UNIT 4

Monitoring impact of Interventions:

Tracking impact interventions
Monitoring is a form of evaluation or assessment, though unlike outcome or impact
evaluation, it takes place shortly after an intervention has begun (formative evaluation),
throughout the course of an intervention (process evaluation) or midway through the
intervention (mid-term evaluation).

Monitoring is not an end in itself. Monitoring allows programmes to determine what is and is
not working well, so that adjustments can be made along the way. It allows programmes to
assess what is actually happening versus what was planned.

Monitoring allows programmes to:

 Implement remedial measures to get programmes back on track and remain

accountable to the expected results the programme is aiming to achieve.
 Determine how funds should be distributed across the programme activities.
 Collect information that can be used in the evaluation process.

When monitoring activities are not carried out directly by the decision-makers of the
programme it is crucial that the findings from those monitoring activities are coordinated and
fed back to them.

Information from monitoring activities can also be disseminated to different groups outside of
the organization which helps promote transparency and provides an opportunity to obtain
feedback from key stakeholders.

There are no standard monitoring tools and methods. These will vary according to the type
of intervention and objectives outlined in the programme. Examples of monitoring methods
include:

 Activity monitoring reports

 Record reviews from service provision (e.g. police reports, case records, health intake
forms and records, others)
 Exit interviews with clients (Survivors)
 Qualitative techniques to measure attitudes, knowledge, skills, behavior and the
experiences of survivors, service providers, perpetrators and others that might be
targeted in the intervention.
 Statistical reviews from administrative databases (i.e. in the health, justice, interior
sectors, shelters, social welfare offices and others)
 Other quantitative techniques.

Impact Evaluation
Impact evaluation assesses the changes that can be attributed to a particular intervention, such
as a project, program or policy, both the intended ones, as well as ideally the unintended
ones. In contrast to outcome monitoring, which examines whether targets have been
achieved, impact evaluation is structured to answer the question: how would outcomes such
as participants’ well-being have changed if the intervention had not been undertaken? This
involves counterfactual analysis, that is, “A comparison between what actually happened and
what would have happened in the absence of the intervention.” Impact evaluations seek to
answer cause-and-effect questions. In other words, they look for the changes in outcome that
are directly attributable to a program.

Impact evaluation helps people answer key questions for evidence-based policy making: what
works, what doesn’t, where, why and for how much? It has received increasing attention in
policy making in recent years in the context of both developed and developing countries. It is
an important component of the armory of evaluation tools and approaches and integral to
global efforts to improve the effectiveness of aid delivery and public spending more generally
in improving living standards. Originally more oriented towards evaluation of social sector
programs in developing countries, notably conditional cash transfers, impact evaluation is
now being increasingly applied in other areas such as the agriculture, energy and transport.

Impact evaluation measures the difference between what happened with the programme and
what would have happened without it. It answers the question, “How much (if any) of the
change observed in the target population occurred because of the programme or
intervention?”

Rigorous research designs are needed for this level of evaluation. It is the most complex and
intensive type of evaluation, incorporating methods such as random selection, control and
comparison groups.

These methods serve to:

 Establish causal links or relationships between the activities carried out and the
desired outcomes.
 Identify and isolate any external factors that may influence the desired outcomes.

For example, an impact evaluation of an initiative aimed at preventing sexual assaults on

women and girls in town x through infrastructural improvements (lighting, more visible
walkways, etc.) might also look at data from a comparison community (town y) to assess
whether reductions in the number of assaults seen at the end of the programme could be
attributed to those improvements. The aim is to isolate other factors that might have
influenced the reduction in assaults, such as training for police or new legislation.

While impact evaluations may be considered the “gold standard” for monitoring and
evaluation, they are challenging and may not be feasible for many reasons, including:

 They require a significant amount of resources and time, which many organizations
may not have.
 To be done properly, they also require the collection of data following specific
statistical methodology, over a period of time, from a range of control and
intervention groups, which may be difficult for some groups.
Impact evaluations may not always be called for, or even appropriate for the needs of most
programmes and interventions looking to monitor and evaluate their activities.

