The pace of today’s IT world is creating havoc for lawyers and lawmakers armed with tools and rules of engagement that just can’t keep up with today’s realities.
What does the issue of sustainability have to do with lawyers and dispute resolution? Good question. We typically think of sustainability as it relates to protecting our environment, going green. But one obvious intersection would be the conflicts that are inherent when you think about the different interests and stakeholders interacting on sustainability issues, which would be better resolved by non-adversarial approaches
Part IV on the Series of articles on Sustainability of Collaborative Processes – Alternatives to Motion Practice. Motion Practice is not a sustainable practice. It is useful to streamline litigation but can be time consuming and costly. The same purposes can be accomplished with the practice of transparency inherent in Collaborative Processes.
A key difference between Collaborative Practice and litigation is the way information is viewed and used. Collaborative Practice is not adversarial or positional. The model in Collaborative Practice is not winner vs. loser – it is interest-based or pricipled negotiation.
What is the problem with “Free Discovery”? The opposite of free is paid – so who pays? How long will is take and waht will the costs be?
Collaborative Practice is a sustainable model for efficient dispute resolution. Here’s why.
What is social enterprise and sustainabilty? How can internal spirituality that people possess be brought our in organizations and the daily work environment? Here are some individuals and companies that embody these traits.