Assuring Quality in ADR Practice & Programs

Next Steps-How to Approach Assessing Quality

TABLE OF CONTENTS MORE 

What is the best way to proceed in designing a quality assurance program? A 1995 report issued by a SPIDR Commission on Qualifications made recommendations to policy makers, practitioners, program administrators, trainers, ADR associations, and consumers about their roles and responsibilities in ensuring competence and quality in dispute resolution practice. It provides a framework for determining which approaches to use. The report is an extremely useful resource for thinking about how to address the issues surrounding quality assurance.

Assuring competence is a key to quality and is a shared responsibility of programs, practitioners, parties and dispute resolution organizations. The 1995 report of the SPIDR Commission on Qualifications, Ensuring Competence and Quality in Dispute Resolution Practice, offers helpful advice and a framework for policymakers, organizations, and others to use in determining the approach to take in the context within which they work. The report recommends that all stakeholders should be consulted in formulating standards of competence and qualifications.

The report recommends using the following 7 questions to assess how to achieve quality. The questions are intended to help organize discussion or deliberation over the issues.

  1. What is the context? The context of the dispute resolution service needs to be examined and understood, because that determines what should be considered competent practice in your specific situation.
  2. Who is responsible for ensuring competence? Stakeholders-including practitioners, consumers, program administrators, and others-have roles and responsibilities in assuring quality. Practitioners can gain skills and knowledge and work within their area of competence. Consumers can familiarize themselves with the basics they'll need to make an informed choice and participate in the evaluation of the services rendered. Programs and associations can solicit views in developing guidelines on competent practice.
  3. What do practitioners and programs do? It is important to examine the core tasks performed in any dispute resolution practice or program.
  4. What does it mean to be competent? The core skills that have been described in this web page, and identified through studies and research, apply here.
  5. How do practitioners and programs become competent? The multiple paths to becoming a competent practitioner need to be recognized. Practice involves some combination of natural aptitude, skills, knowledge, and other attributes developed through education, training, and experience.
  6. How is competence assessed? No one method of assessment should be relied on because it may lead to emphasis of one measure of competence at the expense of other valuable measures. And assessing competence should be a shared responsibility among the various stakeholders.
  7. How should assessment tools be used to assure quality? Quality assurance tools should be used to support the goals of the dispute resolution program and be consistent with the practice context where they are to be applied. Here is where use of certification and credentialing arise. Formal and informal certification are ways to assure competence of practitioners. The more formal the certification process, the greater the number of considerations that accompany its implementation. For instance, there are issues of costs of operating a certification programs as well as how to handle decertification. Programs can also assure competence through training, supervision, monitoring and the use of assessment tools.

While the framework is expressed in a linear way, it is adaptable to different situations and contexts. By answering all the questions, programs are likely to achieve more sound and practical approaches to qualifications issues.

TABLE OF CONTENTS MORE