 To measure programme impact, an evaluation is typically conducted at the start

(known as a baseline) and again at the end (known as an endline) of a programme.
Measurements are also collected from a control group with similar characteristics to
the target population, but that is not receiving the intervention so that the two can be
compared.
 Attributing changes in outcomes to a particular intervention requires one to rule out
all other possible explanations and control for all external or confounding factors that
may account for the results.

An evaluation of the impact of a campaign to raise awareness around the provisions of a

recently enacted law on violence against women for example would need to incorporate:

 Baseline data on awareness of the law’s provisions prior to the campaign for the
intervention group;
 Endline data on awareness of the law’s provisions after the campaign for the
intervention group;
 Baseline data on awareness of the law’s provisions prior to the campaign for a closely
matched control group not exposed to the campaign; and
 Endline data on awareness of the law’s provisions after the campaign for a closely
matched control group not exposed to the campaign.

Endline data allows the programme to see if there were external/ additional factors that might
influence the level of awareness among those not exposed to the campaign. If the study
design does not involve a randomly-assigned control group, it is not possible to make a
definitive statement regarding any differences in outcome between areas with the programme
and areas without the programme.

However, if statistically rigorous baseline studies with randomly assigned control groups
cannot be conducted, very useful and valid baseline information and endline information can
still be collected.

Evaluation requires technical expertise and training. If the programme does not maintain the
capacity in-house, external evaluators should be hired to assist.

There are five key principles relating to internal validity (study design) and external validity
(generalizability) which rigorous impact evaluations should address: confounding factors,
selection bias, spillover effects, contamination, and impact heterogeneity.

 Confounding occurs where certain factors, typically relating to socioeconomic

status, are correlated with exposure to the intervention and, independent of exposure,
are causally related to the outcome of interest. Confounding factors are therefore
alternate explanations for an observed (possibly spurious) relationship between
intervention and outcome.
 Selection bias, a special case of confounding, occurs where intervention participants
are non-randomly drawn from the beneficiary population, and the criteria determining
selection are correlated with outcomes. Unobserved factors, which are associated with
access to or participation in the intervention, and are causally related to the outcome
 of interest, may lead to a spurious relationship between intervention and outcome if
unaccounted for. Self-selection occurs where, for example, more able or organized
individuals or communities, who are more likely to have better outcomes of interest,
are also more likely to participate in the intervention. Endogenous program selection
occurs where individuals or communities are chosen to participate because they are
seen to be more likely to benefit from the intervention. Ignoring confounding factors
can lead to a problem of omitted variable bias. In the special case of selection bias, the
endogeneity of the selection variables can cause simultaneity bias.
 Spillover (referred to as contagion in the case of experimental evaluations) occurs
when members of the comparison (control) group are affected by the intervention.
 Contamination occurs when members of treatment and/or comparison groups have
access to another intervention which also affects the outcome of interest.
 Impact heterogeneity refers to differences in impact due by beneficiary type and
context. High quality impact evaluations will assess the extent to which different
groups (e.g., the disadvantaged) benefit from an intervention as well as the potential
effect of context on impact. The degree that results are generalizable will determine
the applicability of lessons learned for interventions in other contexts.
Stress Management and Detached
Involvement
Stress Management: Stress is obvious and employees have to adapt to stress in such a way
that they are no longer aware of it. Companies can effectively manage stresses by removing
the stressors that cause needless tension and job burnout. Other stress management strategies
may keep employees “stress-fit,” but they don’t solve the fundamental causes of stress.
Organizations manage stress by investigating the main causes of stress in their workplace.
Another suggestion is to change the corporate culture and reward systems so they support a
work-life balance and no longer reinforce dysfunctional workaholism. More generally, the
most effective ways to remove workplace stressors is to empower employees so that they
have more control over their work and work environment. Role-related stressors can be
lessened by selecting and assigning employees to positions that match their capabilities.
Noise and safety risks are stressful, so improving these conditions would minimize stress in
the workplace. Workplace bullying can be minimized through clear guidelines of behaviour
and feedback for those who infringe those standards.

Figure: Stress management strategies:

Mangers have important contribution in the identification and intervention of constant

workplace stress. Lazarus (1991) has recognized three main strategies for reducing work-
related stress. In the first strategy, managers can help their employees to cope up with
workplace stress is changing the working conditions so that they are more favourable to
effective coping. When barriers are removed such as work overload, environmental
annoyances, isolation, and lack of autonomy, an environment is created in which an
employee can perform better. The second strategy to reduce work-related stress is to facilitate
the employee to improve his or her transaction with the environment. Managers should
provide the worker with services such as an employee assistance program or links to stress
management resources to help them work through the issues that hamper adequate appraisal
of the situation. Moreover, such programs will teach the employee how to utilize behavioural
skills such as implementing a new diet, meditation techniques, and relaxation techniques in
order to relieve the physical and psychological effects of stress. Usually, these programs will
involve cognitive behavioural interventions (Long, 1988). The third strategy is to assist the
employee recognizes the stressful relationship between the individual or group and the work
setting (Lazarus, 1991) and developing a strategy to help reduce the tension in that affiliation.

To summarize, Stress is an adaptive reaction to a threatening situation that is perceived by

person in work setting or in his life. Stressors are the causes of stress and include any
environmental conditions that place a physical or emotional demand on the person. Stressors
are found in the physical work environment, the employee’s various life roles, interpersonal
relations, and organizational activities and conditions. Conflicts between work and non-work
obligations are a common source of worker stress. Workplace stress has dangerous
consequences on the health of employees such as it can cause significant psychological and
physiological problems. Workplace stress has been associated with the aetiology of physical
disorders such as heart disease, hypoadrenia, immunosuppression, and chronic pain.
Additionally, the psychological impact of workplace stress includes depression, persistent
anxiety, pessimism, and resentment.

The impact of these symptoms on organizations is significant as these symptoms lead to

antagonism in the workplace, low morale, interpersonal conflict, increased benefit expenses,
decreased productivity, and increased absenteeism. To cope up with stressful situation,
experts provide various stress management strategies. By providing the foundation for
employees to prosper while also allowing employees to take responsibility for their stress
related symptoms, organizations will find considerable improvement in productivity and an
improved workplace dynamism. Some tactics directly remove superfluous stressors or
remove employees from the stressful environment. Other strategies facilitate employees to
modify their interpretation of the environment so that it is not viewed as a severe stressor.
Wellness programs promote employees to develop better physical defences against stress
experiences. Social support provides emotional, informational, and material resource support
to safeguard the stress experience.

Detach Involvement Detachment is distancing oneself in order to gain perspective and to

expand the context.

The degree of detachment or involvement which is most appropriate will vary during the
coaching relationship. It will be for the coach to choose what is most appropriate.

Involvement is the ability to be both mentally and emotionally involved.

Mentally, to ascertain and clarify the facts presented by the client.

Emotionally, being aware of the client’s feelings, which enables empathy, but also to be in
touch with his or her own feelings.

Together, they give the coach a fuller grasp of the client’s and their own reality.
A) The inter-personal rela onship:

Detached involvement is an indispensable skill of in-depth coaching. It is a skill which can be

learned and developed, both by the coach and the client.

Detached involvement ensures that the coach will be present to the client in the most
effective way.

It facilitates non-attachment to outcome, which can be a challenging goal for many coaches.

When detached involvement is lacking, the coach’s tendency will be to become over-
involved with the client’s story, perhaps lapse into mentoring, offering advice and strategies,
and taking too much responsibility for the outcome.

B) The intra-personal rela onship:

Who will be making this choice when you are the coach in question?

Where in your personality is your locus of decision-making, of making choices when you are
coaching? Which part of you decides?

It is most likely to be the part or parts of you that normally run your life, known as your
Primary Selves. Hal and Sidra Stone identified some of the selves in their book, “Embracing
your Selves” (1988): the Pleaser, the Perfectionist, the Inner Critic and the Controller. We
might add the Hard Worker and the Helper and the Victim to this list.

These sub-selves or sub-personalities sometimes act like the dominant members of a board of
directors, who come to meetings with their own agenda and set of priorities based on their
point of view. In such cases, the authority of the CEO may be absent or just ignored.

Another analogy would be a kingdom in which the rightful ruler is absent, and the kingdom is
actually ruled by the barons. I call this situation the Empty Throne.

C) The inter-func onal rela onship:

To what extent is detached involvement applicable in the external coach’s relationship with
the organisation which has engaged him?

Over-involvement might lead the coach to major on pleasing the coachee’s employer at the
coachee’s expense and at the expense of the coach’s integrity.

Over-detachment might lead to the coach following their own agenda at the expense of their
relationship with the corporate client.

So, which part of you will be making these choices?

Our sub-personalities come with their own perspectives, their own priorities and make their
choices accordingly.
In order to practice detached involvement successfully, you will need to consciously rise
above the level of your sub-personalities and attain your centre, your Conscious Self. If your
sub-personalities are the musicians in the orchestra, your Conscious Self is the conductor of
the orchestra.

In the previous three scenarios, the coach will need to discern from a clear and stable place.

So, what can we do to arrive at our centre, our Conscious Self?

The applied psychology of Psychosynthesis offers us a technique called the Dis-identifying

and Identifying Exercise which helps us to disidentify from the contents of our personality
and connect with our deeper centre of identity, our Conscious Self, also known as our “I”.

How do we know when we have attained our “I”?

We typically experience a greater calm, a degree of serenity and balance beyond the daily
norm.

A place where clarity and sureness of choice is more available to us.

It is from this place that we can discern most clearly and choose the appropriate levels of
detachment and involvement in all the interventions in our coaching practice.

When you practice detached involvement, you’re both a participant and an observer of your
life at the same time. You see all experiences as part of life’s journey without judging them as
being good or bad. You simply experience them and are in control of your responses to them.
You’re fully involved, but detached from the allure of outcomes.

So, how do you learn to practice detached involvement?

 Take nothing personally

 Make no assump ons
 Make as few judgments as possible
 Let go of the need to be right
 Let go of the need to control
 Be passionate about all of life’s experiences, even the painful ones
 Give all you have, your true gi s, to whatever you’re doing
 Detach from future poten al results
Meaning, Sources and Consequences of
Stress
Stress is a general term applied to various psychologic (mental) and physiologic (bodily)
pressures experienced or felt by people throughout their lives.

Stress is defined as “a state of psychological and physiological imbalance resulting from the
disparity between situational demand and the individual’s ability and motivation to meet
those needs.”

Dr. Hans Selye, one of the leading authorities on the concept of stress, described stress as
“the rate of all wear and tear caused by life.”

Stress can be positive or negative:

 Stress is good when the situa on offers an opportunity to a person to gain something. It acts
as a mo vator for peak performance.
 Stress is nega ve when a person faces social, physical, organiza onal and emo onal
problems.

Factors that are responsible for causing stress are called stressors.

Causes of Stress

1. Career Concern

If an employee feels that he is very much behind in the corporate ladder, then he may
experience stress. If he seems that there are no opportunities for self-growth, he may
experience stress. Hence, unfulfilled career expectations are the significant source of stress.

2. Role Ambiguity

It occurs when the person doesn’t know what he is supposed to do, on the job. His tasks and
responsibilities are not clear. The employee is not sure what he is expected to do. It creates
confusion in the minds of the worker and results in stress.

