Republic of the Philippines

UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN PHILIPPINES

Tamag, Vigan City
2700 Ilocos Sur

COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION

Dispute Resolution and Crisis Management

DISPUT

CRISIS

KEVIN MEL R. PACPACO, MSCJ

Kevin Mel R. Pacpaco, MSCJ

 Republic of the Philippines
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN PHILIPPINES
Tamag, Vigan City
2700 Ilocos Sur

COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION

Subject Code: Crim 6

Descriptive Title: Dispute Resolution and Crisis/Incident

Management

Course Description:

This course deals with the study of the process of

dealing and resolving conflicts/disputes resolutions and
crisis management. It includes the art of intervention through
mediation and reconciliation of disagreement between
stakeholder’s agencies. Likewise, the course includes handling
of crisis that the criminal justice personnel are commonly
encountered. Moreover, the study significantly provides
mechanism on how to adopt strategies in dealing with potential
and actual crisis which are addressed by concerned agencies
and authorities from law enforcement, correction and
communities.

Part 1
Dispute Resolution System

Basic Concept
Crime are as old as humankind according to Dr. Cesare
Lombroso in his “Positivist Theory”, Crime is a social
phenomenon which cannot be treated and checked by the
imposition of penalty but through enforcement of individual
measures. In this premise, the understanding on crime
prevention implies everybody’s business. In order to deal with
confronting issues and conflicts within the family, workplace
and in the community, everyone has to contribute to the
general effort of resolving disputes especially those that are
mostly affected simple understanding on the root cause of the
conflict and adopting best practices on dispute resolutions
will contribute in attainment of restoring peace and promotion
of positive interpersonal relations. Moreover, the knowledge
on crisis management principles and procedures as well as the
understanding on the concept on Incident Command System will
be a contributing factor to the criminology students being as
an aspirant law enforcement and public safety practitioners.

In the most recent curriculum for criminology education

under the CHED Memorandum Order Number 05 series of 2018, the
subject Dispute Resolution and Crisis Management was
introduced formally into the criminology profession.

Kevin Mel R. Pacpaco, MSCJ

 Republic of the Philippines
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN PHILIPPINES
Tamag, Vigan City
2700 Ilocos Sur

COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION

Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 2004 (R.A 9285)

came into law for the purpose of promulgating the prescribe
procedures and guidelines for its implementation along with
the policy of the state to promote party autonomy ins the
resolution of disputes or the freedom of the parties to make
their own arrangements to resolve their disputes; to encourage
and actively promote the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution
as an important means to achieve speedy and impartial justice
and to declog court dockets; to provide means for the use of
ADR as an efficient tool and an alternative procedure for the
resolution of appropriate cases; and to enlist active private
sector participants in the settlement of disputes through ADR.

Applying the principles governing alternative dispute

resolution will provide the opportunity for the parties
involved in to settle the issue in their own expense with the
support of the local community, authorities of the law and
responsible social organization with the aim of restoring
interpersonal relations thereby contributory to the public
safety and promotion of peace in general.

Items to ponder
Dispute Resolution and Crisis Management
 A study involving the understanding, analysis and
applying strategies in resolving dispute at the
elementary stage.
 The restoration of interpersonal relations among the
member of the parties involved are its primordial end.
 Moreover, the understanding and application of knowledge
on the incident command system as an approach with Crisis
Management were significantly featured.

Dispute Resolution
 Resolution of a dispute between two or more parties.
 A way of solving a conflict without having to go to
court.
 Also known as “Dispute Settlement”

Alternative Dispute Resolution System (ADRS)

 Any process or procedures used to resolve a dispute or
controversy, other than by adjudication of a presiding
judge of a court or an officer of a government agency.
 Neutral third person participates to assist in the
resolution of issues, including arbitration, mediation,

Kevin Mel R. Pacpaco, MSCJ

 Republic of the Philippines
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN PHILIPPINES
Tamag, Vigan City
2700 Ilocos Sur

COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION

conciliation, early neutral evaluation, mini-trial or any
combination thereof.

