Are you looking this product? Now you can get product in Installer Format,just following step by step until finish you will be guided downloading this book for free, Enjoy it.
It's a fact that conflicts are just a part of life. Even if you're a fair and compromising person, you still from time to time over the course of going about your personal or professional affairs, are going to run across people that you end up in disagreements with. Sometimes it can involve minor things and at other times the issue or issues being dealt with can be more substantial.
Now for some reason, popular consensus has it that the best venue to have conflicts resolved by a third party, is in a civil court, and you can see these types of arguments taking place on popular court TV shows. Each side presents their case and then a judge weighs the arguments, and makes a decision. The problem with this all too common scenario though, is that in most cases one side is the winner, and the other party is the loser.
So wouldnt it be nice if there was some new option for conflict resolution where both sides could end up winners? That is that the third party hears both sides and then decides what's fair. A venue where what each party is willing to give is taken into account and also where no tangible factors can also be considered.
The fact is that mediators have been around for years and perhaps you may have heard of; say a sports figure having the terms of his or her contract being mediated? Of course you have and there's good reason why this is done. That reason is that sports franchises and the professional athletes that play for them simply dont have the time that it takes for disagreements to be worked out in a pubic court setting. Also there are quite often privacy issues involved.
So in a way a mediator is a lot like a judge, with one exception. That is that they can't issue court orders and complicated legal motions also can't be brought into play. Even so, the agreements that a mediator works out can be laid out in a legally binding document that can be taken into court, and enforced in the same way as a contract can. In fact many professional mediators are retired judges.
Still one more difference between having a dispute resolved by a mediator instead of in a court of law, is that no agreement is final until both parties agree to it. What this means, is that unlike a lawsuit for example, if you're unhappy with how things are unfolding you can at any time simply excuse yourself from the process, and bow out of it with no legal repercussions. However, this very rarely happens.
The reason this is such a rare occurrence, is that in most personal conflicts both parties really do have a good idea of what is fair. Rather, the sticking points most often arise from personality differences. Simply put, in most disputes that people are having trouble resolving on their own, what is really needed is to separate them, and bring in an unbiased third party to assist in bringing it to an end.