3. Rotating Work Shifts

Stress may occur in those individuals who work on different work shifts. Employees may be
expected to work on day shift for some days and then on the night shift. That may create
problems in adjusting to the shift timings, and it can affect not only personal life but also
family life of the employee.

4. Role Conflict

It takes place when people have different expectations from the person performing a
particular role. It can also occur if the job is not as per expectation, or when a job demands a
certain type of behavior that is against the person’s moral values.
5. Occupational Demands

Some jobs are more demanding than others. Jobs that involve risk, and danger are more
stressful. Research findings indicate, job that cause stress needs constant monitoring of
equipments and devices, unpleasant physical conditions, making decisions, etc.

6. Lack of Participation in Decision-making

Many experienced employees feel that management should consult them on matters affecting
their jobs. In reality, the superiors hardly ask the concerned employees before taking a
decision. That develops a feeling of being neglected, which may lead to stress.

7. Work Overload

Excessive workload leads to stress as it puts a person under tremendous pressure. Work
overload may take two different forms:

 Qualita ve work overload implies performing a job that is complicated or beyond the
employee’s capacity.
 Quan ta ve work overload is a result of many ac vi es performed in a prescribed me.

8. Work Underload

In this, case, too little work or very easy work is expected on the part of the employee. Doing
less work or jobs of routine and simple nature would lead to monotony and boredom, which
can lead to stress.

9. Poor Working Conditions

Employees may be subject to poor working conditions. It would include bad lighting and
ventilation, unhygienic sanitation facilities, excessive noise, and dust, presence of toxic
gasses and fumes, inadequate safety measures, etc. All these unpleasant conditions create
physiological and psychological imbalance in humans thereby causing stress.

10. Lack of Group Cohesiveness

Every group is characterized by its cohesiveness, although they differ widely in its degree.
Individuals experience stress when there is no unity among work group members. There are
mistrust, jealousy, frequent quarrels, etc., in groups and this lead to stress to employees.

11. Interpersonal and Intergroup Conflict

These conflicts take place due to differences in perceptions, attitudes, values and beliefs
between two or more individuals and groups. Such conflicts can be a source of stress for
group members.

12. Organizational Changes

When changes occur, people have to adapt to those changes, and this may cause stress. Stress
is higher when changes are significant or unusual like transfer or adoption of new technology.
13. Lack of Social Support

When individuals believe that they have the friendship and support of others at work, their
ability to cope with the effects of stress increases. If this kind of social support is not
available, then an employee experiences more stress.

The main causes of stress outside work or organization:

Causes of stress outside work

1. Civic Amenities

Poor civic amenities in the area in which one lives can be a cause of stress. Inadequate or lack
of public facilities like improper water supply, excessive noise or air pollution, lack of proper
transport facility can be quite stressful.

2. Life Changes

Life changes can bring stress to a person. Life changes can be slow or sudden. Gradual life
changes include getting older, and abrupt life changes include death or accident of a loved
one. Sudden life changes are highly stressful and very difficult to cope.

3. Frustration

Frustration is another cause of stress. It arises when goal-directed behavior gets blocked.
Management should attempt to remove barriers and help the employees to reach their goals.

4. Racial, Caste, and Religious Conflicts

Employees living in areas, which are often prone to conflicts among people based on
differences seen in their race, caste and religion do suffer more from stress. In the case of a
religion, the minorities and lower-caste people (especially in India) are subject to more stress.

5. Personality

We can classify people as ‘Type A’ and ‘Type B’.

The ‘Type A’ people:

 They feel guilty while relaxing.

 They get irritated by minor mistakes of self and others.
 They feel impa ent and dislike wai ng.
 They also mul task and prefer to do several things at one me.

The ‘Type B’ people are exactly opposite and hence are less affected by stress due to the
above factors.

6. Technological Changes
When there are any changes in technical fields, employees are under the constant fear of
losing jobs or need to adjust to new technologies. It can be a source of stress.

