New ODR Impact Assessment Tool from NCSC

The National Center for State Courts has just released a new paper from Thomas M. Clarke and Paula Hannaford-Agor entitled “Measuring the Impact of Access to Justice Programs: An Assessment Tool for Funders and Policymakers.” The paper presents a rubric for evaluating the cost-benefit of various strategies for expanding access to justice, with a particular focus on Litigant Portals and Online Dispute Resolution. The equation they use to calculate the objective comparable value of any individual A2J capability is:

The paper then applies this calculation to a variety of A2J approaches, including online dispute resolution. An excerpt from the analysis of ODR’s benefits:

“First, calculate the proportion of people who did not use other legal services who benefitted from ODR: 190,000 people who accessed ODR x 76% who did not use other legal services x 75% who received a positive outcome from ODR = 108,300. Then calculate the number of people who got a better outcome using ODR than with other legal services: 190,000 who accessed ODR x 24% who also used other legal services x 44% who received a suboptimal outcome with other legal services x 70% that received a better outcome using ODR = 14,045. Then add the two results: 108,300 + 14,045 = 122,345 (5% of 2.43 million people targeted for ODR).”

While the model is not simple to explain (as you can see) a thoughtful rubric such as this one will be very helpful in comparing different A2J approaches moving forward, and will be valuable to anyone attempting to calculate Net Present Value for ODR investments in the courts.

Check out the full paper here.

New Updated ODR Case Studies from NCSC

NCSC’s JTC ODR case studies paper has been updated with new case studies as well as updates to previous ones. From the new paper:

“The JTC first released a publication on the topic of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) in 2016. When Online Dispute Resolution and the Courts was published, only one US court had implemented ODR, and just a handful of US courts were seriously considering it. Within a year, significant enough change had occurred in the national ODR conversation that the paper was withdrawn and updated. A companion paper, Case
Studies in ODR for Courts: A view from the front lines
, was created, featuring a cross section of successes and misfires in what were then groundbreaking ODR efforts. This paper builds on that foundational work, to continue the conversation.

Since 2016, the shift in US courts’ practical experience as well as interest in ODR has been seismic. Dozens, if not hundreds of courts from large and small jurisdictions all over the US have online dispute resolution implemented for some case types and are looking for ways to expand use. Many more ODR project initiatives are underway. Some courts now have several years of ODR case data to evaluate and share.

The ODR implementations highlighted in this paper represent a variety development processes and platforms, ranging from in-house development to customizations of software created by an international collaborative. There are cloud-based SaaS products, as well as adaptations of platforms designed for other purposes, including BeInformed and SalesForce.

The following ODR implementations illustrate a sample of technologies, philosophies, and approaches to the use of technology in dispute resolution. Additional case studies will be added in coming months, with the most current examples featured at the top.”

Read the updated paper here.

https://bit.ly/2tOnaCx

Federico Ast gives a free online conference on Blockchain and Conflict Resolution via ODR Latinoamerica

Free online conference | ODR LATINOAMERICA 2020
Federico Ast :When the blockchain meets the ODR: Kleros and the birth of decentralized justice
March 19 | 2:00 pm GMT-3 Time

About Federico Ast:
Graduated in economics and philosophy from the University of Buenos Aires. He has a PhD in Business Management from IAE Business School. He attended the Global Solutions Program of Singularity University in 2016. He was a speaker at TEDx. He has taught at universities such as Stanford, Berkeley and Paris 2 Panthéon-Assas. He teaches Blockchain Disruption, the first blockchain course in Spanish for the online education platform Coursera. He is a specialist in civic innovation and the application of technologies such as blockchain and artificial intelligence for the transformation of legal systems and governments. He is the founder of Kleros, a project that applies blockchain and crowdsourcing in dispute resolution.

