Executive summary
The research paper analyzed the disputes in the Dwight Babcock Condominium with the aim of identifying the sources of disputes and amplifying of the proper conflict resolution processes. It identified self-interests and laxity to enforce the Window Replacement Policy as the cause of the disputes. Nonetheless, the study indicates that applied the processes such as voting, emails exchange and annual general meeting after the dispute employed mediation, arbitration and negotiation to solve the disputed matter in the Condo Association.
General outline
The research paper will analyze the causes, methods of resolution and conclusions based on the findings of the study. In the introduction, the paper gives a general view of Dwight Babcock Condominium and the policies enforcement that promotes the welfare of the entire community. For instance, the modern windows are energy-efficient that can cut the overall condominium costs. Also, it highlights the disputes ensuing because of the Condo Association policies.
In the discussion section, the paper will present the sources of disputes and conflicts in the Dwight Babcock Condominium communal living. For example, holding on to personal interest and not embracing the communal benefits. After that, it will discuss the methods used to solve the disputes and the benefits of each of them. Here, it will analyze such conflict and disputes resolution processes as the mediation, arbitration and negotiations. In the conclusion, the paper will draw conclusions based on the findings of the study.
Introduction
The paper will look at the case study of Dwight Babcock Condominium, which is a communal living embodies by communal policies such as the smoke-screen and Condominium Window Policy that are empirically supported by reviews of budgets among other issues that affect the members. However, the community has witnessed disputes concerning the policies guiding the wellbeing of the residents. As such, the paper will research on communication conflict resolution approaches such as the mediation, arbitration and negotiation applied in the case. In the first account, the paper will outline the sources of conflict among the resident. For instance, it will look at the Window Policy and its effect on the relationship of the residents based on the emails exchanged between the residents and the management. After that, the paper will analyze the methodologies on which the complaints used to present their disputes on communal living. Still, it will look at the ways used to resolve disputes such as mediation, arbitration and negotiations the as well as the advantages of each of them. Finally, it will draw a conclusion based on the findings of the case study and review of other relevant materials.
Sources of conflicts and dispute
Conflicts and disputes on the communal living result from varied sources and their degree depend on the approaches assumed by the parties involved as shown by the ensuing discussion. In the first instance, the case studies show that holding on personal preference over the expected communal benefits leads to disputes and delay of enforcement of agreed policies. Particularly, there are disputes concerning the 5-years mandated Window Replacement Policy. In some instance, Condo Association members dispute while others approve the Window Replacement Policy. Notably, some members argue that applying of punitive approach would disadvantage the entire communal members on two accounts. According to this member, punitive policies result to the division of the community due to is reactivity nature. Besides, the member indicates that he does not favor the new window and would rather keep the bubbly window for its impressionistic value. His proposal insists that restoration would have communal benefits to the entire Condo Association if only the punitive enforcement does not come into play. In a similar case, a second member of the community prefers the original architectural character noting that there is no compelling financial reason to change them. Additionally, the member feels that the Window Policy Enforcement should only come to effect when the original owner sells the unit to another person.
On the opposite side, some members favor the punitive Window Policy Enforcement citing several reasons for their proposal. One of the policy support argues that those rejecting the policy have been consistent in opposing policies that aim at improving the conditions of the Condo Association. For instance, they have kept dogs while the policies state dogs are not allowed in the condominium. Furthermore, she thinks that there for monetary fine with immediate effects considering that the policy was 5-years ago. Therefore, there is no need for either grace period or noncompliance without fine. Expected, the strife and the back and forth responses yield disputes and counter the health coexistence. Thereby, to bring the dispute to a halt, healthy conflict resolutions need to start immediately, and the ensuing discussions give the insights of the process.
Conflict and disputes resolution
The case study amplifies amicable solutions to the disputes by instilling fairness to all the community members to prevent the re-occurrences as well as promote harmonious coexistence. Clearly, there is member' engagement through continuous and constructive communications. For instance, there are emails sent to all the residents. On the other hand, the residents reply the email to the Dwight Babcock Condominium management expressing their opinions either for or against the Window Policy Enforcement. The fourth and back communication between the respective parties entails the negotiation process as noted Fisher and Patton (1991). Notably, the process is a central cause in the disputes resolutions owing to its various advantages it affords the parties. It is important to note that the process gives the members a chance to provide the solutions. For instance, in the Dwight Babcock Condominium case, the emails sent to express the reasons for why the enforcement should either be taken or not. In that case, both parties feel a part of the community since they have presented their take on the disputed matter. Essentially, a negotiated policy becomes easy to enforce owing to the engagement process between the disputing parties and the management as discussed by Sandole (1993).
Additionally, the case employs aspects of mediation to make sure both parties get fair treatment based on the facts and the past policies as noted by The Dwight Babcock Condominium manager and the trustees act as the mediators in this case as noted by Liebmann (1998). For instance, during the annual general meeting held to settle the issues of the Window Policy, the chairperson acted as the mediator. Here, there is evidence of some instances where impartiality applied to reach amicable decisions. In the first case, the chairperson ensures there is quorum before engaging any form of decision-making. This imparts fairness in the mediation process that promotes compliance and prevents future disputes in the Dwight Babcock Condominium as noted by Duffy, Grosch, and Olczak (1991). Besides, the management conducted a voting process to reaffirm on the Condominium window policy. After that, the decision to replace the original windows with more energy-efficient ones got approval based on majority rule. Notably, the windows would be beneficial to the entire community regarding energy conservation with the reference to the budget review. The budget facts and figures show that the current windows contributed to a significant increase in the energy cost. Additionally, the mediation process allowed the members to give their views on the ways to enforce the Window Replacement Policy through the e-mail process. Clearly, the mediation process in the case study is both comprehensive and participatory.
Finally, the case shows high levels of arbitration in several accounts. In the first instance, the disputing parties present their views to the arbitrator, the management, to make decisions on the disputed matter, the Window Replacement Policy as shown by In Normore, In Long, and In Javidi (2016). In this case, the management reviews the opinions of both parties to make valid cases on the issues. More importantly, the management uses the budget reviews, parties’ opinions and the past amendments. Eventually, the arbitrator makes decisions supported by the most people in the community by approving the Window replacement. Notably, the process is important in allowing the disputing parties present their views to the arbitrator which is important during the enforcement process. Studies have confirmed that in the event that the parties are consulted and heard in disputes resolutions, the outcomes are always desirable.
Conclusion
The findings of this report point to several important facts that need consideration during the conflict resolutions. Firstly, the mediator and the arbitrators need to find the root cause of the disputes. Thus, conflict resolution needs to listen to the disputing parties before coming up with their decision. Secondly, the study noted that negotiation process is important in creating enforceable policies that are acceptable to both parties. Finally, the conflict resolution needs to ride on effective communication channels as well as adherence to fairness to provide lasting solutions.
References
Duffy, K. G., Grosch, J. W., & Olczak, P. V. (1991). Community Mediation: A Handbook for practitioners and researchers. New York: Guilford Press.
Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1991). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
In Normore, A. H., In Long, L. W., & In Javidi, M. (2016). Handbook of research on effective communication, leadership, and conflict resolution.
Liebmann, M. (1998). Community and Neighborhood Mediation. London: Routledge- Cavendish.
Sandole, D. J. D. (1993). Conflict resolution theory and practice: Integration and application. Manchester [u.a.: Manchester Univ. Press.
