Is Arbitration a Tradition?

Is Arbitration a Tradition?

One of the possible reasons why Arbitration is mostly chosen may be that parties tend to go with the traditional methods, the ones that are already known by the parties, and Arbitration is such a method, whereas Mediation is not. How can somebody chose a mechanism that they have never heard of? Or even if they heard of it… they do not know what it is, or how it works. So, considering the natural fear of the unknown, they will never choose an unfamiliar mechanism to solve their disputes.

People also tend to avoid risks. So, when the time comes to decide which mechanism they will choose to resolve their problems, they go for the familiar and already known method, which is Arbitration. They have already tried it and they know how it works, and they think that it works fine, so why try something new? Why to adventure in a different scenario if already solving the dispute is a big puzzle?

One way to move out of this issue is by education and advertising of Mediation, its advantages and successes not only between the general public, but also to the lawyers and justice system and by adapting the education strategy to each culture(1). This way, the people will know about Mediation and the attorneys will be more eager to recommend it to their clients, making the process more familiar and accepted. The only way to break a tradition is by creating a new one, and Mediation could be a better tradition to solve the international business disputes.

In schools throughout the United States of America a curriculum of conflict resolution is being taught since Kindergarten(2). This is also happening in some other countries in the world, like Argentina and Colombia(3). Considering this, we may say that a new generation of consensus, collaboration and mutual respect may take over our adversarial generation and produce the changes needed to solve disputes in a more effective and less painful way as today.

Literature: