As a result of the ever increasing commercial activities, disagreements which sometimes result into full-blown disputes are bound to occur requiring resolution, one way or the other. There is no doubt that commercial activities in the industrial and financial sectors, has increased tremendously and frequent disagreement and disputes are necessary occurrence requiring resolution. Whenever disputes occur in the commercial arena, two major hurdles face the disputing parties. How to resolve the disputes quickly, at the least cost and in a manner that will riot stifle or disturb the continuum of their business activities. Businesses have a very simple and straightforward approach to resolving disputes. They need disputes resolved quick and efficiently. In the globalized world of commerce, this is not always possible because of the legal arid procedural complexities surrounding formal dispute resolution. Thus, businesses, along with legal experts and visionaries across the world, have started the dispute resolution landscape to accommodate these growing needs by introducing less formal procedures for dispute resolution. These procedures are known collectively as Alternative Dispute Resolution (“ADR). The a1177 of this research work is to determine if Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) method of conflict resolution bring satisfaction to the parties in dispute and to highlight how Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) fosters better understanding among parties and individuals in dispute and also to know if ADR maintain the privacy of the parties in dispute as against the traditional settlement through court

CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

“Alternative” Dispute Resolution is usually considered to be an alternative to litigation. It can also be used as a colloquialism for allowing a dispute to drop or as an alternative to violence. In recent years, there has been more discussion about taking a systems approach in order to offer different kinds of options to people who are in conflict, and to foster “appropriate” dispute resolution.

Disputes arise in contracts of sales, construction, employment, banking, insurance, etc. Where what is required is simply the appropriate interpretation of just one or two clauses of the contract. Such matters cannot wait for eighteen years to be resolved. What is actually required is a constructive and amicable interpretation of the grey clauses for the contract to continue. Litigation simply proves inadequate in the resolution of such disputes. Differences arising from on-going personal relationships get complicated when litigation is resorted to because of the obvious is win-lose nature of litigation. Court judgments identify clear winners and outright losers. The winner becomes a triumphant champion, the loser naturally does everything to undermine the judgment or wait für another day to take his pound of flesh.

What also is the real and actual value of a judgment if after paying lawyers money and anticipating so much emotion; time and energy going to court for about two decades, the judgment finally came several years after? This poser becomes even more relevant when the subject of the dispute is time sensitive. An investment dispute in particular and business dispute in general cannot wait for eighteen- years to be efficiently and meaningfully resolved. The outcome will be a sheer waste of time, money, energy, emotions and other valuable resources of all the parties directly or indirectly involved including the supposedly victorious party, except of course, the lawyer. Emerging developments have indicated that litigation as a mechanism for dispute resolution is old, tired party unfriendly and incapable of coping with challenges of contemporary dispute resolution.

Going to court creates hard feelings between the parties involved. The Yoruba of South Western Nigeria puts it clearly: “You don”t come back from the court to be friends.”

It is because of the limitations of litigation, some of which have been highlighted above, that the researcher decides to embark on this research topic on which focus is now being placed on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in most contemporary jurisdiction as means of resolving disputes. So what is this Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and .what is it all about? The meaning of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), its essence, advantages and limitations will all be explained in t:hë course of this study.

1.2  STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Going through traditional court of law to resolve cases involves procedures that are time consuming. The processes of obtaining evidence, presenting the evidence, preparing witnesses and the defense proceedings takes time; this time involvement has been attributed to delayed justice in some quarters.

The cost of seeking the services of a legal practitioner, obtaining evidence and processing such evidence, etc. may be enormous when compared to the cost of resolving disputes via the alternative dispute resolution methods. In a law court where one wins and the other lose, one of the parties is happy about the final decision of the judges while the other is left aggrieved. Sometimes, the aggrieved party looks for opportunity for further litigation, through appeals; in higher court of law.

In contrast to the ADR process of dispute resolution, understanding is not reached when the cause(s) of disagreement is presented.

Again, the privacy of the parties involved in dispute is not protected. Each party will want to discredit the other party by dredging out the other”s deepest secrets.