7. Career Changes

When a person suddenly switches to another job, he is under stress to shoulder new
responsibilities adequately. Under-promotion, over-promotion, demotion and transfers can
also cause stress.

Following habits can remarkably help to relieve stress:

 Regular medita on
 Physical exercise
 Balanced diet
 Focused thinking
 Control of anger
 Managing Depression
 Maintaining calmness in stressful situa ons
 Having a posi ve a tude towards life
 Harmony towards self and others, etc.
Evaluating Value change
Change in the workplace can make us uncomfortable as we step out of what we normally do
and attempt new ways of working. Adapting to change in the workplace is often difficult
because it’s too easy to stay accustomed to our habits, however change is essential to many
aspects of business and our working life.

Those companies that don’t change can stagnate and not develop. Our current world is
constantly evolving in terms of technology and many other challenging but innovative ways.
Having the ability to face these new challenges head-on will not only develop the company as
a whole but also those who work within it.

Value change refers to an adjustment made in the price of a stock, usually to reflect the total
number of outstanding shares issued and withheld currently by investors.

The daily changes made in shares held by various investors are influenced by the daily
changes seen in the demand and supply. These price changes are periodically adjusted to go
at par with the Market changes.

The Value change enables a group of stocks to be weighed equally so that they can be
evaluated easily. Moreover, the number of shares held by a certain investor can change daily.
And this is the reason why the total number of shares held by a particular investor on a
specific day needs to be updated every day to determine the price changes.

A value change adjustment is made to equally with the stocks included within a single group.
Investors can use value change in a number of settings, as it defines a particular kind of
calculation used to evaluate and compare investment tools by considering the total shares
held by investors.

The main objective of a value change is to ensure that shares belonging to a specific group or
category are having equal weight. The theory also defines the steps that need to be followed
while estimating the metric used to assess and compare several instruments by factoring in all
the outstanding stocks, which don’t include reinvested shares.

To ensure that employees practice company values, HR professionals must:

 Determine the company values to incorporate into the employee appraisal process.
 Define and describe those values succinctly.
 Create methods for managers to quantify values.
 Immediately discipline employees who fail to espouse company values, regardless of
their job performance.
 Model the values for employees.
Formulating evidence-based practices and
Responsible investment
The first stage of any evidence-based practice process is formulating an answerable question.
This forms the foundation for quality searching. A well-formulated question will facilitate the
search for evidence and will assist you in determining whether the evidence is relevant to
your question.

The most commonly used framework for formatting questions is PICO. The acronym
translates to:

 Which problem, disease or condition are you looking at?

Population or
 How is your population defined? (age, gender, ethnic group …)
Problem
 How is the problem being treated?
Intervention
 Which alternative method are you comparing this with? (It’s ok to
Comparison leave this one blank if you are not doing a comparison)

 Which result are you focusing on or measuring?

Outcome

Other variables that can be added to this PICO framework are:

 What is the duration of the intervention?

Timeframe  What is the follow up schedule?

Type of
 Which type of study will you be using? (e.g. Randomised Control
study
Trials, Treatment Outcome Studies)
or
Study design
 Where is your intervention of interest taking place?
Setting

The PICo variation is useful for for qualitative studies

 Which problem, disease or condition are you looking at?

Population or
 How is your population defined? (age, gender, ethnic group …)
Problem

 Which experience, activity, process or event are you interesting

Interest in focusing on?

 Where is this happening? (Geographical location, e.g. Australia /

Context Service location, e.g. hospital)
Responsible investment

Socially responsible investing (SRI), also known as social investment, is an investment that is
considered socially responsible due to the nature of the business the company conducts.
Common themes for socially responsible investments include socially conscious investing.
Socially responsible investments can be made into individual companies with good social
value, or through a socially conscious mutual fund or exchange-traded fund (ETF).

