The Arbitration Blame Game: Notes on Developing an Effective Corporate Arbitration Program

By Bennett, Steven C. | Dispute Resolution Journal, February-April 2005 | Go to article overview

The Arbitration Blame Game: Notes on Developing an Effective Corporate Arbitration Program


Bennett, Steven C., Dispute Resolution Journal


Arbitration, love it or hate it, it's here to stay. The real question for any business is whether arbitration can be used intelligently, as part of a well-considered dispute resolution program. The author offers an outline of how to construct such a program.

The business and legal communities are divided between those who embrace arbitration and those who abhor it. Arbitration boosters point to the advantages of arbitration and suggest that every business could benefit from its use. Arbitration haters point to problems with the process and suggest that these problems cannot be avoided.

Is there a middle ground? Indeed, there is. Even the most fervent advocates of arbitration must recognize its limitations and potential problems. Similarly, the most ardent arbitration opponents must admit that arbitration can be effective for certain purposes and in certain circumstances, and that it is possible (with careful planning) to avoid many of the negatives sometimes associated with arbitration.

Arbitration Is Not Perfect

Many people who have had some experience with arbitration can point to proceedings that were not well conducted. A proceeding that takes much longer than expected or involves steeply rising costs can be quite frustrating.1 Similarly, an arbitrator who is less capable than expected can produce disaffection, not just with the outcome (everyone wins and loses sometimes in any dispute resolution system), but with the fairness and rationality of the process itself.2 The lack of assurance that the proceedings will be efficiently and fairly managed and the potential unpredicability of outcomes, moreover, have led some to avoid the process, evidently concluding that it cannot be improved (or that the work involved in improving arbitration is not worth the effort).3

One could say that the problem is too big to tackle, that the "system is unfair," or that reform is "somebody else's problem." All of these are really just excuses for inaction. None of these excuses will bring about change. And none of them recognize the reality that arbitration is here to stay. In certain industries, like textiles, securities and reinsurance, arbitration is a regular method of dispute resolution.4 Some businesses insist on arbitration in some or all of their contracts, and any party contemplating a deal must be prepared to accept arbitration as part of the price.5 Courts around the country are turning to alternative dispute resolution processes (often mediation or early neutral evaluation, but in some instances offering an arbitration alternative) as a means to reduce caseloads and streamline the litigation process.6

Why We Should Fix Arbitration

The potential benefits of arbitration are well-recognized. Here are some key benefits for commercial parties.

Parties in arbitration may pick an expert in the subject matter to serve as the arbitrator (or on a panel of arbitrators). Having an expert decision maker may lead to a quicker decision in complicated, technical disputes because of the expert's comprehension of the evidence, which is often more than ordinary jurors (and even judges) could be expected to have.

The commercial arbitration process is most often a private process.8 So when trade secrets or similarly sensitive information must be discussed, arbitration may be preferable to public court proceedings. Even when trade secrets are not likely to come up, it is often beneficial not to have the dispute made public because of the detrimental effects a public dispute can have on the reputation of the disputants.

Arbitration has the potential to be faster and less costly than litigation. The informality of the process, the fact that discovery and motion practice are more limited than in litigation, coupled with the ability of the parties to streamline the arbitration process, make arbitration capable of providing a decision on the merits far sooner than a verdict could be obtained in court. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

The Arbitration Blame Game: Notes on Developing an Effective Corporate Arbitration Program
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.