3 Signs That You (Or Your Clients) Are Dispute-Savvy

Whether you are a dispute resolution practitioner or a commercial operator, you know that some manage to navigate the commercial dispute resolution world more effectively than others. What distinguishes those who thrive from those who barely survive?

The answer may be simpler than you think, but the implications of understanding this could have a big impact on the way you approach commercial disputes.

The Global Pound Conference is travelling around the world asking commercial users, judges, mediators, lawyers, academics and government officials to share everything they know about the difference between users who are dispute-savvy and those who are not.

After talking to the first 350 respondents, this is what we know so far:

If you are dispute-savvy:

1. You see the bigger picture

You look for solutions or ways to move forward rather than focusing on vengeance or blame. To do this you consider the dispute from different perspectives, rather than having a fixed mindset about what the outcome should be. You understand the importance of maintaining business relationships for continued commercial success.

2. You are more autonomous

You take an active role in negotiations around both the process and the outcome of a dispute. You are less reliant on lawyers to drive things and look to draw on a range of dispute resolution processes that are tailored to your particular dispute.

3. You have realistic expectations

You take a pragmatic approach to disputes. You are aware that resolving disputes costs both time and money. To maximise the chance of obtaining cost-effective, timely and enforceable solutions you keep sight of the bigger picture.

The consequences for these findings are twofold.

Firstly, for those of us who are commercial clients, we can use this information to consider the way we approach disputes.

Secondly, for those of us who are commercial practitioners, we can use the information to identify the different needs, wants and expectations of our clients.

In the meantime, the GPC Series will continue to collect data of this nature from around the world. For those of you who want more information about the research underpinning this blog, please refer to the Singapore Session 1: Hierarchy of needs, wants and expectations of parties involved in commercial dispute resolution processes.

Written by Emma-May Litchfield and Danielle Hutchinson.

emdanielle-hutchinson

Emma-May Litchfield and Danielle Hutchinson are academics in Australia, who focus on empirically-based applied research. They work in both the Melbourne Graduate School of Education at the University of Melbourne and the Graduate School of Business and Law at RMIT University. At present, Danielle and Emma-May sit on the Executive and Academic Committees of the Global Pound Conference Series 2016-17.

Danielle and Emma-May are the co-founders and directors of the consulting firm Resolution Resources, who provide dispute resolution services and solutions both nationally and internationally. Together they work as dispute resolution advisors, providers and educators.

8 comments

Dr Rosemary Howell

This is an important, useful blog. Whilst we have had some historical information about parties’ behaviour, the reliance on quantitative data, drawn from forced-choice questions, has limited the value . For the first time we now have qualitative data, drawn from participants’ discussion of the conference questions – providing a much richer understanding of what happens and why. This is truly living up to the promise of the GPC.

Jonathan Crowe

[…] committed to tailoring your business to meet their needs? Irrespective of whether your clients are ‘dispute-savvy’ or still finding their way into the world of commercial dispute resolution, there are things that […]

[…] committed to tailoring your business to meet their needs? Irrespective of whether your clients are ‘dispute-savvy’ or still finding their way into the world of commercial dispute resolution, there are things that […]

[…] expectation and experience between sophisticated users (with the report coining the concept of ‘dispute savvy’ users) and novices and to move from our anecdotal assumptions of the dispute resolution […]

[…] expectation and experience between sophisticated users (with the report coining the concept of ‘dispute savvy’ users) and novices and to move from our anecdotal assumptions of the dispute resolution […]

[…] to see the benefits of hybrid processes such as med-arb. Secondly, there was a realisation that dispute-savvy parties desire tailored processes that require DR practitioners to be familiar with a range of […]

[…] to see the benefits of hybrid processes such as med-arb. Secondly, there was a realisation that dispute-savvy parties desire tailored processes that require DR practitioners to be familiar with a range of […]