Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution (TMDR): Opportunities and Dangers

Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution (TMDR) presents opportunities and dangers that we cannot yet fully envision. Technologies are available or imminent, such as tele-immersion, that will dramatically change the ways we think about dispute resolution in a virtual environment. Whether or not one finds the idea of TMDR appealing, a generation of teens and preteens is integrating technology so deeply into their daily lives that they not only will expect, but will demand, that those technologies be used in a dispute resolution proceeding. Because girls communicate differently than boys when using technology, it will be interesting to learn if women prove to be more effective technology mediated dispute resolvers than men. TMDR already is proving to be the most appropriate process when great distances are involved or safety and security are paramount. Despite the fears some may have, virtual spaces do not produce only virtual agreements. TMDR can enable us to achieve long-term process goals, and technology usage does not cause us to be less satisfied or content. Although the dangers of technology can be formidable, a number of protective measures are possible. We must be vigilant to ensure that neutrals are not using technology to manipulate dispute resolution processes. And finally, parties and neutrals must take care to protect confidential information from wrongdoers intent on taking advantage of technology\u27s inherent vulnerabilities

Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution (TMDR): Opportunities and Dangers

Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution (TMDR) presents opportunities and dangers that we cannot yet fully envision. Technologies are available or imminent, such as tele-immersion, that will dramatically change the ways we think about dispute resolution in a virtual environment. Whether or not one finds the idea of TMDR appealing, a generation of teens and preteens is integrating technology so deeply into their daily lives that they not only will expect, but will demand, that those technologies be used in a dispute resolution proceeding. Because girls communicate differently than boys when using technology, it will be interesting to learn if women prove to be more effective technology mediated dispute resolvers than men. TMDR already is proving to be the most appropriate process when great distances are involved or safety and security are paramount. Despite the fears some may have, virtual spaces do not produce only virtual agreements. TMDR can enable us to achieve long-term process goals, and technology usage does not cause us to be less satisfied or content. Although the dangers of technology can be formidable, a number of protective measures are possible. We must be vigilant to ensure that neutrals are not using technology to manipulate dispute resolution processes. And finally, parties and neutrals must take care to protect confidential information from wrongdoers intent on taking advantage of technology\u27s inherent vulnerabilities

Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution (TMDR): A New Paradigm for ADR

Published in cooperation with the American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolutio

Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution (TMDR): A New Paradigm for ADR

Published in cooperation with the American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolutio

Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution (TMDR): A New Paradigm for ADR

Technology is changing the way that children are communicating (particularly elementary and pre-school aged children), and these changes have significant implications for alternative dispute resolution processes and practices. Although ADR practitioners and theorists are not ignoring technology, we have focused almost exclusively on the question of how we can use technology to enhance our existing practices. We are not paying sufficient attention to the fact that young children are communicating differently than we communicate. Insufficient energy is being dedicated to the question of how those differences in communication inevitably influence the way that those children resolve disputes. The article analyzes social science research that describes and documents how technology is changing the ways in which children are communicating. The successes of software and hardware developers are coming so quickly that it is difficult for those of us outside the technology fields to stay informed. Dispute resolvers are not asking how new technologies, technologies of which we may not even be aware (or at least not fully understand), are changing the way that our children are communicating. We also are not asking how those changes affect alternative dispute resolution. The article suggests ways in which ADR will change as a result of the ways children are communicating. It also discusses the future of current theories and approaches to ADR, such as mindfulness meditation (frequently discussed by Professor Leonard Riskin, among others)

Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution Can Improve the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf Ethical Practices System: The Deaf Community is Well Prepared and Can Lead by Example

The work of American Sign Language (ASL)/English interpreters is filled with complex interpersonal, linguistic and cultural challenges. The decisions and ethical dilemmas interpreters face on a daily basis are countless and the potential for disagreement regarding those decisions is great. Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution (TMDR) processes can be particularly helpful when misunderstandings and conflicts arise. Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution is a more inclusive phrase than Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) and includes cellular telephones, radio frequency devices, and satellite communication systems. The Deaf Community has learned to adapt and rely upon a variety of technologies and, because many Deaf individuals already are comfortable with technology, it makes sense to further integrate technology into dispute resolution processes. And while the Deaf Community can benefit from a greater reliance on technology, conversely, the communication skills that the Deaf community and interpreters employ routinely can provide valuable insights for everyone who uses new technologies to communicate and resolve disputes. David Allen Larson previously has addressed the opportunities and dangers inherent in technology. He believes that Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) practitioners and theorists must study how individuals increasingly are using technology to communicate. Those practitioners and theorists then must determine how those technologies can be integrated into dispute resolution processes most productively. He offers three distinct reasons why we need to approach technology in this manner: 1) teens and preteens, who soon will be adults, rely heavily on technology to communicate and we need to become competent in those technologies; 2) fuel prices continue to rise and technology allows us to communicate effectively without incurring travel expenses; and 3) security concerns have made physical travel less convenient and potentially less safe. This article examines the mediation process within the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf Ethical Practices System and suggests when and how technology may be utilized to enhance that process. Background information regarding the interpreting profession, the Deaf Community and the process for filing and reviewing grievances provides a context for this discussion. An overview of the technologies already being used within the Deaf Community and interpreting field assists in determining where new technologies can be introduced most effectively. Each of the three steps in the EPS is analyzed to assess how additional technologies can be integrated productively. Finally, peripheral activities surrounding the EPS and mediation process are identified, highlighting elements in which technology may be use

Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution Can Improve the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf Ethical Practices System: The Deaf Community is Well Prepared and Can Lead by Example

The work of American Sign Language (ASL)/English interpreters is filled with complex interpersonal, linguistic and cultural challenges. The decisions and ethical dilemmas interpreters face on a daily basis are countless and the potential for disagreement regarding those decisions is great. Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution (TMDR) processes can be particularly helpful when misunderstandings and conflicts arise. Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution is a more inclusive phrase than Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) and includes cellular telephones, radio frequency devices, and satellite communication systems. The Deaf Community has learned to adapt and rely upon a variety of technologies and, because many Deaf individuals already are comfortable with technology, it makes sense to further integrate technology into dispute resolution processes. And while the Deaf Community can benefit from a greater reliance on technology, conversely, the communication skills that the Deaf community and interpreters employ routinely can provide valuable insights for everyone who uses new technologies to communicate and resolve disputes. David Allen Larson previously has addressed the opportunities and dangers inherent in technology. He believes that Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) practitioners and theorists must study how individuals increasingly are using technology to communicate. Those practitioners and theorists then must determine how those technologies can be integrated into dispute resolution processes most productively. He offers three distinct reasons why we need to approach technology in this manner: 1) teens and preteens, who soon will be adults, rely heavily on technology to communicate and we need to become competent in those technologies; 2) fuel prices continue to rise and technology allows us to communicate effectively without incurring travel expenses; and 3) security concerns have made physical travel less convenient and potentially less safe. This article examines the mediation process within the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf Ethical Practices System and suggests when and how technology may be utilized to enhance that process. Background information regarding the interpreting profession, the Deaf Community and the process for filing and reviewing grievances provides a context for this discussion. An overview of the technologies already being used within the Deaf Community and interpreting field assists in determining where new technologies can be introduced most effectively. Each of the three steps in the EPS is analyzed to assess how additional technologies can be integrated productively. Finally, peripheral activities surrounding the EPS and mediation process are identified, highlighting elements in which technology may be use

Brother, Can You Spare a Dime? Technology Can Reduce Dispute Resolution Costs When Times are Tough and Improve Outcomes

Cost reduction is one of the desirable results frequently attributed to Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) processes. Although it is reasonable to assume that businesses always are interested in saving money, this goal takes on added importance when the economy is struggling. The cost savings inherent in ADR, which already are significant, can be increased substantially through the strategic adoption of technology. Although I generally do not urge caution when it comes to expanding the ways in which we use technology, we nonetheless must recognize not only technology’s potential benefits but also its possible pitfalls. It is relatively easy to identify some of the cost savings that can be achieved through greater reliance on technology. It can be somewhat more difficult, however, to identify the circumstances in which technology can create unanticipated costs. Fortunately, many of those costs can be avoided. This article identifies cost efficiencies that technology can bring to dispute resolution processes and also suggest how potential costs can be minimized or avoided. The article begins by examining the Technology Revolution. The emergence of technology mediated dispute resolution (TMDR) as an efficient and cost-effective means of resolving disputes illustrates the significant impact the Technology Revolution has had in the area of ADR. This article suggests why TMDR has not been embraced more enthusiastically. It then explores how we can use technology to make dispute resolution more effective and efficient and explains why, in light of a rapidly maturing technology savvy generation, we might have little choice but to embrace TMDR. The article next discusses Cybersettle and Smartsettle, two of the established TMDR programs available today. The following section provides additional reasons why the use of TMDR will increase, including the assertion that foreign nations’ decisions to expand TMDR will compel the United States to rely more heavily on TMDR. The article then examines the challenges raised by TMDR. These challenges include power imbalances; the possibility that TMDR software and platforms may exercise greater influence over the dispute resolution process than expected; and questions as to how we can involve artificial intelligence devices, robots, and avatars in our dispute resolution processes. Ideas for integrating artificial intelligence devices into TMDR processes are based upon the manner in which these devices already are being used in the health care industry. The article concludes by examining the dangers and financial costs of relying on avatars and robots, identifies sectors well positioned to use TMDR, and briefly raises the issue of whether we need to regulate TMDR