PPD 2010 Syllabus.doc



PPD 690: Alternative Dispute Resolution

School of Policy, Planning, and Development

University of Southern California

Instructor: Helene V. Smookler Spring 2010

Office Hours: Before & After class Section 51243R

& by appointment

Phone: 310-475-5700 Thurs. 6:00 – 9:20

e-mail: smookler@ RGL 219

hsmookle@usc.edu

Course Description

This course is designed for graduate students with little or no prior background or experience in the field of dispute resolution. Discussion of the literature, case studies and role-playing will be used to introduce students to the theory and methods of conflict resolution. The focus will be on facilitation, negotiation and mediation as it is and can be used in the public sector and to provide participants with experience in analyzing conflicts and reaching consensus. Most of the readings and role plays concern public policy issues, particularly topics in local and regional government.

Learning objectives. At the end of this course you will understand when Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is appropriate, what procedures and practices are available and how to be a more effective participant in those processes. You will also learn what skills are required and where to go for more formal training to become a mediator. Most importantly, you will gain skills that will allow you to be a more creative public policy decision maker.

Specifically, the course will help the student develop the following:

Public policy consensus building skills. Using consensus-based approaches, gain ability to develop solutions and make decisions that are more creative and more widely supported than those made using tradition decision-making methods, such as top-down decision making or even parliamentary or legislative procedure.

Consensus Building Design Skills. Ability to determine the best way to achieve consensus on public policy issues, with ceative decisions that are widely acceptable and that can be effectively implemented.

Ethics. The rules and ethical obligations of persons in the public area; the ethical issues that persons in the policy area face, particularly when it relates to disclosure of information and handling of sensitive issues, such as those related to race, religion and health

Skills. Improve decision-making skills; more effectively run meetings; reach closure in meetings and on issues; effectively involve stakeholders in decision making; determine processes for decision making and conflict resolution; develop better understanding of policy process; and improve meeting participation skills.

Readings

• Goldberg, Sandler, Rogers, Dispute Resolution: Negotiation, Mediation, and Other Processes, Little Brown & Co., 4th Edition (May 2003)

• Susskind, McKearnan, Thomas-Larmer, The Consensus Building Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to Reaching Agreement, Sage Publications (1999)

• Negotiated Rulemaking Deskbook, Center for Public Policy Dispute Resolution, University of Texas School of Law (October 1996) [available on web]

• Case studies, exercises, materials distributed in class or posted on the blackboard.

Course Requirements

1. Preparation and participation. Since the class meets only one day a week students are required to attend class and be prepared for participation in class discussion. You are required to be able to respond to questions in each of the chapters in the Goldberg, Dispute Resolution and other assignments. Students must notify the professor of any planned absences.

2. Role Plays. Students will participate in negotiation and mediation role plays. Each student will be given the opportunity to be a mediator. Most of the role plays will be taken from the Goldberg book. Others will be handed out in class.

2. Journal. Students will complete a journal. It will include analysis of what was learned in class, from the readings, and in daily, work, school, or personal activities. Regarding the role plays, for example, you should describe what you or the participants The course materials should help you assess issues and conflicts in your job or home life. Address these in your journal.

3. Mediation Convening Paper. Students will draft a convening paper on a current local, complex public policy dispute. Papers involve original research and interview with stakeholders.

Requirements and Grading:

Assignment Length Deadline Grade %

Class participation (discussion, Goldberg questions, role plays) 33.33

Journal . April 30 33.33

Papers April 30 33.33

Topic due: Feb. 19

(If requested, I will review drafts and provide comments)

Form and style: The journal and staff paper draft must be double spaced. All assignments must be written in plain, concise prose, as described in Strunk and White's Elements of Style. You should also use an appropriate style manual, I prefer Kate Turabian, A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Thesis and Dissertations (2007, 7th ed), University of Chicago Press.

All memos and reports will be handled electronically through submission and return of Word documents using the digital drop box on the class Blackboard site. I will not accept any papers via email or in hard copy. Labeling protocol: please label all files by your last name and name of assignment (e.g., smookler_memo1.doc)

Policy on late and missing assignments: I will grade late assignments down for each day late. Please inform me in advance if you must miss a deadline. I will not give a passing grade unless all assignments are completed.

