| Abstract | The promotion of mediation and other alternative forms of employment dispute resolution have largely been driven by a business case revolving around efficiency benefits compared with conventional rights-based processes and the potential of costly litigation. In both the USA and the UK, the spectre of legal action and consequent costs has seen organizations turn towards mediation, viewed as offering a greater likelihood of resolution and savings in terms of staff time relative to grievance and disciplinary procedures (see Latreille and Saundry 2014). However, it has also been argued that mediation can have positive ‘upstream’ effects, acting as a catalyst for wider changes in the way organizations manage individual conflict. For example, there is evidence that it fosters conflict-handling skills (Anderson and Bingham 1997; Kressel 2006) and can enhance employer–employee relationships (Seargeant 2005). In the UK, the government has promoted mediation on the grounds that it can help transform ‘employer–employee relationships, the development of organizational culture and the development of “high-trust” relationships’ (BIS 2011: 3). |
|---|