The Foundation for Prevention and Early Resolution of Conflicts (PERC) is dedicated to the promotion of conflict resolution by agreement-making through the voluntary techniques of conflict resolution: negotiation, mediation and arbitration. The web site contains a statement by Theodore W. Kheel, PERC's president, entitled The Gentle Art of Agreement-Making in the belief that agreement-making underlies both conflict resolution and alternative dispute resolution. It also offers without charge an online Primer on Conflict Resolution based on Kheel's book, The Keys to Conflict Resolution. Those taking the primer can email questions to ted_kheel@conflictresolution.org. As a complement to the Primer, PERC has provided access to selected readings from Kheel's book, plus a unique cartoon collection that will help illustrate some of the basic principles of conflict resolution. Introduction to the Primer Before accessing the Primer, participants might wish to read Kheel's summary of the voluntary techniques of conflict resolution, the way in which the vast majority of conflicts are resolved. Kheel calls negotiation, mediation and arbitration voluntary techniques since all three depend on agreement making for their success. Negotiation begins whenever someone (an individual or an organization) seeks to get something from someone by agreement. Disputants usually invoke mediation by negotiating an agreement with each other, or jointly accepting a third party's proposal that they agree on mediation. In rare cases, they may be required by legislative fiat or court mandate to engage in mediation. But they can't be forced to settle. In effect, the parties continue in mediation to seek through negotiation to get what they want by agreement. The disputants must also agree with each other to invoke arbitration. They may also be ordered by legislative fiat in rare cases to accept resolution of their dispute by the decision of a third party. But the process is then properly called compulsory, not voluntary, arbitration. Simply summarized: Negotiation is conflict resolution by agreement. Mediation is third party assistance in conflict resolution by agreement through negotiation. Arbitration is conflict resolution by agreement to have a third party make a final and binding decision resolving the dispute. As the cost and delays of conflict resolution through litigation have skyrocketed, an approach called Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has come into prominence. Coincidentally, ADR's alternatives to litigation happen also to be the voluntary techniques of conflict resolution: negotiation, mediation and arbitration. Negotiation almost always precedes litigation. But it does not necessarily end when litigation or arbitration begins. While the voluntary techniques as well as litigation have a common goal -- to resolve the dispute -- there are vast differences between them. To begin with, they differ significantly in the way they are invoked. Either side in a dispute can start a lawsuit. They don't need the consent of their opponents to sue. There are differences in the challenges the disputants face in using the voluntary techniques. For negotiators, it is to determine how best to induce their opponent to agree to give them what they want. They continue to have the same challenge in mediation. But they must now take the mediator's presence into account in deciding on how best to get their opponents to agree to give them what they want. The mediator's challenge is to get the parties to agree with each other. The disputants' challenge in arbitration is to determine how best to persuade the arbitrator to decide in their favor. The voluntary techniques can be used to resolve any and all disputes. The courts, on the other hand, can only resolve "rights" disputes, i.e., disputes over alleged violations of rights and obligations under law or contract. They cannot entertain "interest" disputes, i.e., disputes over claims that do not state what the lawyers call a cause of action. No court, for example, can tell a seller to take less, or a buyer to pay more. Nor can a court rule on the terms and provisions to be included in a new or renegotiated contract. Only the parties themselves can settle such disputes. Interest disputes, incidentally, far outnumber the rights disputes the courts can resolve. As a matter of fact, far more lawsuits are settled through negotiation than the courts decide. A lawyer retained by a client will almost always send a letter announcing his intention to sue but add that, to avoid the costs and delays of litigation, he would be willing to discuss a settlement. Of course, if a claimant can't get the other side to sit down and talk, he may have no alternative but to sue. But efforts to negotiate a settlement are frequently undertaken at all stages of a lawsuit and sometimes even after a decision has been made. The ability of the disputants to agree with each other on using the voluntary techniques is the only limit on their use in the resolution of conflicts. In their availability to resolve any and all disputes, the voluntary techniques and negotiation in particular can be viewed as the "do it together" techniques of conflict resolution. They call on all of us to learn how to get along with each other. If you are now ready for the Primer, click here.