Alternative Dispute Resolution University of Phoenix Learning Team Essay Example For Students

Alternative Dispute Resolution: University of Phoenix Learning Team Essay Any group or team that works together to achieve a common goal is bound to experience some form of conflict. In the context of a University of Phoenix learning team, settling these disputes in an efficient and quick manner allows the team to be more productive and thereby earn a higher grade. Having some form of resolution process in writing for the team to follow when a dispute does happen will then allow for a more effective learning team. Some of the potential disputes that may arise in this setting include differences in opinion regarding the direction of the team or the direction of the project that the team is working on. Additionally, the team might find itself confronted with the problem of a team member not making the contributions he committed to. In this setting it is highly doubtful a team would file some form of lawsuit against the offending member. First, dealing with the costs of such an idea is prohibitive. Second, using a court to settle one of the above situations is just a bit on the extreme side! Not all disputes need to go to court! In fact, going to court would not even be an effective method strictly because of the time it would take to resolve in that manner. The team needs a quick solution to the problem that it faces. Keeping speed, cost, and simplicity all in mind it is obvious that some form of alternative method is called for. Cheeseman (2010) provides several alternatives: Negotiation, Arbitration, Mediation, Conciliation, Mini-Trial, Fact-Finding, and a Judicial Referee. Seeing that ongoing relationships are involved, and a speedy resolution is required, I chose to use Mediation method for the Learning Team Alternative Dispute Resolution Clause. Mediation requires a neutral and knowledgeable third party to meet with the parties involved, gather the pertinent facts and then help the parties reach a mutually agreed settlement (Cheeseman 2010). Further, Morel notes that Mediation successfully resolves disputes 90 percent of the time (2005). The outcome to pursue isn’t necessarily to assign blame for a failure, but rather to change a behavior so that future success can be achieved by the team. This is the facilitative model, as opposed to the evaluative model – which seeks to point out the strengths and weaknesses in each side’s arguments and then forecast the likely outcome if the case were to go to court. Learning Team Alternative Dispute Resolution Clause When a dispute among team members arises, the team members are to find a valid mediator from their non-team member peers. The goal of the mediation should be to clarify team member responsibilities and implement required changes to the team charter so that future disputes will be avoided. References Cheeseman, H. R. (2010). Business law:  Legal environment, online commerce, business ethics, and international issues  (7th ed. ). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Morel, J. L. (2005,  October). Alternative Dispute Resolution. IDC Quarterly, 15(4), 1-3. Top of Form color-code matches: default mode: auto-navigation: Save Cancel Bottom of Form Top of Form * - Word Count: words * - Percentage: % or Cancel Bottom of Form * preferences * Help Turnitin Originality Report * Processed on: 07-25-10 7:49 PM CDT * ID: 143535153 * Word Count: 503 * Submitted: 1 Alternative Dispute Resolution By Brian Smith Similarity Index 5% Whats this? Similarity by Source Internet  Sources: 5% Publications: 0% Student  Papers: N/A exclude quoted exclude bibliography exclude small matches download refresh print mode: 5% match (Internet from 7/20/10) http://www. essay-blogs. com Alternative Dispute Resolution Brian Scott Smith LAW531 July 26, 2010 Professor Keith Merriweather Any group or team that works together to achieve a common goal is bound to experience some form of conflict. In the context of a University of Phoenix learning team, settling these disputes in an efficient and quick manner allows the team to be more productive and thereby earn a higher grade. .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8 , .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8 .postImageUrl , .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8 .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8 , .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8:hover , .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8:visited , .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8:active { border:0!important; } .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8 .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8 { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8:active , .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8 .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8 .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8 .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8 .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8 .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8 .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u68870d70c29a663ecf873963f8089bd8:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Scopes Monkey Trail EssayHaving some form of resolution process in writing for the team to follow when a dispute does happen will then allow for a more effective learning team. Some of the potential disputes that may arise in this setting include differences in opinion regarding the direction of the team or the direction of the project that the team is working on. Additionally, the team might find itself confronted with the problem of a team member not making the contributions he committed to. In this setting it is highly doubtful a team would file some form of lawsuit against the offending member. First, dealing with the costs of such an idea is prohibitive. Second, using a court to settle one of the above situations is just a bit on the extreme side! Not all disputes need to go to court! In fact, going to court would not even be an effective method strictly because of the time it would take to resolve in that manner. The team needs a quick solution to the problem that it faces. Keeping speed, cost, and simplicity all in mind it is obvious that some form of alternative method is called for. Cheeseman (2010) provides several alternatives: Negotiation, Arbitration, Mediation, Conciliation, Mini-Trial, Fact-Finding, and a Judicial Referee. Seeing that ongoing relationships are involved, and a speedy resolution is required, I chose to use Mediation method for the Learning Team Alternative Dispute Resolution Clause. Mediation requires a neutral and knowledgeable third party to meet with the parties involved, gather the pertinent facts and then help the parties reach a mutually agreed settlement (Cheeseman 2010). Further, Morel notes that Mediation successfully resolves disputes 90 percent of the time (2005). The outcome to pursue isn’t necessarily to assign blame for a failure, but rather to change a behavior so that future success can be achieved by the team. This is the facilitative model, as opposed to the evaluative model – which seeks to point out the strengths and weaknesses in each side’s arguments and then forecast the likely outcome if the case were to go to court. Learning Team Alternative Dispute Resolution Clause When a dispute among team members arises, the team members are to find a valid mediator from their non-team member peers. The goal of the mediation should be to clarify team member responsibilities and implement required changes to the team charter so that future disputes will be avoided. References Cheeseman, H. R. (2010). Business law: Legal environment, online commerce, business ethics, and international issues (7th ed. ). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Morel, J. L. (205, October). Alternative Dispute Resolution. IDC Quarterly, 15(4), 1-3.