Syllabus revision. I will regularly assess progress and elicit student feedback regarding the course. If necessary I will revise the syllabus to make it more suitable.

Academic integrity: Students should maintain strict adherence to standards of academic integrity, as described in SCampus (). In particular, the University recommends strict sanctions for plagiarism, defined below:

11.11 Plagiarism

A. The submission of material authored by another person but represented as the student's own work, whether that material is paraphrased or copied in verbatim or near-verbatim form.

B. The submission of material subjected to editorial revision by another person that results in substantive changes in content or major alteration of writing style.

C. Improper acknowledgment of sources in essays or papers.

Note: Culpability is not diminished when plagiarism occurs in drafts which are not the final version.

Also, if any material is prepared or submitted by another person on the student's behalf, the student is

expected to proofread the results and is responsible for all particulars of the final draft.

Source: SCampus University Governance;

The recommended sanctions for academic integrity violations are attached to this syllabus. For more information also please see the “Guide to Avoiding Plagiarism,” from USC’s Expository Writing Program, . All reference to the work of others must be properly cited using APA citation standards. This includes work made public on the WWW. If you have any questions about academic integrity or citation standards, please ask in advance.

Academic accommodations. Any student requesting academic accommodations based on a disability is required to register with Disability Services and Programs (DSP) each

semester. A letter of verification for approved accommodations can be obtained from DSP. Please be sure the letter is delivered to me as early in the semester as possible. DSP is located in STU 301 and is open early 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The phone number for DSP is (213) 740-0776.

COURSE SCHEDULE

Week 1. Introduction to Conflict Resolution Jan. 14

And Consensus Building in the Public Sector

• Differences between Conflict Resolution in the Public Sector and Other Sectors

• Goals and Processes of Dispute Resolution: Negotiation and Mediation

• Exercises in Negotiation and Mediation

Required reading:

• Handbook , Introduction, 1-57 (overview of processes)

o Susskind, An Alternative to Robert’s Rules of Order for Groups, Organizations, and Ad Hoc Assemblies that Want to Operate by Consensus.

• Goldberg, Dispute Resolution , 1-14

• Video --

Week 2. Negotiation Jan. 21

Required reading:

Goldberg, Dispute Resolution, 14-106

o M. Meltsner & Schrag, Negotiating Tactics

o H. Raiffa, The Art and Science of Negotiation

o Questions, p. 34

o Note: Principled Negotiation

o W. Ury, Getting Past No

o J. White, The Pros and Cons of “Getting to Yes”

o Fisher, Ury and Patton, Getting to Yes

o Lax & Sebenius, The Manager as Negotiator

o Questions, p. 61

o Note: The Janus Quality of Negotiation –Deal Making and Dispute Resolution

o Rubin & Sander, When should we Use Agents

o Questions, p. 67

o White, Machiavelli and the Bar: Ethical Limitations on Lying in Negotiation

o Rules of Professional Conduct

o Shell, When is it Legal to Lie in Negotiations

o Questions, p. 80

o Mnookin, Why Negotiations Fail

o Exercises (to be assigned)

Week 3. Fairness, People, Tactics and Power Jan. 28 Choosing Appropriate Consensus Building Strategies

Required Reading:

• Handbook, 61-97

o Carpenter, Choosing Appropriate Consensus Building Techniques and Strategies

• Goldberg, Mediation, 107-182

o Rogers and Salem, Student’s Guide to Mediation

o Fisher & Ury, Getting to Yes

o Questions, p.115

o Knebel & Clay, Before you Sue

o Note: The Role of Apology in Dispute Resolution

o Note: Dealing with Impasse

o Questions, p.139

o Note: Dealing with Differences

o Question, p. 145

o Public Encouragement of Mediation

o Social Science Assessments of Mediation

o Question, p. 158

o Regulating Mediation

o Questions, p. 162

o Enforcement Mechanisms

o Questions, p. 175

Week 4 Planning and Designing Systems Feb. 4

• Choosing Appropriate Strategies and Techniques

• Designing Systems

• Convening

Required reading:

