Logo
  • Email
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter



This website is authored by Lester Levy, Esq.
a founding member of JAMS.

  • About
    • About Lester Levy
  • The Basics of Environmental Mediation
    • What types of Environmental Cases can be mediated?
    • The Benefits of Environmental Mediation
    • The Environmental Mediation Process
    • Insurance Company Involvement
    • The Mediation Outcome
  • Case Studies
    • Case Study 1: Objectivity as Resolution Tool Provided Through A Neutral Expert
    • Case Study 2: Working Together
    • Case Study 3: Swift, Fair and Efficient: Awarding Compensation to Toxic Tort Victims
    • Case Study 4: Sequenced Regulatory and Insurance Negotiations
    • Case Study 5: How Communication Both Causes and Ends Conflict
  • Blog
  • In the News
  • Contact
You are here: Home / mediation / Mediation is an Alternative Process

Mediation is an Alternative Process

March 10, 2016 by Lester Levy 2 Comments

Mediation is an alternative processPractitioners in the field of ADR lament that mediation has become increasingly “judicialized” – meaning that it is all too often viewed as just another step on the litigation path toward trial.  That was not the prevailing view when I began my mediation practice almost 25 years ago.  Mediation was viewed as a uniquely significant settlement opportunity, where the parties came prepared to explore settlement options and to negotiate their way to that end.

There is some unfortunate irony in the reduced role that ADR is granted in the contemporary litigator’s playbook.  The litigation mindset is determined to conquer all in its pathway (at least up until the moment of a final verdict).  So much so that even ADR, which is positioned as a true alternative pathway, is reduced to being merely another item in the pre-trial preparation check list.

But mediation is not a trial in miniature.  The assessment of trial risks – and the costs of winning or losing – can be important factors in evaluating whether to settle and at what value.  But mediation has so much more potential than that.  Mediation provides a forum in which to explore alternative approaches and remedies, to better understand what is driving the underlying conflict, and the parties themselves exercise control over where and how it ends.

Mediation academics have identified an alternate metric by which to measure success in  negotiation.  This is referred to as each party’s BATNA.  A BATNA is an acronym for considering whether maintaining the conflict, and moving ahead in litigation, is “Better than the Alternative of a Negotiated Agreement.”  Practically, what this means is that the disputants should step back from the firing line and assess whether the costs, aggravation(s) and risks of unknown results in litigation present a better course than accepting the offer on the table – or offers that might reasonably be obtained through further negotiation.

If you enter mediation with only a litigation mindset – then you are not engaging in “alternative” dispute resolution.  If you look at the conflict and the possibilities of resolving it solely through a lens of the evidence that will be formally introduced at trial, or the likelihood of winning a summary judgment motion, you are merely handicapping the risks against, and potentialities of success, at trial.  If you wait for the other side – or the mediator – to convince you that you should make a settlement offer worthy of consideration, you put the power of resolution in the hands of your opponent.  In so doing, you likely are not representing your own or your client’s interests very well; because you have not even begun to explore the varied possibilities of resolution.  Remember, all parties must say “yes,” for there to be a settlement.

Ironically, most advocates who behave in this way believe that they are negotiating from a position of strength.  I disagree.  I believe that they are merely negotiating within their own limited safety zone, which almost assuredly guarantees that the case will not settle, and may serve only to confirm their own views of the case’s outcome.  Unfortunately, one’s opponent probably is not there with a similar intention of pre-trying the lawsuit, so that any “confirmation” of the likely outcome is illusory.

If your aim is settlement, why approach mediation in such a guarded manner?  If you’re looking for confirmation of the accuracy of your case evaluation, don’t go to mediation, but go straight to trial.  There you will surely find out how strong your case is.  There the court will exercise its sole power to enforce its independent judgment for, or against, your interests.  You will learn with certainty whether your projections were accurate –right or wrong – but you will have lost all control to say “no thank you” if you are unhappy with the result.

Be careful, for this might not be the best course of action, particularly for those who are inclined to be risk-averse.  If you are reluctant to take risk in the context of mediation just imagine how exposed to risk you will feel on the eve of trial, when belatedly you might well regret that you did not explore your opponent’s entreaties to reach a mutually acceptable negotiated settlement.

 

Share this:

  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Email

Related

Filed Under: mediation Tagged With: ADR, alternative dispute resolution, mediation, mediation process, mediation vs. litigation

inter-generational-theft-Brexit-climate-change

The inter-generational theft of Brexit and climate change

In last week’s Brexit vote results, there was a tremendous divide between age groups. 73% of voters under the age of 25 voted to remain in the EU, while about 58% over the age of 45 voted to leave. This generational gap is among the many parallels … Read More...

drinking-water-regulation

Our Drinking Water Regulation Is So Weak Even Flint’s Water Got A Pass

WASHINGTON — Federal drinking water rules are so relaxed that not even the city of Flint, Michigan, has been cited for a violation, even though many Flint residents have been relying on bottled water for drinking and cooking since last year. The … Read More...

Environmental Mediation: A New Paradigm for Resolving Multi-Party Disputes

Some of you may already have seen a copy of my new ebook, in which I propose a new paradigm for resolving complex, multi-party environmental disputes. It relies on mediation -- not as it has been compromised and incorporated into standard litigation … Read More...

Trackbacks

  1. Lack of authority leads to failed mediations - Environmental ADR says:
    April 8, 2016 at 1:24 pm

    […] also goes to the point I have written about in more depth in other blog posts – that mediation is an alternative process, not litigation in miniature.  It is about settlement […]

    Reply
  2. Mediation Agreements with Basic Rules Can Increase Chances of Success - Environmental ADR says:
    May 10, 2016 at 9:54 am

    […] that mirror litigation tactics – to which mediation is intended to provide an alternative – or treating mediation as merely another procedural step in the litigation process by “going through the motions” and appearing to mediate without any real intent to reach […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Tweets by @environmentadr

Environmental Mediation Newsletter

Sign up to receive my environmental mediation newsletter on a monthly basis

Tags

ADR agriculture alternative dispute resolution Apple Apple phones big data Bio diversity Brexit class actions climate change contamination data data analysis eco-friendly environment environmental clean up environmental disputes environmental mediation environmental technology EPA farmed fish Flint global water challenge green living infrastructure legal strategy litigation alternative mediation mediation process mediation vs. litigation nature negotation New Jersey pollution oceans protected areas recycling renewable energy role of mediator settlement sustainability technology toxic tort water water contamintation water summit

About Me

lester-levy

I strongly believe in the value of mediation – said another way, environmental mediation really works. I would go even further: I believe that environmental disputes are perfectly suited to the mediation process – perhaps more so than any other area of legal practice. I have formed these views after mediating environmental cases for more than 20 years, throughout the United States, and having worked with thousands of lawyers, companies, insurance carriers, regulatory agencies and courts. My … Read more

My Latest Posts

  • The inter-generational theft of Brexit and climate change
  • Our Drinking Water Regulation Is So Weak Even Flint’s Water Got A Pass
  • Environmental Mediation: A New Paradigm for Resolving Multi-Party Disputes
  • Flexibility Is Key to Success in Mediation
  • Leaving the EU would put our environment at risk

Connect with Me

Lester Levy

JAMS- New York
620 Eighth Ave. (NY Times Building)
34th Floor
New York, NY 10018
P (212) 751-2700

JAMS- San Francisco
2 Embarcadero Center
Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94111
P (415) 982-5267

Copyright 2016-2020 Lester Levy | Site developed by Good2bSocial