The Nexus Between Alternative Dispute Resolutions and Cultural Practices
It is undeniable that disputes are the shadows cast by human interaction and are inevitable yet manageable. Think about this– a Ghanaian technology company employed the service of a prolific Nigerian software developer to build an efficient and user-friendly website to engage with their clients. In their relationship, a misunderstanding ensued, and their contractual agreement fell to the cliff of frustration. They indeed tried their best to resolve the issue through litigation. However, the long process of litigation fell through. They thereafter resorted to a mediator to resolve their differences. The question is how he could successfully meditate in their case, considering they are people of two distinct cultural beliefs and values. This essay dwells on the nexus between culture and Alternative Dispute Resolution in light of this trend.
Disputes could arise from breaches of trust, misunderstandings, and the colourful diversity of human culture. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) offers a canvas of mechanisms designed to assist conflicting parties in swiftly and harmoniously resolving their differences. This enables them to avoid the labyrinthine corridors of litigation. This essay unravels the interplay between ADR and culture and unveils how cultural nuances shape ADR practices and outcomes. It also highlights actionable strategies to ensure cultural inclusivity strengthens ADR’s efficacy while preserving the rights and dignity of all parties. ADR is no fleeting trend; its roots run deep in human history. From the communal gatherings of ancient Greek city-states to the council of elders in pre-colonial African societies, ADR embodies humanity’s age-old quest for peace. In Nigeria, traditional societies resolve disputes through elders’ wisdom and societal norms, which underscores the inseparability of culture from conflict resolution.
Today, as ADR aims to reduce litigation costs, delays, and uncertainties, it becomes essential for arbitrators, mediators, and conciliators to navigate the cultural landscapes of disputing parties. As such, culture serves as the prism through which people interpret conflict and resolution and influences their expectations, communication styles, and preferred outcomes.
To convincingly affirm this assertion, this essay unfolds in six sections. First, it introduces the topic and establishes its relevance. Next, it explores the conceptual framework of ADR and culture. The third section examines the symbiotic relationship between culture and ADR. The fourth part highlights the potential outcomes of integrating cultural perspectives into ADR. The fifth section offers practical recommendations for ADR practitioners in line with cultural integration. Finally, the essay concludes by emphasizing the transformative power of cultural inclusivity in ADR.
It is necessary to conceptualize the key terms. Therefore, the subsequent paragraphs briefly examine them.
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Various authors have proffered different views on the meaning of ADR. The Black’s Law Dictionary defines ADR as procedures for setting disputes by means other than litigation. It is a broad range of mechanisms and processes designed to supplement the traditional court’s litigations by providing a more effective and faster resolution process. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is a bouquet of alternatives to traditional courtroom battles that offers flexibility, cost-effectiveness, and timeliness. It includes negotiation, mediation, conciliation, and arbitration tailored to address specific disputes, which are concisely examined below.
Negotiation
Negotiation is usually the first approach before resorting to other methods of ADR. It is informal and grants the parties flexibility. This is synonymous with the dialogue approach employed by business owners or family members, where they engage in conversation about the issue for the purpose of resolving it. This is why transparency is core in negotiation: because family tensions might cloud the parties, as the case may be. Therefore, transparency and objectivity must be adopted in this method.
Mediation
Mediation is more of an informal method of dispute resolution that gives room for parties to be flexible in identifying their issues and resolving it. It enables them to control the process and suggest solutions. It could also be formal where parties engage the knowledge of an expert to intervene in their disputes. Importantly, the purpose of a mediator is not to decide whether a party is wrong or right but the goal is to help the parties find a mutually acceptable resolution. It also requires active involvement from both parties.
Conciliation
Conciliation is a method facilitated by a neutral third party known as a conciliator focused on reaching a dispute resolution that both parties consider satisfactory. This mechanism is also confidential, voluntary, and flexible. In contrast, the conciliator provides the parties with a proposal to resolve the issue, and the parties have to agree on their own conclusion. Although the presented proposal is not binding, as in mediation, any formal agreements struck after conciliation can be legally binding.
Arbitration
Arbitration is more formal than other ADR methods and could also appear more like litigation. It occurs when parties submit their dispute to an arbitrator who renders a decision following the process. Parties can agree to arbitrate before or after a conflict occurs. Apart from cost and efficiency, the actual benefit of arbitration over formal litigation has been that the parties in arbitration have the liberty to set the rules of arbitration, which can be much more flexible than formal civil procedures required in court.
Culture
Importantly, culture serves as a mosaic of beliefs, values, and practices and is the soul of a society. Anthropologist E.B. Tylor described it as “that complex whole encompassing knowledge, art, morals, law, and custom. Culture shapes our worldview, influencing how we communicate, negotiate, and resolve disputes. It is both the foundation of identity and the bridge to understanding.”
