Dispute resolution takes into consideration the various processes used in resolving disputes between conflicting parties (Campbell 2010). Disputes usually arise in any ideal work setting. They typically occur when two or more parties disagree on something, making matters to remain unsolved. Taking this into consideration, dispute resolution mechanisms are crucial for any organization. Effective dispute resolution mechanisms can significantly help workers when it comes to maintaining healthy relations with their seniors. This is through handling workplace issues at early stages. In most cases, employees become more productive and cooperative when they are assured that their grievances are taken care of (Berger 2006). A good dispute resolution mechanism should focus on effective solution. This is because it can substantially help in avoiding costs of resolving the conflicts externally (Taylor 2002). Taking this into consideration, this paper focuses on the two methods of resolving conflicts; distributive bargaining and mediation. On this, it focuses on the differences between these two methods, their advantages and disadvantages, and situations in which they are applied.
Difference between Mediation and Distributive Bargaining.
Mediation is one of the methods of dispute resolution where a third party, who is neutral, assists the conflicting parties in reaching to a voluntary resolution (Doherty & Guyler 2008). The process of mediation is usually confidential, informal, and flexible. In this process, the mediator assists the conflicting parties in understanding the interests of all the people involved. This is also entails taking into consideration their legal and practical choices. The mediator plays the role of assisting the conflicting parties communicate better, explore practical and legal settlement options, and reach an acceptable solution of the dispute. Usually, the mediator does not help in deciding the solution of the dispute.