The University of Missouri’s symposium, Moving Negotiation Theory from the Tower of Babel Toward a World of Mutual Understanding, will take place on Friday, October 7, from 9 am to noon Central Time. We recently set the schedule for the symposium, as follows. 9 am – Definition and Scope of Negotiation – and Why Theory … Continue reading Schedule for the Tower of Babel Symposium
You may be familiar with the Randall Kiser et al. study, Let’s Not Make a Deal: An Empirical Study of Decision Making in Unsuccessful Settlement Negotiations, 5 Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 551 (2008), which replicated amazing findings in other studies, cited in Randy’s book, Professional Judgment for Lawyers. The top line finding in the … Continue reading Bad Decisions to Go to Trial
My colleague, S.I. Strong, recently circulated on the DRLE listserv a link to a survey conducted in 2015 for the National Center for State Courts. The survey involved a nationwide random sample of 1000 members of the public (actually registered voters). This is a very respectable sample, especially considering that the reported findings are very … Continue reading Compared to What?
From my colleague, S.I. Strong: As you may (or may not) already know, a team of researchers recently concluded a study for the European Parliament on arbitration across the European Union and Switzerland. As part of this study the researchers undertook a large-scale survey of arbitration practitioners across Europe, including 871 respondents from every country … Continue reading Request to Participate in a Survey about Arbitration in the Americas
In a recent post, I described the structure of Missouri’s upcoming symposium entitled “Moving Negotiation Theory from the Tower of Babel: Toward a World of Mutual Understanding,” which will take place on October 7, 2016. In this post, I tell why it came about and what I hope it will accomplish. Missouri’s Center for the … Continue reading Why We Are Conducting Missouri’s Tower of Babel Symposium and What I Hope We Accomplish
One might assume that using a “planned early dispute resolution” (PEDR) system should be a “no-brainer” for businesses that regularly litigate because litigation-as-usual undermines many business interests such as efficiency, protection of reputations and relationships, control of disputing and business operations generally, and risk management, among others. Although this seems like a plausible assumption, the … Continue reading A No-Brainer?
My colleague, S.I. Strong, forwarded this message: The International Mediation Institute (“IMI”), a non-profit standards body, is conducting international census research on the state of mediation today. The survey will be screening the following perspectives: • Those who (may) use mediation (“Users”) • Those who (may) recommend using mediation as an external counsel, consultant, or … Continue reading IMI Wants YOU to Complete this Survey
FOI Jean Sternlight announced that 19 (count ’em) articles are available online from UNLV’s great-looking symposium, Psychology and Lawyering: Coalescing the Field. (Click on the title of the post to access the link.)
As I mentioned in a recent post, the University of St. Thomas Law School held a terrific symposium on November 13, entitled Dispute System Design: Justice, Accountability and Impact. They have posted a video of the symposium as well as powerpoints from most of the presentations. Kudos to Mariana Hernandez Crespo, Heidi Van De Berg, … Continue reading Video and Powerpoints from Fabulous St. Thomas DSD Symposium
On Friday, I was honored to join the all-star cast – including keynoter Lisa Blomgren Amsler, Jackie Font-Guzmán, Susan Franck, Tim Hedeen, Mariana Hernandez Crespo, Jan Martinez, Jackie Nolan-Haley, Jen Reynolds, Colin Rule, Andrea Schneider, Nancy Welsh, and Maureen Weston – at St. Thomas Law School’s Symposium, Dispute System Design: Justice, Accountability and Impact. I … Continue reading Why and How Corporations Use PEDR – Preliminary Findings
