal with a conflict thus increasing the chances of it being resolved.
   The compromising mode is located at the center of the model since it is both cooperative and assertive but only to a given extent. This approach borrows from the school of thought that "half sixpence is better than none". In the end, both sides get something even if not everything. This mode, therefore, means splitting the difference between the divergent positions or seeking out a quick solution in the middle ground. Overusing this mode is healthy since it increases the rate of satisfying conflict resolution. On the other hand, underusing the mode leads to dissatisfied conflicting partners.
The mode is known as collaborating lies at the topmost position of the model and can be viewed as the extreme of avoiding. This means being willing to hold the belief that whenever two parties are at loggerheads, it is possible for both of them to end up getting what they want. This model is dependent on mutual respect and creativity in seeking solutions. However, overusing this mode could lead to long-drawn-out conflict resolution processes as the mediator seeks to please both sides and ensure they all get what they seek. On the other hand, underusing the mode leads to dissatisfied conflicting parties.
Answer-2
Mediation refers to a structured, dynamic, as well as an interactive process whereby a neutral entity assists the disputing parties when it comes to resolving conflict through the utilization of specialized negotiation and communication techniques. Mediation is usually a party-centered procedure since it is primarily focused on the rights, needs as well as interests of the various parties in question. In this process, the mediator employs a broad variety of techniques when guiding the process in a direction that is constructive leading to parties arriving at an optimal solution.
Fact-Finding is the duty of an individual or group of individuals within an administrative or judicial proceeding that has the responsibility of determining the facts, which are relevant to come to a decision on a given controversy. A fact-finding exercise is supposed to be impartial, objective as well as timely. Fact-finding may be carried out before the process of mediation starts in order to get all the facts on the table.
Arbitration refers to a form of alternative dispute resolution or ADR whereby the disputes are resolved outside the court system. In this process, one or even more people decide the dispute, and an arbitration award is also deemed to be legally binding on both sides and gets enforced by the courts. This process is normally employed when it comes to resolving commercial disputes more so when it comes to international commercial transactions.
Answer-3
One of the models is known as facilitative mediation. In this model, the mediator is expected to structure a process to assist the parties to arrive at a mutually agreeable resolution. He, therefore, asks questions, normalizes and validates the parties' points of view, and assists the parties when it comes to finding as well as analyzing the resolution options. Under this model, the facilitative mediator is not expected to make any recommendations to the involved parties, offer his or her advice as to the case’s outcome, or even predict what a court may do in such a case. The parties are thus in charge of the outcome while the mediator is in charge of the process.
Under the evaluative mediation model, the mediator assists the involved parties to reach a resolution by pointing out their cases' weaknesses and making a prediction as to what a jury or judge would likely do. Such a mediator may make informal or formal recommendations to the parties as to the issues’ outcome. An evaluative mediator is mostly concerned with the parties’ legal rights rather than interests and needs. His evaluation is therefore based on the legal concept of fairness.
Transformative mediation is mostly based on the values of empowerment of all the parties as much as possible and recognition of the parties of the various other parties’ interests, values, needs as well as points of view. These mediators, therefore, meet with all the parties together because only they can provide each other with the required recognition.