• Goldberg, 301-335

o Dispute Resolution System

• Goldberg, Brett & Ury, Designing an Effective Dispute Resolutions System

• Costantino & Merchant, Designing Conflict Management Systems

▪ Questions, p. 333

o Selection of the Process

• Sander & Goldberg, Fitting the Forum to the Fuss

o Uniform Mediation Act

• Handbook, 99-136

o Susskind and Thomas-Larmer, Conducting a Conflict Assessment

• Handbook, 169-197

o Carlson, Convening

Week 5 Designing Systems (Con’t) & Ground Rules Feb. 11

Required reading:

• Handbook, 137-168

o Straus, Designing a Consensus Building Process Using a Graphic Road Map

• Goldberg, pp. 335-375,

• Handouts – Ground Rules Examples

•

Week 6 Negotiated Rulemaking and Confidentiality Feb. 18

Required Reading:

• Negotiated Rule Making Deskbook (entire)

• Goldberg, 341-358

o Representing a Client in Mediation

• Premediation

▪ Risken, The Represented Client in a Settlement Conference

• Advocacy During Mediation

• Ethical Issues

• Making the Decision to Settle

▪ Aaron & Hoffer, Decision Analysis as a Method of Evaluating

▪ Question, p 350-355

• Confidentiality

▪ Goldberg, 441-473

Week 7 Barriers to ADR in Public Sector Feb. 25 Role of Facilitator Mediator

Representation of Stakeholder Interests

Required reading

Handbook, 199-240

o Poirier Elliott, The Role of Facilitators, Mediators, and Other Consensus Building Practitioners

Handbook 241-285

o Laws, Representation of Stakeholder Interests

Week 8 Building Consensus – Reaching Closure March 4

Limits in the Public Policy Arena

Required reading

Handbook, 287-323

o Managing Meetings to Build Consensus

Handbook, 325-373

o McKearnan and Fairman, Producing Consensus

Case 3, Handbook, The Chelsea Charter Process

Week 9 Experts, the Press and Technology March 11

Required reading:

• Handbook, 375-400.

o Ehrmann & Stinson, Joint Fact-Finding and the Use of Technical Experts

• Handbook, 401-434.

o Ozawa, Making the Best Use of Technology

• Handbook, 435-462

o Kunde, Dealing with the Press

• Case 5, San Francisco Estuary Project, Handbook, 801-828

Week 10 Dealing with Cultural and Value Differences March 25

Required reading:

• Handbook, 463-493.

o Forester, Dealing with Deep Value Differences

• Case 9, Native American Experience, Handbook, 901-922

• Case 10, Haida Gwai, Handbook, 923-950

Week 11 Dealing with Cultural and Value Differences (cont) April 1

Required reading:

• Case 14, Facilitating Statewide HIV/AIDS Policies and Priorities, Handbook,1011-1030

• Case16, The God’s Fellowship Church Reconciliation Process, Handbook, 1051-1064

• Goldberg, 571-588

Week 12 Implementing Consensus Based Agreements April 8

Required reading:

• Handbook, 527-556

o Potapchuk & Crocker, Implementing Consensus-Based Agreements

• Handbook, 591-630

o Moore & Woodrow, Collaborative Problem Solving within Organizations

• Case 2, Northern Oxford County Coalition, Handbook, 711-742

Week 13 Evaluating Public Policy Consensus Building April 15

Required reading:

• Handbook, 631-675

o Innes, Evaluating Consensus Building

• Case 4, Affordable Housing Mediation, Handbook 773-800

• Case 1, Activating a Policy Network, Handbook, 685-710

Week 14 The Future of ADR –Evaluation of Cases April 22

Student Perspective

Required reading:

Goldberg, 591-609

o Societal-Public Perspective

o Student Perspective: “Can I Earn a Living in ADR”?

o Alfini & Galton, ADR Personalities and Practice Tips

Case 6, New York Bight, Handbook, 829-858

Case 7, Superfund Cleanup, Handbook, 859-878

Week 15 Paper Presentations April 29

Catch-up Paper and Journal

Required reading:

• Case 11, The Chattanooga Process, Handbook 951-968

Final Paper and Journal due

5 PM Wednesday May 5

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download