Abstract
Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) services are e-justice service conduits that utilize Electronic Negotiation Systems (see the chapter by Kersten and Lai, this volume). They are a key mechanism that may provide a viable solution to the flood of e-disputes. Justice is important in negotiation processes (see the chapter by Albin and Druckman, this volume).It is therefore suggested that ODR services are a viable means to serve justice on the web.In this chapter we describe the state of e-justice and introduce the need for online dispute resolution services. We then present the concept of ODR, its different forms, and its association with Negotiation Support Systems. To this end we portray a classification of ODR services, give examples of different types of services, and specifically discuss one of the promising types, namely Principle-Based Dispute Resolution Services. The chapter concludes with an overview of the challenges associated with the introduction of ODR services, and specifically with their adoption by users; an issue that is echoed in several other chapters as well (see chapters by Etezadi, and Kersten and Lai, this volume)
Jim played the tuba as a senior in high school, more than three decades ago. When he decided to resume his old hobby, he searched eBay to find an instrument. He bid $510 on a tuba and won – only to find out that it was actually a baritone: a smaller, related instrument with a different tonal range
– Cara Cherry Lisco, Vice President, Dispute Resolution Services, SquareTrade, describes a typical online dispute, January 2005
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
References
Bergling S Alternative dispute resolution for consumer transactions in the borderless online marketplace. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Waldorf, Maryland, USA, pp 1–216
Bichler M, Kersten G, Strecker S (2003) Towards a structured design of electronic negotiations. Group Decis Negot 12(4):311–335
Bonnet V, Boudaoud K, Gagnebin M, Harms J, Schultz T (2002) Online dispute resolution systems as web services, Proceedings Hewlett-Packard Open View University Association Workshop Held on videoconference, workshop on June 11–13 2002, Available via online http://www.hpovua.org/publications/proceedings
Bunnell D, Luecke R (2000) The eBay phenomenon, 1st edn. Wiley, New York, NY, pp 61–62
Burger WE (1977) Our vicious spiral. Judges J 22(1):49
Chen C (2004) United States and European Union approaches to internet jurisdiction and their impact on e-commerce. Univ Pa J Int Econ Law 25(1):423–454
de Figueiredo JM (2000) Finding sustainable profitability in electronic commerce. Sloan Manage Rev 41(4):41–52
Dehning B, Richardson VJ, Urbaczewski A, Wells JD (2004) Reexamining the value relevance of e-commerce initiatives. J Manage Inf Syst 21(1):55–82
DOJ (1992) US department of justice statistics, Report to Congress on the state of litigation, Washington, DC
Doong HS, Lai HC (2008) Exploring usage continuance of e-negotiation systems: expectation and disconfirmation approach. Group Decis Negotiation 17(2):111–126
European Commission (2001) Commission recommendation 2001/310/EC on the principles for out-of-court bodies involved in the consensual resolution of consumer disputes, published in OJ L109/56, 19 April 2001
Fisher R (1983) Negotiating power: getting and using influence. Am Behav Sci 27(2):149–166
Fisher R, Ury W, Patton B (1991) Getting to yes: negotiating agreement without giving in, 2nd edn. Penguin Books, New York, NY
Friedman RA, Currall SC (2003). Conflict escalation: dispute exacerbating elements of e-mail communication. Hum Relations 56(11):1325–1347
Friedman RA, Currall SC (2003) Conflict escalation: dispute exacerbating elements of e-mail communication. Hum Relat 56(11):1325–1347
Gefen D, Karahanna E, Straub DW (2003) Trust and TAM in online shopping: an integrated model. MIS Q 27(1):51–90
Gonzalez AG (2003) eBay law: the legal implications of the C2C electronic commerce model. Comput Law Secur Rep 19(6):468–473
Hasan AS, Serguievskaia I (2006) A framework for developing experience based e-negotiation system. J Comput Sci 2(2):180–184
Hornle J (2003) Online dispute resolution: the emperor’s new clothes? Benefits and pitfalls of online dispute resolution and its application to commercial arbitration. Int Rev Law Comput Technol 17(1):27–37
Javalgi R, Ramsey R (2001) Strategic issues of e-commerce as an alternative global distribution system. Int Mark Rev 18(4):376–391
Jones R (1999) Legal pluralism and the adjudication of internet disputes. Int Rev Law Comput Technol 13(1):49–67
Katsh E (1994) Digital lawyers – orienting the legal profession to cyberspace. Univ Pittsburgh Law Rev 55(4):1141–1175
Katsh E, Rifkin J (2001) Online dispute resolution, 1st edn. Jossey – Bass, New York, NY
Katsh E, Rifkin J, Gaitenby A (2000) E-commerce, e-disputes and e-dispute resolution: in the shadow of ebay law. Ohio State J Dispute Res 15(3):705–734
Kersten GE (2003) The science and engineering of e-negotiation: an introduction, 36th Hawaii international conference on system sciences (HICSS'03), Hawaii, USA
Kersten GE (2004) E-negotiation systems: interaction of people and technologies to resolve conflicts, InterNeg international seminar: markets, negotiations and dispute resolution in new economy, John Molson School of Business, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada
Kiesler S (1997) Preface. In: Kiesler S (ed) Culture of the internet. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ
Lai HC, Doong HS, Kao CC, Kersten GE (2006) Negotiators’ communication, perception of their counterparts, and performance in dyadic e-negotiations. Group Decis Negotiation 15(5):429–447
Landry EM (2000) Scrolling around the new organization: the potential for conflict in the on-line environment. Negotiation J 16(2):133–142
Lee KC, Kang I, Kim JS (2007) Exploring the user interface of negotiation support systems from the user acceptance perspective. Comput Hum Behav 23(1):220–239