Remembering Clayton Christensen

While much of the world is mourning the loss of the great basketball player Kobe Bryant, I also want to take a moment to mark the passing of the influential thinker and researcher Clayton Christensen, author of The Innovator’s Dilemma and the father of the theory of disruption, which has shaped technological change ever since. A few of his quotes relevant to the growth and evolution of ODR:

“Empowering innovations transform something that is complicated and expensive into something that is so much more simple and affordable that a much larger population can enjoy it.”

“When an entrant competitor attacks the low end of any market, the rational reaction of the incumbent firms is to abandon rather than defend it – because the low end is the least profitable of their possible investments.”

“The reason why it is so difficult for existing firms to capitalize on disruptive innovations is that their processes and their business model that make them good at the existing business actually make them bad at competing for the disruption.”

“There just isn’t anything more invigorating than to read an article or hear about an entrepreneur using the term ‘disruptive technology’ that makes no reference to me as the source. When it’s clear they really got the idea and they use it as if it were in everyday parlance, that’s the ultimate triumph.”

It’s never easy to say goodbye to those who inspire us, but we can carry forth their influence if we remember the lessons they taught us and the example set by their hard work and achievements. RIP. (h/t Orna)

ODR beginning to find takers in India

New article in India’s Economic Times on ODR. An excerpt:

‘ODR offers a more accessible, transparent and faster option, particularly for companies dealing with high volume and low value transactions done online. With more Indians transacting online — whether for e-commerce or banking — stakeholders say the timing is right for ODR to gain acceptance as an easy mechanism to resolve grievances. A year ago, a Nandan Nilekani -led panel on digital payments suggested that all payment system operators “must implement a fast and fair online dispute resolution system”.

Globally, ODR growth was fuelled by the e-commerce boom, with eBay and PayPal resolving millions of disputes online. “ODR can be used across sectors — from insurance to banking – and also for family disputes. It is about leveraging tech to prevent and resolve disputes,” says Chittu Nagarajan, a pioneer in ODR who headed Community Court initiatives at eBay and PayPal.

After the acquisition of her last ODR firm Modria by Tyler Technologies, Nagarajan in 2019 launched CREK ODR, an industry- and dispute-agnostic platform, which can be accessed by clients anywhere in the world. She underlines the need for a strong technology layer while implementing ODR. Her startup is an end-to-end SaaS platform with multiple features like virtual mediation rooms. “ODR is not just about applications. You need a fantastic tech platform. The design can’t be the same for platforms resolving family and e-commerce disputes.”

Players are aware of the challenges in the adoption of ODR in India — from the lack of enough arbitrators to building trust among consumers. “People need to accept that disputes can be resolved without the parties seeing each other,” says Jaswal. “The bigger test will be dealing with people who are not used to the digital ecosystem.”

Sama’s Sinha says capacity building is also a concern. “Lawyers can now explore providing online arbitration and mediation services as a viable career option too.”

Nevertheless, there is growing conviction that it is only a matter of time before ODR is adopted at scale in India. CODR’s Mahendra points to two recent judgements. In the first case, the Bombay High Court pulled up Tata Capital Financial Services when it was found to have used the same arbitrator for over 2,200 cases, paying him Rs 1,000 per case, which highlights the need for a large number of arbitrators at acceptable price points.’

Read more at:
https://tech.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/internet/online-dispute-resolution-is-beginning-to-find-takers-in-india/73219590

New Court ODR Needs Assessment


Doug Van Epps and Michelle Hilliker of the Michigan Court System (and the creators of MI-Resolve) have just shared a document that consolidates their experience to date in designing, implementing, and testing a court ODR system.  The resulting “Considerations” document also includes items gleaned from conversations with their colleagues around the country, publications, and web materials. 

As they describe the document, “Perhaps more than other resources we’ve seen to date, this document also suggests that it may be helpful to differentiate between the goals of ‘disposing of cases’ and ‘resolving disputes,’ the ‘DR’ of ‘ODR,’ as well as between ‘ODR’ and ‘Online Court.’  It remains to be seen whether these distinctions are helpful to others, but they have guided our thinking along the way.” 

