Disputes are common between any group of people that spend some time together. These range from friends, families, and couples to employers and their employees. Some people choose to sweep their issues under the carpet and simulate as near normal a life as possible.
This is nonetheless not only emotionally draining, but in most cases, leads to serious issues in the future. Some disputes can be solved by having a peer mediate between warring parties and bring them together. Some nonetheless call for professional mediation, collaboration or services for arbitration resolution such as those provided by a law firm.
These in most cases are disputes between divorcing couples, employers and employees or contractors and property heirs. These, unlike other differences, have a legal impact. Irrespective of the out-of-court dispute resolution technique you choose for your issue, negotiation will form one of the primary undertakings in it.
This is a process of making joint decisions between parties with opposing views. The following are the models of negotiation your lawyer might use for your case.
Win-Win or Integrative Approach
This is also called a creating value or collaborative approach and is considered the best for dispute resolution since both parties will be satisfied. The primary concern in the integrative negotiation approach is the maximizing of joint outcomes, and it thus works in cases with unlimited resources.
With this alternative, your lawyer will separate people from the issue and focus on the interests of the warring parties rather than their positions for mutual gain. There will also be several possibilities floated before both sides on a dispute decide on the best choice for both of them.
Win-Lose or Distributive Approach
This is also called the claiming value, zero-sum, or competitive approach. It is based on a notion that the dispute can only be settled when one person wins and the other loses. It works best for cases with fixed resources and where one party’s interest opposes the other’s.
Either way, both sides at the end of the resolution should accept and support the decision.
This applies in cases where one party feels his/her interests are threatened and thus ensures the outcome of the case is also unfavorable to the other party. In the lose-lose approach, none of the parties gets what they desire. This model is the least favorable and is thus rarely used for solving conflicts.
This is a somewhat improved approach to the lose-lose strategy. To avoid a situation where none of the parties gets what they want, both will give up part of what they initially sought. A compromise approach is an ideal choice for cases where parties cannot convince each other or when the resource in dispute are limited.
The above negotiation approaches might seem easy enough for you to handle with anyone labeling themselves as a mediator for warring parties. They nonetheless require exceptional expertise to guarantee the outcome is not only fair but also legal.
You might not need a lawyer on a retainer for a personal relationship, but this is essential in businesses. This way, the lawyer will be readily available to negotiate any conflicts before they turn into ugly and costly court battles.