Arbitration– Arbitration is a formal, private, voluntary process in which an individual neutral or panel of three neutrals, usually with subject area expertise, is selected by the disputing parties or by a neutral agency. Rules governing process, evidence and testimony are well defined and, unlike mediation, creative or non-traditional solutions are generally not possible. The ruling of the arbitrator(s), usually rendered without an opinion, is generally binding and subject to appeal only under limited circumstances. There are forms of arbitration which provide a limited degree of control to the parties. These include bracketed (a/k/a “high-low”) arbitration and final offer (a/k/a “baseball”) arbitration. In “high-low” arbitration, the parties structure an agreement to limit the range of outcomes. In “baseball” arbitration, each party submits a final offer or demand to the arbitrator. In either case, the arbitrator selects an award between the range of offers presented based upon their review of the evidence.

Case Evaluation – Case evaluation is a non-binding process in which the disputing parties and/or their attorneys present an overview of their dispute to a neutral party experienced in the subject matter of the dispute. The neutral party provides an opinion regarding the strengths and weaknesses of their dispute should it go to trial. A case evaluation conducted shortly after a lawsuit has been filed but before the parties have commenced discovery is often called early neutral evaluation (ENE).

Cost Allocation – A cost allocation is a process by which past and future costs for materials, services, etc. are apportioned among two or more responsible parties. Cost allocations are often used by the courts and in arbitration proceedings to establish binding decisions among the disputing parties. However, cost allocations may also be extremely useful in non-binding settlement processes such as negotiation and mediation.

Facilitation– Facilitation is a process in which a third party neutral assists multiple parties (e.g., stakeholders in public forums, informal workshops, etc.) in reaching a consensus. The neutral usually does not provide an opinion on the substantive issues under discussion but rather focuses on the decision-making process by encouraging cooperation and communication among the parties, summarizing issue discussion, and providing administrative support.

Fact Finding – The issues underlying many disputes may be, wholly or in part, factual in nature (e.g., technical or scientific). Parties can retain a third-party neutral with applicable technical or scientific expertise to help them resolve these issues by reviewing the available evidence and conducting additional information discovery activities as appropriate including: interviews, site visits, questionnaires and surveys, and internet-based topical research.

Litigation– The most formal and binding of dispute resolution processes, litigation is a process by which a dispute is resolved by trial in a court of law. Rules and procedures for conducting litigation are extensive, complex and rigidly adhered to. The disputing parties have virtually no control over the process of the outcome. The facts of the dispute are presented by legal professionals, representing each party, to a judge and in many cases a panel of pre-selected individuals called a jury. The decision rendered by a judge and jury is binding and often results in a “win-lose” situation for the parties. Litigation is costly and time-consuming. It is interesting to note that in spite of the significant costs and time spent in the litigation process, over 90% of all lawsuits are settled prior to going to trial.

Mediation– Mediation is an informal, private, voluntary process in which a third-party neutral is selected by the disputing parties to assist them in resolving their dispute. The mediator has no authority to impose a settlement and the outcome of this process is controlled by the parties and is non-binding unless a mutually acceptable agreement is reached among the parties. Unlike arbitration, there are no restrictions or rules governing this process and creative or non-traditional solutions are possible. There are two basic types of mediation: facilitative mediation, and evaluative mediation. In facilitative mediation, the mediator focuses on effecting clear, productive communications among the parties with the goal of helping the parties find a resolution to their dispute on any mutually acceptable basis. In evaluative mediation, the mediator, in addition to facilitating communications among the parties, provides the parties with a formal or informal opinion on the strengths and weaknesses of the dispute and, if appropriate, predicts its likely outcome at trial.

Minitrial - In a minitrial, corporate decision-makers from each party in the dispute (e.g. a management or financial excecutive with settlement authority) listen to presentations, arguments, and evidence summaries made by each party's counsel and technical representatives. A third-party neutral acts as the moderator or advisor to oversee the proceedings and may, at the request of the parties, give an opinion on the subjects in dispute. Following the presentations, the decision-makers meet, without or without the neutral advisor, for direct negotiations.

Scientific Negotiation – Scientific negotiation, or joint fact-finding, involves the use of one or more neutral technical experts by each party or represented interest in a technically complex dispute. The focus of these neutral technical experts is to collaborate on developing information to resolve the dispute among the parties rather than to discredit the technical positions of the parties. To be effective, the neutral technical experts must be given a clearly defined scope of work and protocols to ensure that the outcome will be acceptable to all of the parties. Often, the activities of neutral technical experts are conducted as part of the mediation process.