What is the difference between arbitration and mediation?

We are in a world full of numerous people from different backgrounds, religions, cultures, with different schools of thought and opinions. Thus, this results in disagreement, serious argument, conflict, or dispute among people, even among workers of an organization, and it delays the necessary progress that needs to be made. Nevertheless, there are some measures that can be put into place or methods to settle whatever dispute or disagreement that might come up between people.

Two major methods are arbitration and mediation. Though they are implemented to achieve the same result, they are different in their approaches. Mediation is a form of alternative dispute resolution which is usually implemented even in the court of laws. In its approach there should be a man in-between, serving as the mediator. He works in a way whereby the two parties involved in an argument are only partially settled. But in the arbitration method, someone or people referred to as arbitrator(s) would make a judgment between the people in dispute, and settle the arguments.

The purpose of arbitration is to spare someone from the struggles he or she will endure if they elect to take their case to a court of law for settlement. Arbitration is closer to disputation settlement in a court of law as it involves the designation of someone who performs a role comparable to that of a judge. Arbitrators hear and consider the evidence before arriving on a decision that shall be binding on both parties.

It spares both parties of a lengthy trial that will likely prove to be financially draining. Mediation is more of a facilitative system in which the decision does not come from the mediator, but he plays the role of a facilitator. Mediation is a situation where the parties in dispute themselves come to a mutual agreement that is acceptable to both. It is a negotiated resolution.