This type of conflict resolution involves an independent arbitrator who is contracted to examine the dispute and the two positions, and make recommendations on possible resolutions. (2008, Law Reform) Advisory ADR offers a more hands-on approach than Facilitative ADR. Both Facilitative and Advisory ADR approaches are employed at a similar juncture in the dispute process: when a disagreement escalates, and may result in legal action. The latter are often referred to as evaluative, as they require an external body that assesses the facts, evidence, and stances of those involved.

1. 1
A SOLUTION FOR EVERY PROBLEM:
HOW TO PREVENT CONFLICT FROM BECOMING LITIGATION
Overview of Conflict Solutions and Services
Advisory ADR
(1) What is Advisory ADR?
This type of conflict resolution involves an independent arbitrator who is contracted to examine
the dispute and the two positions, and make recommendations on possible resolutions. (2008, Law
Reform) Advisory ADR offers a more hands-on approach than Facilitative ADR.
Both Facilitative and Advisory ADR approaches are employed at a similar juncture in the dispute
process: when a disagreement escalates, and may result in legal action. The latter are often referred
to as evaluative, as they require an external body that assesses the facts, evidence, and stances of
those involved.
Advisory ADR Services offered by ADR Chambers and the Stitt Feld Handy Group
Preventative
ADR
ADR Systems
Design
Conflict
Resolution
Training
Coaching
Facilitative
ADR
Traditional
Mediation
Roster Rate
Mediation
Phone Mediation
eVideo Mediation
Advisory
ADR
Ombuds Services
Neutral Evaluation
Workplace
Investigations
Integrity
Commissioner
Fairness
Monitoring
Determinative
ADR
Traditional
Arbitration
Expediated
Arbitration
Med-Arb
Private Appeals

2. 2
Ombuds – the Ombuds approach is investigative in nature, involving an analysis of the conflict
and the mandate to resolve it quickly and economically. In instances where no agreement is
reached, the reviewer will propose possible solutions. Part of the evaluator’s job is to examine the
institutional design of an enterprise that can cause failure to provide adequate service or respect
client rights. Several of the banks in Canada utilize the ADR Chambers’ impartial Banking
Ombuds as tool to manage conflict.
Early Neutral Evaluation – Early Neutral Evaluation is an evaluative technique in which a lawyer
or legal professional with expertise in the subject reviews the positions in order to provide an
appraisal of the case and likely ruling should it go to court. The assessor reviews evidence,
including documents, testimonies, and other submissions. While the assessor does not make final
decisions, he or she will produce information that highlights the case’s advantages and
disadvantages, and the ways in which both of these could influence a judgment.
Workplace Investigations – Workplace Investigations is an increasingly popular segment of
Advisory ADR. Developments in legislation has put increased amounts of responsibility on
companies to ensure safety in the workplace and, in cases of disagreement, must show that they
have adequately and thoroughly examined both employee and client concerns using a neutral,
third-party. (2018, ADR Chambers) ADR Chambers at the Stitt Feld Handy Group have highly-
skilled investigators that analyze and prepare reports on conflict in the professional environment.
Written reports can be comprised of information, whether or not the claims can be justified, and
proposals for next steps.
Integrity Commissioner - An Integrity Commissioner serves in an advisory capacity, with the main
task of determining whether or not public servants are acting in an ethical way. ADR Chambers
has provided this service to many Towns, Cities, and Municipalities for nearly a decade. Similar
to our Workplace Investigation service, the Integrity Commissioner process involves in-depth
analysis of processes in the work environment and suggestions on where the company or institution
can improve.
Fairness Monitoring - This type of Advisory ADR is first and foremost a tool to aid procurement
procedures, particularly in government-funded infrastructure projects. The Fairness Monitor
operates separately autonomously, offering support to those involved in the proposal submission
process, ensuring that all parties adhere to the procurement procedure originally laid out, and
making sure procedural issues, such as conflict of interest, are dealt with in a way that is fair to all
parties. These evaluators are responsible for analyzing the bidding process and offering
suggestions on its design, overseeing its use, be present at evaluation sessions, and submit an
account detailing whether or not the process was supervised impartially and equitably.
(2) When is Advisory ADR appropriate?
Advisory and Facilitative ADR approaches share many of the same advantages, including
efficiency, cost-efficacy, guaranteed privacy, and evasion of formal litigation. However, Advisory
ADR is different from Facilitative ADR in that the resolutions are not entirely reached by the
disputants. The Advisory ADR approach is most often employed when there’s a particular need

3. 3
for an unbiased third-party to engage in the process of reaching an agreement. By utilizing an
external third-party to examine the case and propose potential solutions, the party responding to
the claim can avoid accusations of partiality.
Advisory ADR can also be extremely advantageous to disputants who desire an evaluation of the
legal validity of the case and a recommendation on the benefit of a private settlement. An in-depth
report of the benefits and drawbacks of taking the dispute to court, the disputants can come to a
conclusion on how to proceed in a cooperative, respectful way. With Advisory ADR, the disputants
have more independence and self-determination than they would if they engaged in formal
litigation, but they use an expert’s opinion to make those decisions.
(3) When is Advisory ADR not appropriate?
Advisory ADR can be useful in a number of situations. However, it may not be advisable in cases
where the disputants require a resolution that is enforced by a court of law. A second instance
where Advisory ADR solutions might not be required, is when a Facilitative ADR approach will
suffice. The latter is typically less expensive, and allows for more autonomy among the disputing
parties.