Home   |   All courses   |   Public courses   |   Cities & dates   |   In-house   |   Licensing   |   Online   |   All we do   |   MTI Worldwide   |   Español   |   Contact
CLICK-THIS # 1: Deadline for Tampa, FL: August 1   . . . . .   CLICK-THIS # 2: Certifications: Tampa, FL, Colorado Springs, CO, Dallas, TX... more   . . . . .   CLICK-THIS # 3: On-line certification, no travel
Go to MTI home

Prevention and Early Resolution of Workplace Conflict
“Unmanaged conflict is the largest reducible cost in organizations today,
and the least recognized.“
— Dan Dana (quoted 1988 ... 2014)

Established in 1985, MTI is the foremost provider of training, certification,
licensing, and consulting in workplace conflict management and mediation.
1-727-864-7528

Click for more info about training without traveling
 
Free   |   Toolbox   |   ROI formula   |   Mediation-at-Sea Cruise   |   Newsletter   |   News releases   |   Tell a friend
MTI
Home
Site map
Site search
About company
Company news
Contact

Jump to


Training
All courses
Public
In-house RFP RFQ
On-line
Company licensing
Webinars
Computer-based
US Government
Mediation-at-Sea
No travel

International
Europe
Africa
Latinoamérica
Countries
Study Tours to USA

Mediation-at-Sea: 2014
Florida to Caribbean
Certifications

Free Resources
Instruments
Teleconferences
Articles
Bibliographies
Newsletter
Subscription Center
Links

Clients
Client list
Login

Directories
Certified Mediators
Certified Trainers
CT Login
Insurance Mediators

More Services
Speaker
Publications
Consultant Registry


Follow Mediation Training Institute on Twitter
Follow MTI on Twitter

Mediation Training Institute on Facebook
Become a fan of MTI

 


Conflict Resolution in the Insurance Industry

See also MTI's partnership with the Insurance Expert Network.


Free Newsletter — Subscribe to the MTI Monthly, a noncommercial opt-in/out newsletter for all who share an interest in conflict and its management:
Email

Bibliography

Edited by Melissa Zarda. See other bibliographies.
Contributors: Claudette Graham, Michael Hill

Copyright restriction: The contents of this bibliography may not be placed on other websites, but links from other websites may be directed to this page. Hardcopies of this page may be printed for academic purposes.

  • Abdalyan, A. M. (2003). Rethinking Insurance Disputes. Assurances, Vol 70, pp. 677-700.

This article analyzes the role of alternative dispute resolution as it relates to the insurance industry. The author focuses on the issues of confidentiality and ethics and their role in enhancing the effectiveness and efficiency of ADR. He also elaborates on the concept that insurance disputes can be driven by seemingly opposing needs such as stability and changes or tradition and innovation.

  • Fellows, Mark. (2006) Hurricane-related Insurance Claim Disputes Post-disaster Insurance ADR Delivery Models (volume 8 no. 2)

The articles states that the top dispute regarding insurance claims resulting from damages sustained from hurricane Katrina is whether wind, water or wind-driven water destroyed properties. Policy makers and commentators agree that these disputes could overwhelm the court system; thus the need for an alternative dispute resolution. Officials in the Katrina affected States have started to institute disaster ADR programs. For example, Louisiana and Mississippi have adapted mediation programs which modeled that of Florida.

  • Fraser, John J. Jr, MD, JD. (2001, American Academy of Pediatrics and the Committee on Medical Liability. Technical Report: Alternative Dispute Resolution in Medical Malpractice.

The report stipulates that in the 1970s and 1980s there was a significant rise in the number of malpractice claims filed against physicians. This resulted in commercial insurance carriers either stopped offering medical malpractice coverage, abandoned professional liability market completely, or significantly increase premiums. Because of these past crises, alternative strategies for resolving malpractice disputes were forms. The report focuses on four of these alternative strategies: negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and pretrial screening panel.

  • Fritz, P. D. (1994). Creative Dispute Resolution: ADR Off on the Wrong Foot. Verdict, 2nd Quarter, pp. 37-38.

This article begins with a discussion of common detractions against ADR and then expounds on newer criticisms involving both disclosure and ethics. The author follows this with a number of recommendations to improve on these potential problems with the ADR process such as advocating forum shopping in the ADR arena and investigating conflicts of interest with the ADR company overseeing the arbitration.

  • Goch, L. (1999). Splitting The Difference. Best' Review (Property/casualty insurance edition), Vol. 99, pp. 103-104.

This article looks at the establishment of Cybersettle, an online dispute resolution business. The Cybersettle process is detailed, telling how the insurance company and the insurer must each submit up to 3 proposed settlement amount, which remain unknown to the other party. The cases are instantly settled when the two sides either get within $5,000 or 30% of the original demand; settlement are usually reached in sixty days.

  • Greening, Jay E. Alternative Dispute Resolution - An Introduction to the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution to Resolve Insurance Disputes.

The article states that society should not rely exclusively on the court system to resolve disputes since other non-judicial method (Alternative Dispute Resolution) are available. These methods may be less expensive, faster, less intimidating, more sensitive to the disputants' concerns, and more responsive to the underlying problems. These methods, (i.e. negotiation, conciliation, mediation) can be used to resolve insurance claims such as: personal injury, mass torts and class actions, uninsured and underinsured motorist, and no-fault.