Moreover, culture profoundly influences ADR, especially in today’s interconnected world, where cross-cultural disputes are common. Understanding cultural contexts is like unlocking the genetic code of conflict resolution, which is essential for achieving sustainable outcomes. Consider a dispute between a German engineering firm, which values punctuality and directness, and an Indian company, which prioritizes relationship-building and flexibility. Without cultural awareness, the third party may misinterpret priorities, leading to further discord.
Moreover, cultural relativity ensures that neutral parties avoid imposing their values, embracing objectivity and fairness. A skilled arbitrator becomes a chameleon, adapting to the cultural hues of the disputing parties while maintaining impartiality.
Cultural Practices and Alternative Dispute Resolution Practices
There are a host of other beneficial outcomes that could be achieved by integrating culture into ADR practices; they are subsequently discussed in the following paragraphs.
Culture-aware ADR fosters smoother communication by bridging gaps and minimizing misunderstandings. A mediator versed in cultural norms and values of conflicting parties becomes a translator of unspoken languages, enabling parties to articulate their grievances and aspirations. This enables the parties to freely express themselves as the third party takes cognizance of their respective cultural communication styles.
When cultural differences are acknowledged and respected, disputants are more likely to perceive outcomes as fair and equitable. It is a matter of truth that the third party’s role is to help the parties find a mutually acceptable resolution that satisfies their legitimate needs, desires, and interests. This builds trust and paves the way for lasting agreements and fosters mutually satisfactory resolutions.
Recognizing and integrating cultural perspectives promotes credibility, encouraging more parties to embrace ADR over litigation. It positions ADR as a dynamic, inclusive mechanism that respects diversity.
After assessing the interplay between culture and ADR and the possible outcomes that could benefit from the inculcation of both, this essay highlights the following recommendations.
In order to achieve optimum outcomes and all-inclusive ADR mechanisms, ADR professionals should undergo training to understand diverse cultural norms and practices. This will equip them to navigate complex disputes effectively. Practitioners must also prioritize empathy by listening to words and the cultural contexts behind them. In addition, ADR methods should be adaptable to allow for culturally sensitive processes that align with parties’ values and traditions. The promotion of cultural relativity is another active recommendation needed to optimize ADR practices. With this, neutral parties must consciously set aside personal biases and embrace the perspectives of disputing parties to maintain objectivity.
Conclusion
In conclusion, culture, like the roots of a tree, nourishes the practice of ADR. It shapes expectations, influences processes, and determines outcomes. By weaving cultural awareness into ADR practices, practitioners can craft resolutions that honor diversity while fostering harmony. In a world where differences often divide, ADR stands as a testament to humanity’s capacity for understanding and collaboration. By embracing culture, ADR resolves disputes and builds bridges across divides, thereby illuminating paths toward peace.
References
Astha Dhawan,‘Origin of ADR Across the Globe’ VIA Mediation Center Retrieved
here Accessed 27 December 2024
Garner A. Bryan, ‘The Black’s Law Dictionary’ (9th ed, Thomas Reuters 2009) 9 Accessed 30 December 2024
Jibrin Ubale Yahaya, ‘The Imperative of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Resolving Conflicts in Nigeria’ (2021) 1 (2B) NOUN International Journal of Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution Retrieved here Accessed 26 December 2024
US Department of Labor, ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution’ Retrieved
here Accessed 27 December 2024
Office of Civil Rights, ‘What is Alternative Dispute Resolution?’ Retrieved here Accessed 27 December 2024
I.A Adedokun, ‘Exploring ADR Mechanism as a Viable Option in Mitigating the Effect of COVID-19 Pandemic: Insight from the Lagos State Tenancy Law 2011’ (2024) 4 (2) Achievers University Law Journal Accessed 30 December 2024
Adam Waks, Dispute Resolution Methods: Uses of Alternative Dispute Resolution’ (2022) Retrieved here Accessed 27 December 2024
Boluwaji Adegboye,’Cultural intelligence
in cross-cultural dispute resolution: A path to effective solutions’
Helen Spencer-Oatey, ‘What is Culture?’ (2012) Global Pad Core Concepts Retrieved here Accessed 27 December 2024
Psico-smart Editorial Team, ‘What Does Cultural Awareness Play in Conflict Mediation Strategies ?’ (2024) Retrieved here Accessed 28 December 2024
Waleeyah Olalekan is a young resilient lady who perpetually craves to pursue beneficial knowledge purely for personal growth and community development. She is a personal development tracker with major concerns in creativity, moderation and soft skills such as teamwork, effective communication, interpersonal relationships amongst others. She is a 500 Level student at the University of Ibadan where she studies law. Her areas of interest cut across Alternative Dispute Resolution, Energy and Environmental Law, Intellectual Property Law and Islamic Law. She is also a student researcher where she has contributed to well researched papers that have contributed positively to knowledge and make an impact.