Crisis Management
 Procedures necessary for a law enforcement leader to
plan, mitigate, and respond to a crisis and the
subsequent consequence.
 Consists of skills and techniques required to asses,
understand, and cope with any serious situation,
especially from the moment it first occur to the point
that recovery procedures starts.
 Occasionally referred as “Incident Management”

Conflict
It is defined as a clash between individuals arising out
of a difference in thought process, attitudes, understanding,
interests, requirements and even sometimes perceptions. It may
result in heated arguments, physical abuses and definitely
loss of peace and harmony.

A Conflict is a struggle between people. The struggle may

be physical or between conflicting ideas. The word comes from
Latin “Conflingere” means to come together for a battler. It
can either be within one person, or they can involve several
people or groups. It exist when they have incompatible goals
and one or more believe that the behavior of the other
prevents them from their own goal achievement.

Conflict Theory
 States that society is in state of perpetual conflict
because of competition for limited resources.
 States that those with wealth and power try to hold on it
by any means possible, chiefly by suppressing the poor
and powerless.
 Argued that individuals and groups within society will
work to try to maximize their own wealth and power.

Conflict Theory are perspectives in sociology and social

psychology that emphasize a materialist interpretation of
history, dialectical method of analysis, a critical stance
towards existing social arrangements, and political program of
revolution or, at least, reform. Conflict theory draw
attention to power differentials, such as class conflict, and
generally contrast historically dominant ideologies. It is
therefore a macro-level analysis of society.

Kevin Mel R. Pacpaco, MSCJ

 Republic of the Philippines
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN PHILIPPINES
Tamag, Vigan City
2700 Ilocos Sur

COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION

Karl Marx is the father of the Social Conflict Theory.
Certain conflict theories set out to highlight the ideological
aspects inherent in traditional thought. While many of these
perspectives hold parallels, conflict theory does not refer to
a unified school thought, and should not be confused with for
instance, peace and conflict studies, or any other specific
theory of social conflict.

Assumptions of Conflict Theory

1. Competition. Exist as a result of the scarcity of
resources, including material resources-money, property,
commodities, and more. Beyond material resources,
individual and groups within a society also compete for
intangible resources as well. These can include leisure
time, dominance, social status, and sexual partners.
2. Revolution. The idea is that change in a power dynamic
between groups does not happen as the result of a gradual
adaptation. Rather, it comes about as the symptoms of
conflict between these groups. In this way, changes to a
power dynamic are often abrupt and large in scale, rather
than gradual and evolutionary.
3. Structural Inequality. Human relations and social
structure all experience inequality of power. In this
way, some individuals and groups inherently develop more
power and reward than others.
4. War. A unifier or as a “cleanser” of societies. It is the
result of a cumulative and growing conflict between
individuals and groups, and between entire societies.

Types of Conflict
1. Information Conflicts. Arise when people have different
or insufficient information, or disagree over what data
is relevant.
2. Values Conflict. Are created when people have perceived
or actual incompatible belief systems.
3. Interest Conflict. Are caused by competition over
perceived or actual incompatible needs. Such conflicts
many occur over issues of money, resources, or time.
4. Relationship Conflict. Occur when there are
misperceptions, strong negative emotions, or poor
communication. One person may distrust the other and
believe that the other person’s actions are motivated by
malice or intent to harm the other.

Phases of Conflict

Kevin Mel R. Pacpaco, MSCJ

 Republic of the Philippines
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN PHILIPPINES
Tamag, Vigan City
2700 Ilocos Sur

COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION

Phase 1. Prelude to Conflict. It involves all the factors
which possibly arise a conflict among individuals.

Phase 2. Triggering Event. An event which triggers the

conflict. Example: A Christian criticizes a Muslim employee
over his project proposal.

