What advantage do non-adjudicative options of ADR offer to parties involved in a dispute?

Non-adjudicative options of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), such as mediation or negotiation, provide parties with the advantage of retaining control over both the process and the outcomes. This means that instead of having a third party, like a judge or arbitrator, make decisions for them, the disputing parties themselves can influence the direction of the negotiation. They have the opportunity to discuss their interests, explore potential solutions, and agree on terms that suit their needs, which can lead to more satisfactory and personalized resolutions.

In these non-adjudicative situations, the parties can communicate openly and collaboratively, which often results in creative solutions that might not be available through traditional litigation. Additionally, maintaining control over the process often leads to better compliance with the agreed terms, as both parties have a stake in the outcome they have collaboratively shaped. This dynamic fosters a more positive relationship post-dispute and can save time and costs compared to a formal court process.

Other options do not accurately reflect the essence of non-adjudicative ADR. For instance, total control over outcomes with no input contradicts the collaborative purpose of ADR. Access to binding court decisions is a characteristic of judicial proceedings rather than ADR mechanisms. Finally, while arbitration can be an expedited form of resolution