• Selected
• Entire List

Abstract:
In 1987, the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Lexington, Kentucky took a surprising step. They decided that when they made a medical error they would truly "come clean" and fully assume responsibility for the error, including apologizing for it. Over the next decade, they went from being one of the highest net legal cost hospitals to among the lowest net legal cost hospitals in the VA system. This paper uses their experience as a springboard for exploring the potential for the use of apology by organizations. Topics discussed include (i) the impact of apology on learning to prevent future errors, (ii) divergent interests toward apology stemming from principal-agents tensions in employment, risk preferences, and sources of insurance, (iii) non-pecuniary benefits of apology to corporate morale, productivity and reputation, (iv) standing and scope when apologizing, and (v) the articulation of policies toward injuries to others.

Abstract:
In 1987, the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Lexington, Kentucky took a surprising step. They decided that when they made a medical error they would truly "come clean" and fully assume responsibility for the error, including apologizing for it. Over the next decade, they went from being one of the highest net legal cost hospitals to among the lowest net legal cost hospitals in the VA system. This paper uses their experience as a springboard for exploring the potential for the use of apology by organizations. Topics discussed include (i) the impact of apology on learning to prevent future errors, (ii) divergent interests toward apology stemming from principal-agents tensions in employment, risk preferences, and sources of insurance, (iii) non-pecuniary benefits of apology to corporate morale, productivity and reputation, (iv) standing and scope when apologizing, and (v) the articulation of policies toward injuries to others.

Abstract:
Should apologies be admissible into evidence as proof of fault in civil cases? The past year has seen a tremendous rise in "apology legislation" designed to exclude apologies from admissibility into evidence. For example, California passed a law in 2000 barring apologetic expressions of sympathy ("I'm sorry that you are hurt") but not fault-admitting apologies ("I'm sorry that I injured you") after accidents from introduction into evidence as proof of fault. Other states are now debating proposed apology legislation, including bills that would exclude fault-admitting apologies from evidence. As apologies can be central elements in preventing and settling lawsuits, such legislation has the potential to dramatically affect dispute resolution and legal practice. This Article examines policy arguments that can be made supporting and opposing such legislation and offers remaining questions for future research.

Apology, dispute resolution, conflict resolution, negotiation, evidence, forgiveness

Abstract:
Most scholarship on negotiation ethics has focused on the topics of deception and disclosure. In this Article, I argue for considering a related, but distinct, ethical domain within negotiation ethics. That domain is the ethics of orientation. In contrast to most forms of human interaction, a clear purpose of negotiation is to get the other party to take an action on one's behalf, or at least to explore that possibility. This gives rise to a core ethical tension in negotiation that I call the object-subject tension: how does one reconcile the fact that the other party is a potential means to one's ends with general ethical requirements for treating people? In response, I argue that there is a general moral duty to respect other people, a duty that is not overridden by the fact of negotiation. I examine the nature of this duty and its implications for both direct principal-to-principal negotiations and legal negotiations conducted indirectly through lawyers.

negotiation, bargaining, dispute resolution, conflict resoultion, ethics, professional responsibility