Online Problem Solving: Can It Work?

I recently came across a site that presents an interesting concept in the field of alternative dispute resolution. ilevel-Dispute Resolution Services at http://www.ilevel.com offers the possibility of online resolution of disputes between consumers and vendors.

Here's how it's supposed to work. A consumer submits an online complaint to ilevel that describes the problem with the service or merchandise purchased from the offending vendor. The complaint includes the consumer's proposal for a settlement.

Although the consumer must be a member of ilevel, the vendor may be, but does not need to be, either a member of ilevel or even a web merchant in order to participate in the process. Both consumer and vendor memberships in ilevel are free at this time.

After an ilevel facilitator reviews the consumer complaint and determines that it is not inflammatory, it is relayed to the vendor for a response. There is a time limit imposed by ilevel. If the vendor does not respond to the complaint within thirty days, of if the consumer and vendor, after online exchanges lasting thirty days, are unable to reach an agreement, the consumer can choose to have the case declared unresolved and posted on the ilevel site. Viewers of the site, the "Court of Public Opinion," can then comment on the merits of the case. These comments will also be submitted directly to the vendor.

In theory, the plan seems promising and has the potential to achieve the desirable goals of consumer satisfaction and improved business practices. I question how successful the program is at the present time, however. My review of approximately ten cases posted on the site turned up no resolutions. The problem seems to be that too many vendors either do not respond to the complaints at all or give perfunctory responses. Therefore, the one tool ilevel has to ensure vendor participation, i.e. the threat of exposure to the consuming public of bad business practices, may have little effect on many vendors.

If the program operates primarily as a mechanism for consumers to vent their dissatisfaction with vendors, then what we're witnessing on this site may be of some psychological value, but it is not conflict resolution.

Although forced agreement is a concept foreign to the field of conflict resolution, coerced participation in the process of dispute resolution is common. Parties to court proceedings, for example, are frequently ordered into mediation prior to adjudication. If ilevel's practice of posting the unresolved cases begins to nudge more vendors into real interaction in the conflict resolution process, the program could be successful indeed.

Go To Page: 1

Articles in this Topic    Discussions in this Topic