Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) refers to any procedure used to resolve a controversy, generally with the assistance of a neutral third party. Such techniques include, but are not limited to, mediation, facilitation, arbitration, fact-finding and mini-trials. Traditional litigation is expensive, time-consuming and extremely stressful to the individuals involved. ADR can overcome most of these negatives by offering the possibility of fast, early settlement, as well as a forum for more flexible, creative solutions to disagreements.

When the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) revised its regulations regarding federal employee complaints of discrimination, federal agencies where mandated to have ADR programs available for employees to use at both the pre-complaint and formal complaint stages. Although an agency is not required to offer ADR in all cases, the EEOC wants ADR as an option, to encourage early settlement of employee complaints

Resolving Conflict

An individual's approach to conflict resolution falls somewhere on a continuum between avoiding an issue all together to forcing your desired outcome on another by whatever means necessary. One's preferred approach is often a learned behavior, based on observations of how conflict was managed (or mismanaged) in the family in which you grew up. Truth is, there are many ways to resolve conflict. The key to success is the ability to clearly define both the issues and desired outcomes, then respond with the approach best suited for the circumstances. For example:

• If the outcome is not very important to you, but is very important to the other party, the best approach may be to accommodate the other person's wishes. Then put the goodwill you generated in the bank, to use another day.
• If the outcome is important to both parties, but time is very limited, a quick compromise may be the best approach.
• If the outcome is very important to both parties, and time allows, collaborating in finding a mutually satisfying solution, where the primary interests of both parties are met, will probably be worth the effort.

As suggested above, some methods of resolving conflict require a greater investment of time and energy, and are often used only when the stakes are high. Other times, the conflict is not worth the time it takes to discuss it, and other methods are in order. The challenge for some people is to overcome a natural tendency to always lean towards one particular style, and over using it to their own disadvantage. For example, if you tend to avoidlict, ask yourself what you are losing in the process. The next time you are faced with a conflict, define what you want to gain, and try a different approach. Conversely, if you always get your way, but your colleagues distrust and despise you, consider whether your luck with your competitive style will soon run out.

Conflict Resolution Strategies

There are many conflict resolution models. Here's one we prefer. It's short, simple to remember, and easy to share with others. With the exception of collaboration, there is nothing you need to "learn" to do to use each method. If you think carefully about the factors involved in the conflict (who the players are, what's at stake, how important this issues is in relation to other possible issues), the proper method to use will be obvious.

Method	What it means	When to use it	Example
Avoidance	Not addressing the issue at all. Ignoring it. Perhaps pretending there is no conflict. Other party gets the outcome they sought.	Issue is unimportant One party is dangerously emotional There is not enough time, energy, or information to properly address the issue	A coworker who is retiring in two months wants you to work extra hours to help him re-arrange an adequate and very complex work process as his "legacy."
Accommodation	Agreeing to the outcome proposed by the opposing party.	Issue is unimportant Maintaining harmony in the relationship is crucial. Opposing party has legitimate authority You're wrong	Giving in on a minor issue, because you need the other party's cooperation in a major issue.
Compromise	Each party gets some of what they want, and sacrifices some of what they want, in order to reach a quick solution.	Time is short The goals of each party are only moderately important When a temporary solution is required until there is time to craft a better one It's important for both parties to feel they got some of what they wanted	You want to hold a meeting from 9-10, several co-workers want to hold the meeting from 10-11. You hold the next one from 9:30-10:30 until you all can examine the pros and cons of each time.
Collaboration	Parties work together to express their primary interests and come up with a creative solution where most primary interests are met.	The issue is important The relationship is important Having a mutually agreed to solution is important	Your have a long-standing conflict with another coworker over a workflow issue. Resolving it would improve customer service and morale within the department.
Competition	One party pursues their concerns at the expense of the other. One uses whatever power one has to win.	Crisis or emergency Losing could hurt the integrity, self-respect, etc. of one side Other more cooperative styles have failed	You have spent significant effort trying to collaborate with a co-worker regarding a problem that is important to him. You need the issue resolved so the work can proceed. You prepare a strong case for your solution and take it to the boss.

For additional federal career advice, visit us at Dreamfedjob.com