Socially responsible investments include eschewing investments in companies that produce

or sell addictive substances (like alcohol, gambling, and tobacco) in favor of seeking out
companies that are engaged in social justice, environmental sustainability, and alternative
energy/clean technology efforts.

In recent history, “socially conscious” investing has been growing into a widely-followed
practice, as there are dozens of new funds and pooled investment vehicles available for retail
investors. Mutual funds and ETFs provide an added advantage in that investors can gain
exposure to multiple companies across many sectors with a single investment. However,
investors should read carefully through-fund prospectuses in order to determine the exact
philosophies being employed by fund managers, along with the potential profitability of these
investments.

There are two inherent goals of socially responsible investing: social impact and financial
gain. The two do not necessarily have to go hand in hand; just because an investment touts
itself as socially responsible doesn’t mean that it will provide investors with a good return,
and the promise of a good return is far from an assurance that the nature of the company
involved is socially conscious. An investor must still assess the financial outlook of the
investment while trying to gauge its social value.

Government-controlled funds

Government-controlled funds such as pension funds are often very large players in the
investment field, and are being pressured by the citizenry and by activist groups to adopt
investment policies which encourage ethical corporate behavior, respect the rights of
workers, consider environmental concerns, and avoid violations of human rights.

Community investing

Community investing, a subset of socially responsible investing, allows for investment

directly into community-based organizations. Community investing institutions use investor
capital to finance or guarantee loans to individuals and organizations that have historically
been denied access to capital by traditional financial institutions. These loans are used for
housing, small business creation, and education or personal development.

Negative screening

Negative screening excludes certain securities from investment consideration based on social
or environmental criteria. For example, many socially responsible investors screen out
tobacco company investments.
Evaluation Mediation process
Mediation is considered as an important part of the legal system in order to resolve the
disputes of the people of the nation. The developing countries are now trying to explore this
mechanism of dispute resolution and making it more advance day by day. Mediation is a
procedure in which one or more unbiased third parties engage for the dispute resolution with
the consent of the parties to the dispute and the person who guides them in negotiating a
unified and informed agreement.

Keeping in mind the pending clogged unheard cases in the courts of India and the year’s long
litigation process which undermines the presence of the justice delivery system in India. And
considering all these circumstances Abraham Lincoln said: “Discourage litigation”. He also
emphasized telling that convince your neighbors to compromise and explain to them how the
nominal winner is often the real loser in expenses and sheer wastage of time.

In India which is a developing country, people often approach courts for the resolution of
disputes and this opting of people for the litigation process over-burdens the courts and
subsequently increases the number of pending cases which ultimately leads to dissatisfaction
among the people of the nation for the judicial system. It is often said that “justice delayed is
justice denied”. Mediation has various benefits such as it’s a cost-efficient process because it
requires very little preparation, less complex, and formal. On the other hand, it is a time-
saving process as the mediator only deals with the important issues and ignore the irrelevant
ones. It is also recommended for sensitive relationships as it protects relationships as
compared to court trials.

The mediation process is broadly classified into two types:

Facilitative mediation:

This is the process in which the mediator structures the process and guides the parties to
reach a solution that is agreed by both the parties to a dispute. They don’t make
recommendations but they facilitate the agreement so that both the parties to the dispute agree
to the decision and mutually accept it.

Evaluative mediation:

This type of mediation is also termed as directive mediation in which the mediator gives
formal recommendations to the disputing parties and helps them with the most accurate
outcome to resolve their dispute through this type of alternative dispute resolution process.
This process is created on settlement conferences and meets which are held by the judges.
This method helps the parties to evaluate the weak points in their case and try applying what
a judge would do. It is an option of the mediator of this mediation process whether to make a
formal or informal recommendation to the parties to the dispute.
Context of Mediation
Mediation is an ADR method where a neutral and impartial third party, the mediator,
facilitates dialogue in a structured multi-stage process to help parties reach a conclusive and
mutually satisfactory agreement. A mediator assists the parties in identifying and articulating
their own interests, priorities, needs and wishes to each other. Mediation is a “peaceful”
dispute resolution tool that is complementary to the existing court system and the practice of
arbitration.