  • Hand, J. A. Dispute Resolution for the Insurance Industry.

This article examines a wide variety of topics and developments in ADR with a focus on the insurance industry. Many step in the process are discusses including why are insurers interested in ADR, why mediation is effective, ways to increase the potential for success at mediation, online mediation, mandatory mediation, arbitration and ways to ensure a successful arbitration.

  • Hays, D. (1999). Insurers Look to Avoid Court Room Battles. National Underwriter, Vol. 103, pp.17-18.

This article examines the rapid growth of ADR in the insurance industry and the reasons behind it. Some of the reasons explored include state and federal mandates and the increasing costs of court settlements. It found that while the actual loss in a court verdict was not very different than and ADR settlement, the time and thus fees involved in the lengthier court process amounted to significant differences in savings.

  • Hicks, Bruce. (2000) Alternative Dispute Resolution - Mediation offers an alternative that can reduce expenses and bad feeling among the disputing parties.

The insurance industry is the biggest user of ADR, particularly mediation. The article provide a brief comparison between mediation, litigation/arbitration. Mediation involves the disputing parties actively working together to resolve their problem in a friendly setting as opposed to litigation/arbitration held in a courtroom setting. Per Mark Appel, senior Vice president of the American Arbitration Association (AAA), 95% of AAA cases were completed successfully through either settlement (81%) or withdrawals (14%).

  • Krivis, J. (1995). Insurers and Lawyers Unified on Mediation. Best's Review (Property/casualty insurance edition), Vol. 95, pp. 71-73.

This article discusses the National Pre-Suit Mediation Program which was formed as a way to institutionalize the use of mediation in all cases. The author believes this approach responds to the needs of all parties by reducing defense costs therefore allowing insurers to concentrate on the actual value of the claim instead court costs. The author also advocates the approach as a way to provide better services to clients and utilize staff more efficiently.

  • Maurer, Keith. (2004) Metropolitan Corporate Counsel, Arbitrating Healthcare Disputes: A Rational Alternative to the lawsuit system.

The article stipules that in 1999 it cost 30 percent more to settle a medical malpractice lawsuit than in 1998, resulting in higher liability insurance. These cost results in increasing premium to patients. A solution to this noted dilemma is arbitration. Arbitration offers both the patient and the provider an avenue to settle legal disputes out of the lawsuit system and into a fair, inexpensive, and efficient system.

  • Mazadoorian, H. N. (March/April 1999). Building an ADR program: What works, what doesn't.

This article discusses the burgeoning use of alternative dispute resolution in the commercial arena, with a focus on the insurance industry. It focuses on the benefits other than monetary savings such as preserving business relationships. Broader potential benefits such as learning more about risk in corporate processes and presenting opportunities to change the corporate culture in the areas of dispute resolution and avoidance are also discussed.

  • Schroeder, Michael J. (2001) Take the lawyer out of the Loop-Help Yourself and Your Patients.

The article depicts the unpleasant process that both the defendant (doctor in a malpractice lawsuit) and the plaintiff (patient) endure during a civil lawsuit. The process of going through the court system can be lengthy, attorneys probing through confidential records, the patient having to pay up-front court costs that usually exceed $10. Arbitration appears to be a better option. It involves a doctor and patient agreeing to use a cheaper, private, confidential, and expedited method.

  • Winn, B. & Davis, E. (2004). Arbitration of Reinsurance Disputes: Is there a Better Way? Dispute Resolution Journal, Vol. 59, pp.22-25.

This article examines ways to improve the common practice of using non-neutral, party-appointed arbitrators to settle reinsurance disputes. It points out that reinsurance disputes are usually between parties who no longer have ongoing business relationships and suggests a number of ways to improve the process including; using clearly defined rules of a neutral ADR provider, being willing to use different arbitrators, using mediation and using streamlined procedures for smaller disputes.

  • Winston, G. (2000). "Virtual Settlement" Online. Canadian Underwriter, Vol. 67, pp.52.

This article discusses the role of ADR in saving money in an environment of rising claims costs and pricing competition. It focuses on the growing role of technology and concentrates on the concept of virtual applications. Cybersettle.com, Inc., the first provider of internet dispute resolution systems is examined and potential future applications are also discussed.

  • Wright, P. (1999). Dispute Resolution for the New Millennium. Canadian Underwriter, Vol. 66, pp. 34.

This article discusses the launch of the Insurance Dispute Services of British Columbia. It discusses the planning, structure and procedures of the process. The programs goals of offering effective and equitable resolution options to all parties is examined in light of challenges from traditional ways of dealing with matters. Also discussed is the wide spectrum of disputes covered, ranging from consumer disputes o inter-industry parties.

  • Zuckerman, S. C. (2002). Insurance: Preemption by McCarran Ferguson. Dispute Resolution Journal, Vol. 56, pp. 92-93.

This article reviewed a decision by the 8th circuit court, which held that a section of Missouri's Arbitration Act forbidding arbitration clauses in insurance contracts regulates the insurance business was not preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act. It also discusses the origins of the case which are based on an insurance policy that stated either the insured or the insurer could demand arbitration if a dispute arose.