Phase 3. Initiation Phase. Initiation phase is actually the

phase when the conflict has already begun. Heated arguments,
abuses, verbal disagreement are all warming alarms which
indicates that the fight is already on.

Phase 4. Differentiation Phase. It is the phase when the

individuals voice out their differences against each other.
The reasons for the conflict are raised here.

Phase 5. Resolution Phase. As conflict leads to nowhere,

individuals try to compromise to some extent and resolve it.
It explores the various options to resolve the conflict.

Conflict Resolution Strategies

Concept of Conflict Resolution

Conflict Resolution is conceptualized as the methods and

processes involved in facilitating the peaceful ending of
conflict and retribution. The term conflict resolution may
also be used interchangeably with dispute resolution, where
arbitration and litigation processes are critically involved.
The concept of conflict resolution can be thought to encompass
the use of nonviolent resistance measures by conflicted
parties in an attempt to promote effective resolution.

Committed group members attempt to resolve group

conflicts by actively communicating information about their
conflicting motives or ideologies to the rest of the group.

Thomas-Kilmann Instrument (TKI)

Nobody likes conflict at work. If not resolved
appropriately and within due time, it can fester and affect
collective morale, interpersonal relationships, and work
productivity. A lot of research has gone into identifying
time-efficient and impactful measures for better conflict
resolution.

Kevin Mel R. Pacpaco, MSCJ

 Republic of the Philippines
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN PHILIPPINES
Tamag, Vigan City
2700 Ilocos Sur

COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION

In the 1970’s, Researchers Kenneth Thomas and Ralph
Kilmann developed a model for Conflict Resolution. It was
called the Thomas-Kilmann Model after them. Under this model,
the term “Conflict” is described as the condition which
peoples concern can’t be compared with the others. If two or
more people or groups care about things that are contradictory
to each other, then the outcome is conflict.

This model describes as the “Two Core Dimensions” which

is the “Assertiveness” and “Cooperativeness”

The Thomas-Kilmann Instrument is designed to measure a

person’s behavior in conflict situations.

Kevin Mel R. Pacpaco, MSCJ

 Republic of the Philippines
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN PHILIPPINES
Tamag, Vigan City
2700 Ilocos Sur

COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION

Person’s Dimensions During Conflict (Two Core Dimensions TKI)

 Assertiveness. The extent to which a person attempts to
satisfy his own concern.

 Cooperativeness. The extent to which the person attempts

to satisfy the other persons concerns.

5 Conflict Resolution Strategies of Thomas-Kilmann’s modes for

handling Conflicts.

1. Avoiding
 This is unassertive and uncooperative.
 The person neither pursues his own concerns nor
those of the individual. Thus, he does not deal with
the conflict.
 It takes in the form of sidestepping the issue,
postponing an issue until a better time, or simply
withdrawing from a threatening situation.
 In the Thomas-Kilmann Model, The individuals wants
to neither address their own problem not the problem
of others. This ultimately means that they do not
want to engage in the conflict at all. Avoiding
might be seen at times as a diplomatic move
involving bypassing or ignoring the issue. It could
also involve putting off the issue until the time is
favorable, or simply stepping back from an
uncomfortable or hazardous situation.
 This might seem easy for the facilitator, but when
conflict is avoided, nothing is resolved.

Kevin Mel R. Pacpaco, MSCJ

 Republic of the Philippines
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN PHILIPPINES
Tamag, Vigan City
2700 Ilocos Sur

COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION

2. Competing
 This is assertive but uncooperative.
 This is a power-oriented mode which you use whatever
power seems appropriate to win your own position-
your ability to argue, your rank, economic status.
 Competing means standing up on something which you
believe is right. It is used by people who plan to
win in a conflict situation.
 In the Thomas-Kilmann Model, it refers to addressing
only ones own concern at the cost of the concern of
the other. An individual’s ability to debate their
position in the hierarchy, or their financial power
matters the most. Competing is defensive, it
strictly means standing up for your individual
beliefs and simply trying to win.
 It may work in sports, or in war, but rarely a good
strategy for group problem solving.
3. Accommodating
 This is unassertive and uncooperative. The complete
opposite of competing.
 The individual neglects his own concerns to satisfy
the concern of the others. There is an element of
Self-sacrifice.
 It takes in the form of selfless generosity, obeying
other person’s order when you prefer not to,
yielding to another’s point of view.
 According to the Thomas-Kilmann Model, accommodating
is both accepting and cooperative. While
accommodating, the individual in question neglects
their own problems or beliefs to address the problem
to the other party. It typically involves selfless
understanding, generosity, or charity. At times
accommodating requires a person to follow the other
person’s order.
 This is less helpful when one party accommodates
merely to preserve harmony. Like avoidance this can
result to unresolved issues. Too much accommodation
can result of having one party takes control in most
conversation.
4. Collaborating
 This is assertive and cooperative. The complete
opposite of avoiding.
 It involves an attempt to work with others to find
solution that fully satisfies both concern.

Kevin Mel R. Pacpaco, MSCJ

 Republic of the Philippines
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN PHILIPPINES
Tamag, Vigan City
2700 Ilocos Sur

COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION

The most beneficial outcome in the Thomas-Kilmann
Model, it includes a voluntary effort to work
alongside the position to find a perfect solution
that wholly address the collective problems. It
involves deep-diving into the issue to locate the
critical demands of the concerned individuals or
parties. Collaborating between two or more people
might take form of a quest to understand the “Why”
of the disagreement. It involves striving to look
for creative answers to interpersonal issues and
enriching yourself from the other person’s insight.
 It might takes in the effort of exploring the root
od disagreement to learn from each other insight and
to find a creative solution to an interpersonal
conflict.
5. Compromising
 It falls on the average point on both the assertive
and cooperative scale.
 the concept is that everyone gives up a little of
what they want, no one gets everything they want.
 Under the Thomas-Kilmann Model, the goal is to find
mutually acceptable and robust solution that, in
some ways, satisfies both the individuals. It comes
midway between competing and accommodating. It
addresses an issue more directly than avoiding but
falls short on investigating it with as much depth
and rigor as collaborating. In certain situations,
compromising might involve seeking middle ground
solutions, providing concessions, or looking for a
quick solution.
 It is perceived as being fair even if no one is
particularly happy with the outcome.

Modes or Methods of Dispute Resolution

1. Lawsuit (Litigation or Judicial)- a lawsuit is a
proceeding by a party or parties against another in the
civil court of law. The archaic term “Suit in Law” is
found only a small number of laws still in effect today.
 The term “Lawsuit” is used in reference to a civil
action brought by a plaintiff (a party who claims to
have incurred loss as a result of a defendants
actions) demands a legal or equitable remedy from a
court.
 Litigation is the use of the courts and civil
justice system to resolve legal controversies. It

Kevin Mel R. Pacpaco, MSCJ

 Republic of the Philippines
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN PHILIPPINES
Tamag, Vigan City
2700 Ilocos Sur

COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION

can be used to compel opposing party to participate
in the solution.

Characteristics of Litigation
 Involuntary- a defendant must participate (no
choice)
 Formal and structured rules of evidence and
procedure
 Each party has the opportunity to present its
evidence and procedure.
 Each party has the opportunity to present its
evidence and argument and cross examine the other
side.
 Public, court proceedings and records are open.
 The decision is based on the law.
 The decision can be final and binding.
 Right of appeal exists.
 Losing party may pay costs.

2. Alternative Dispute Resolution. Means any process or

procedures used to resolve a dispute or controversy,
other than by adjudication of a presiding judge of a
court or an officer of a government agency, in which
neutral third party person participates to assist in the
resolution of issues, including arbitration, mediation,
conciliation, early neutral evaluation, mini trial or any
combination thereof.