Lewicki RJ, Saunders DM, Minton JW (1999) Negotiation (companion volume to Negotiation: reading, exercises and cases), 3rd edn. Irwin McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA
Lewis LF, Spich RS (1996) Principled negotiation, evolutionary systems design, and group support systems: a suggested integration of three approaches to improving negotiations. In: Proceedings of the 29th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, Hawaii, USA, 3, pp 238–250
Lim J (2003) A conceptual framework on the adoption of negotiation support systems. Inf Softw Technol 45(8):469–477
Lim J, Gan B, Chang T-T (2002) A survey on NSS adoption intention, 35th Hawaii international conference on system sciences, IEEE, Hawaii
Maiese M (2003) Negotiation. Avilable via http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/negotiation/?nid=1273. Accessed 28 April 2010
Maynes ES (1979) Consumer protection: The issues, Journal of Consumer Policy 3:97–109
Mediate com. (2006) The world’s dispute resolution channel, Negotiation power, Available via http://www.mediate.com/divorce/pg26.cfm. Accessed 28 April 2010
Merriam Webster Online (2006) <http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/justice>. Accessed 28 April 2010
Moore DA, Kurtzberg TR, Thompson LL, Morris MW (1999) Long and short routes to success in electronically mediated negotiations: group affiliations and good vibrations. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 77(s):22–43
Nadler J (2001) Electronically-mediated dispute resolution and e-commerce. Negotiation J 17(4):333–347
NCL (2001) Online auctions, 2001 Survey. National Consumers League (NCL), Washington DC, USA
Pacini C, Andrews C, Hillison W (2002) To agree not to agree: legal issues in online contracting. Bus Horiz 45(1):43–52
Parlade CV (2006) Online dispute resolution and quality of justice. Available via http://www.odr.info/claro.doc. Accessed 28 April 2010
Ramsay DCI (1981) Consumer redress mechanisms for poor-quality and defective products. Univ Tor Law J 31(2): 117–152
Rawls J (1999) A theory of justice. OUP, Oxford
Rule C (2002) Online dispute resolution for business, 1st edn. Jossey-Bass (A Wiley Imprint), San Francisco, CA
Sawada T (2005) Potentiality of private ADR in EC market: results and value achieved through the ADR pilot project. Electronic Commerce Promotion Council of Japan (ECOM), Tokyo, Japan
Schoop M, Jertila A, List T (2003) Negoisst: a negotiation support system for electronic business-to-business negotiations in e-commerce. Data Knowl Eng 47(3):371–401
Selis P, Ramasastry A, Wright CS (2002) Bidder beware: towards a fraud-free marketplace – best practices for the online auction industry. Washington State Attorney General’s office and the Center for Law Commerce and Technology at the University of Washington Law School, Washington, DC, 1–58
Thiessen EM, Soberg A (2003) Smartsettle described with the Montreal taxonomy. Group Decis Negotiation 12(2): 165–170
Thiessen EM, Loucks DP, Stedinger JR (1998) Computer-assisted negotiations of water resources conflicts. Group Decis Negotiation 7(2):109–129
Turel O (2006) Predictors of disputants’ intentions to use online dispute resolution services: the roles of justice and trust. McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
Turel O (2010) Interdependence issues in analyzing negotiation data. Group Decis Negot 19(2):111–125
Turel O, Yuan Y (2005) Online negotiation services: benefits and challenges of users and service providers. J Altern Dispute Res, October issue, 62–77
Turel O, Yuan Y (2006) Trajectories for driving the diffusion of e-negotiation service providers in supply chains: an action research approach. J Internet Commerce 5(4):125–149
Turel O, Yuan Y (2007a) Online dispute resolution services for electronic markets: a user centric research agenda. Int J e-Business 5(6):590–603
Turel O, Yuan Y (2007b) User acceptance of web-based negotiation support systems: the role of perceived intention of the negotiating partner to negotiate online. Group Decis Negotiation 16(5):451–468
Turel O, Yuan Y (2007c) You can’t shake hands with clenched fists: potential effects of trust assessments on the adoption of e-negotiation services. Group Decis Negotiation 17(2):141–155
Turel O, Yuan YF, Connelly CE (2008) In justice we trust: predicting user acceptance of e-customer services. J Manage Inf Syst 24(4):123–151
Turel O, Yuan Y, Rose J (2007) Antecedents of attitude towards online mediation. Group Decis Negotiation 16(6):539–552
Vetschera R, Kersten G, Koeszegi S (2006) User assessment of internet-based negotiation support systems: an exploratory study. J Organ Comput Electron Commerce 16(2):123–148
Vice JW (2006) Neutrality, justice, and fairness, Loyola University Chicago. Available via http://www.ombuds.uci.edu/Journals/UCI%20Ombudsman_%20The%20Journal%201997.pdf. Accessed 29 April 2010
Watson WE, Kumar K, Michaelsen LK (1993) Cultural diversity’s impact on interaction process and performance: comparing homogeneous and diverse task groups. Acad Manage J 36(5):590–602
Wood CM (2004) Marketing and e-commerce as tools of development in the Asia-Pacific region: a dual path. Int Mark Rev 21(3):301–320
Xu Z, Yuan Y (2009) Principle-based dispute resolution for consumer protection. Knowl-Based Syst 22:18–27
Yuan Y, Turel O (2007) E-negotiations: bridging the practical divide—introduction to the special issue. Group Decis Negotiation 17(2):107–109
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Turel, O., Yuan, Y. (2010). Online Dispute Resolution Services: Justice, Concepts and Challenges. In: Kilgour, D., Eden, C. (eds) Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation. Advances in Group Decision and Negotiation, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9097-3_25
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9097-3_25
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-9096-6
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-9097-3
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)