When working in any business field, you need to prepare yourself for the possibility of running into disagreements and arguments. Some of these issues you can work out on your own. Others may need stronger methods of handling.
But do you need to hop to litigation right away? Despite the constant mentions of litigation, it does not always serve as the best method of handling disputes.
FINRA brings up two popular alternative methods of dispute resolution. Mediation and arbitration offer two entirely different experiences, fill separate niches and offer unique benefits. They also have their own potential drawbacks, so it is important to thoroughly consider each choice before picking one.
If your argument is one you think you could work out alone with a little extra help, mediation might work. A mediator’s job is to provide guidance and act as a sort of “referee” for your dispute resolution. It is up to you and the other involved parties to come to a conclusion. Mediators cannot force a solution upon you, nor do they have legal power to make any of you act.
However, they ensure that all parties have their turn to speak. They deescalate situations if they start getting out of hand. They also provide valuable input from a neutral perspective.
On the other hand, arbitration holds more similarities with traditional litigation. An arbitrator even has similar abilities as a judge. It is up to them to listen to your arguments and evidence, then make a decision. Their decision legally binds all parties, who must fulfil the terms. However, it costs less than litigation and you do not need to go through the whole court process. This still gives it an edge over litigation that may appeal to you.
In the end, you must make your pick based on what you think has the biggest advantages and fewest drawbacks. Then, you can move forward with solving the actual dispute.