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The general objective of this study is to examine how alternative dispute resolution can be a key on organizational performance and growth in the banking sector of Nigeria Economy. Other specific objectives include:

1. To ascertain if Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) saves time in contrast to a court of law.

2. To find out if Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) saves money.

3. To determine if Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) method of conflict resolution bring satisfaction to the parties in dispute.

4p

4. To highlight how Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) fosters better understanding among parties and individuals in dispute.

5. To know if ADR maintain the privacy of the parties in dispute as against the traditional settlement through court.

1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The following are the research questions formulated for this study:

(1) Does Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) save time in contrast to a court of law?

(2)Does Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) save money?

(3) Does Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) method of conflict resolution bring satisfaction to the parties in dispute?

(4)Does Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) foster better understanding among parties and individuals in dispute thereby sustaining cordial relationship?

(5)Does Alternative Dispute Resolution maintain the privacy of the parties in dispute as against the traditional settlement through court?

1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The study will highlight the primary” purpose of ADR which is to create avenues and platforms for amicable resolution of already existing or intending conflicts or disputes in such a way that it is quick, costless and at the same time, does not infringe on the right and privacy of the parties involved.

The study will also serve as alternative to litigation which is used to create a “winwin” situation between parties by providing resolutions that the parties agree and are happy with.

Its process involves the use of negotiation skills to achieve and develop agreement that will benefit the parties involved in a dispute. It is also meant to be voluntary, flexible and used to serve the parties interest.

It will be beneficial to the organization under study, to students who would like to going to similar research works, organizations, companies and professional bodies.

1.6 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The research work covers Alternative Dispute Resolution, a Key on Organizational Performance and Growth in the Banking Sector of Nigerian Economy with First Bank of Nigeria Plc, ABA as its case study. The reason for this is that the relationship between staff and management or employers of staff is very vast as it cuts across all the state and even in the personal environment. If someone should embark on this study in its entity, it would simply amount to nothing less than writing a book.

1.7 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

With the nature of man, it can be concluded that there is hardly perfection in human endeavours, but the fact remains that man will continually be. engaged in the struggle for perfection. In an attempt to carry out this study, the researcher was faced with the under listed problems:

The problem of getting enough textbooks from the school library which will. treat the topic as a whole was also a big problem.

The uncooperativeness of the staff of the Bank: They were fury restricted from entertaining questions from outsiders even when you show them your identity card which shows prove of the researcher being a student, they feel it was a means of collecting ideas for sabotage.

The last was time schedule of the school; that the shortness of the semester, having to receive lectures and as well shuttle the case study for interview and administration of the questionnaire.

1.8 DEFINITION OF TERMS

Conflict: This is defined as a serious disagreement or an argument like a long and bitter conflict between employers and workers and disagreernent with the people and authority.

Resolution: This is defined as the action of solving or settling problems, doubts, etc.

Alternative: This is defined as a different solution to a problem instead of something else.

Dispute: Can be defined as a lack of compromise between parties. It can also be said to arise when parties fail to reach satisfactory bargain over an issue,

Agreement: Is a promise or a contract made with somebody or an entity. It can also be harmony in opinion or feengs.

ADR: Which means Alternative Dispute Resolution can be simply explained as the means or methods of resolving legal disputes or conflicts privately through the intervention of a third party other than via litigation.

Litigation: This is the process of bringing a case, laying a claim or defending a claim, etc before a law court.

Dialogue: Is spoken or written conversation or talk like discussion between people in which opinions are exchanged.

Negotiation: This is defined as discussion which is aimed at reaching an agreement.

Adjudicate: This is when a dispute is examined in detail and a decision is given on it. It can andso be likened to a judge in a contest or a conflict.

Reputation: This is defined as the opinion of people about what somebody or something.

Confidentiality: This is defined as trusting someone with private information or secrets.

Mediation: Mediation is the process in which parties involved in a dispute meet jointly and separately in confidence with a neutral and independent outside party to explore and decide how the dispute between them will be resolved.

Conciliation: This is the process or service of helping people to settle disputes between employers and workers.

Mandate: This is the authority to something, somebody or given to a government or other organizations by the people who support it.