Arbitration and mediation both promote the same ideals, such as access to justice, a prompt
hearing, fair outcomes and reduced congestion in the courts. Mediation, however, is a
voluntary and non-binding process – it is a creative alternative to the court system. Mediation
often is successful because it offers parties the rare opportunity to directly express their own
interests and anxieties relevant to the dispute. In addition, mediation provides parties with the
opportunity to develop a mutually satisfying outcome by creating solutions that are uniquely
tailored to meet the needs of the particular parties. A mediator is a neutral and impartial
person; mediators do not decide or judge, but instead becomes an active driver during the
negotiation between the parties. A mediator uses specialized communication techniques and
negotiation techniques to assist the parties in reaching optimal solutions.

Mediation is a structured process with a number of procedural stages in which the mediator
assists the parties in resolving their disputes. The mediator and the parties follow a specific
set of protocols that require everyone involved to be working together. This process permits
the mediator and disputants to focus on the real problems and actual difficulties between the
parties. Moreover, the parties are free to express their own interests and needs through an
open dialogue in a less adversarial setting than a courtroom. The main aim of mediation is to
assist people in dedicating more time and attention to the creation of a voluntary, functional
and durable agreement. The parties themselves posses the power to control the process- they
reserve the right to determine the parameters of the agreement. In mediation, the parties also
reserve the right to stop anytime and refer a dispute to the court system or perhaps arbitration.

Generally, an agreement reached through mediation specifies time periods for performance
and is customarily specific, measurable, achievable, and realistic. It is advisable for the
parties to put their agreement in writing to create tangible evidence that they accomplished
something together. The written agreement reminds the parties of their newly achieved
common ground and helps to prevent arguments and misunderstandings afterward. Most
importantly, a written agreement provides a clear ending point to the mediation process. The
agreement binds the parties contractually. In case of disputes concerning compliance with the
mediated agreement (e.g., whether a party carries out an agreement) or implementation of a
mediated agreement (e.g., disputes concerning the precise terms for carrying out an
agreement), the agreement is enforceable as a contract, as it would be in cases of the non-
fulfilment of any ordinary contractual provision. Enforceability is necessary for mediation, as
an ADR process, to possess any legal strength or to impose any liability on the parties. It
should be noted that, in the United States, compliance with mediated settlement agreements is
high because the parties, themselves, create the terms of the settlement agreement. Thus,
enforcement proceedings are relatively rare because the parties voluntarily carry out their
own agreements.
Generally, choosing arbitration or mediation is attractive to parties because they get to
participate in these proceeding more directly than they would in a courtroom or in a litigated
dispute proceeding. However in arbitration, the arbitrator still makes the final determinations
of fault and compensation, and the parties must accept those decisions as though they were
made by a judge. Also, an arbitration proceeding is governed by formal rules and the role of
parties’ attorneys is still central to the representation of their interests. With a mediator’s
help, the parties are increasingly empowered to participate directly in the process and
determine the outcome of their own dispute, thus regulating and protecting their own
interests.

Another important difference between arbitration and mediation exists in regards to choosing
the neutral party. In choosing an arbitrator, the parties seek to select an individual that
possesses particular legal skills, knowledge and competence. With the exception of non-
binding arbitration in Italy, the arbitrator determines that outcome of the dispute according to
traditional legal principles, so the arbitrator must be highly knowledgeable in the relevant
area of law. In mediation, the selection of a mediator can be made among individuals with a
variety of degrees and particular experience or specialized training in the mediation of
disputes. Mediators are often described as experts in the process (of mediation), although it is
generally helpful to designate a mediator with some degree of subject matter knowledge as
well. Ultimately, mediation is a collaborative effort by all involved, and to arrive at a
satisfactory outcome, it includes the willing cooperation and respect of all parties.