3. Collaborative Law. Also known as the Collaborative

Practice, divorce or family law is a legal process
enabling couples who have decided to separate or end
their marriage to work with their collaborative
professionals including collaboratively trained lawyers,

Kevin Mel R. Pacpaco, MSCJ

 Republic of the Philippines
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN PHILIPPINES
Tamag, Vigan City
2700 Ilocos Sur

COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION

coaches and financial professional in order to avoid the
uncertain outcome of court and to achieve a settlement
that best meets the specific needs of both parties and
their children witout he underlying threat of litigation.

Create your own

solution without having Focus on the best Negotiation based in
decision imposed by interest of the children interest not rights
judge.

Maintain a civil,
ongoing relationship Resolve your matter in
with your spouse for Collaborative private without a public
the sake of your Law hearing
children

4. Negotiation. The most basic mean of settling differences.

It is back-and-forth communication between the parties of
the conflict with the goal of trying to find a solution.

Negotiation process

Kevin Mel R. Pacpaco, MSCJ

 Republic of the Philippines
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN PHILIPPINES
Tamag, Vigan City
2700 Ilocos Sur

COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION

 you may negotiate directly with the other person. You
may hire an attorney to negotiate directly with the
other side on your behalf. There are no specific
procedure to follow.

When and How negotiation is Used?

 Most people every day. In some circumstances you may
want the help of a lawyer to help you negotiate fair
deal. Negotiation is the first method of choice for
problem-solving and trying to reach a mutually
acceptable agreement.

Characteristics of Negotiation
 Voluntary
 Private and confidential
 Quick and inexpensive
 Informal and unstructured parties control the process,
make their own decisions and reach their own agreements
(no third-party decision maker)
 Negotiated agreement can be enforceable
 Can result in a win-win solution.

Restorative Justice
 An approach to justice in which the response to a crime
is to organize a meeting between the victim and the
offender, sometimes with representative of the wider
community.
 The goal is for them to share their experience of what
happened, to discuss who was harmed by the crime and how,
and to create a consensus for what the offender can do to
repair the harm from the offense.

Restorative Justice-Core Values

 The offender
o Apology. either oral or written, recognizing
responsibility and not seeing oneself as a victim
and realizing and acknowledging the harm suffered by
the victim.
o Reintegration. Earning his/her place back at the
community, particularly through the action plan
developed.
 The victim
o Harm. Assessing what harm was done, developing a
case plan to repair the harm and creating an action

Kevin Mel R. Pacpaco, MSCJ

 Republic of the Philippines
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN PHILIPPINES
Tamag, Vigan City
2700 Ilocos Sur

COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION

plan for those responsible for healing and repairing
the harm.
o Forgiveness. the opportunity is expected for the
victim to accept an apology from the offender and to
extent forgiveness.
 The community
o Relationship. Healing broken relationship and
creating new relationships.

Key Values of Restorative Program

1. Encounter. Create opportunities for victims, offender and
community members to meet and discuss the crime and its
aftermath. The element are: meeting, narrative, emotion,
understanding and agreement.
2. Amends. Expect offenders to take steps to repair the harm
they have caused. The elements are: apology, changed
behavior, restitution and generosity.
3. Reintegration. Seeks to restore victims and offenders as
a whole, contributing members of the society. The
elements are: acknowledging dignity and worth, providing
material assistance and offering moral spiritual
direction.
4. Inclusion. Provide opportunities for both parties to
participate in the resolution.

Restorative Justice VS Retributive Justice

 Retributive Is a valued-based approach focused on
determining harm resulting from crime, what needs to be
done to repair the harm, and who is responsible for
repairing the harm while Retributive is an approach
focused om determining what law was broken, who broke it,
and how should they be punished.
 Restorative view crime as an act against another person
and the community while Retributive view crime as an act
against the state and a violation of law.
 Restorative Justice views crime as an accountability by
both individual and the society and punishment.
Retributive Justice views crime as an individual act and
individual responsibility.

Kevin Mel R. Pacpaco, MSCJ