I think this document is very well considered and put together, and it will be extremely helpful for other court leaders in thinking through how ODR can and should be integrated into court operations.

Check out the document here:   courts.mi.gov/ODRConsiderations

Recording of live transmission – Cyberweek 2019 Spanish Chapter – Closure by Dr. Alberto Elisavetsky

WEBCONFERENCIA DE CIERRE CYBERWEEK 2019 CAPÍTULO EN ESPAÑOL

WEBCONFERENCIA DE CIERRE CYBERWEEK 2019 CAPÍTULO EN ESPAÑOL

Posted by Odr Latinoamerica on Thursday, November 28, 2019

If you want to visit the homepage of Cyberweek 2019 Spanish Chapter go here: http://odrlatinoamerica.com/cyberweek-pagina-de-acceso/

Password: cyberuser58


Thank you for a wonderful Cyberweek!
We had a great time pulling it together. We’re already making plans for 2020. Make sure to click on the agenda to watch the sessions
you missed on youtube.

Image result for ethan katsh

“Leah Wing and I and the National Center for Technology and Dispute Resolution are most grateful to Colin and others who organized this year’s Cyberweek. The first Cyberweek was in 1998. To those of you who enjoyed the week’s activities, please follow ODR.INFO and join ICODR. It is clear that the future we imagined in 1998 is largely here. We look forward to an even more ambitious Cyberweek next year. For those of you who can, please attend ODR2020 in Dublin in May 2020.” – Ethan Katsh

Congratulations to Luca Dal Pubel from San Diego University — he was the top performer in the Grand re-Opening of the International eNegotiation Exhibition. He passed all the written exams with flying colors and demonstrated his mastery of Smartsettle ONE in the practicum (the contest) having achieved a score of 90. Congrats, Luca!

Note: the Agenda has youtube links so you can replay sessions you missed

Thank you to Cyberweek 2019 Supporters! (Click for the full list)

(To visit the Spanish Cyberweek, which is happening concurrently, just visit
http://odrlatinoamerica.com/esp-cyberweek-topics/)

New Court ODR Data from Franklin County

Great data set from the Franklin County, Ohio Court ODR project presented at odr2019.org — check it out here.

From the presentation:

“Income and race have historically served as predictors for case dispositions. Positive dispositions are associated with high income and low minority rates while low income and high minority rates are associated with negative case dispositions. The 2015 NCSC State of State Courts Poll highlights the issue and the public desire for courts to develop innovative, technology-based solutions that promote dispute resolution options.

The purpose of the FCMC Data Project is to demonstrate the value of court-connected alternative dispute resolution, promote transparency, and provide a resource for anyone interested in court-connected mediation and online dispute resolution as an access to justice initiative.

Project analyses are defendant-focused. Project data, including party information and case dispositions, are static as of September 2019. Project data were manually collected and entered and subject to human error. In accordance with Ohio law, some data were not collected…

Low-to-middle income defendants in the non-ODR tax sample set experienced a lower percentage of dismissals than upper income and out-of-county defendants, whose income levels exceed low-to-middle income defendants. Similarly, higher minority percentage defendants experienced a lower percentage of dismissals.

ODR tax participants experienced both a higher rate of dismissals and a relatively equal percentage of dismissals across income groups. The average dollar amount at issue in the CDIT ODR dataset was $1,041.51. Low, middle, and upper income defendants had nearly identical dismissal percentages. Similarly, minority percentages increased without negative case dispositions.

A significant percentage of ODR participants accessed the portal outside of traditional business hours (8 am to 5 pm)…

The CDIT ODR portal achieved its three primary goals:

  1. The Default judgment rate for CDIT cases reduced by 10%.
  2. More than one-third of CDIT defendants accessed court services outside of business hours.
  3. Dismissals now outpace default judgments in CDIT cases.”

Learn more at
https://sites.google.com/view/fcmcdataproject/about