Start Here: Tell Us the Short Story

• In one sentence, how would you summarize the dispute we’re trying to resolve?
• Which best describes the nature of the dispute? Options: Contract interpretation/breach, Partnership or JV dissolution, Construction/engineering claim, International commercial dispute, Intellectual property or licensing, Employment/termination, Other
• When did the events giving rise to the dispute begin (approx. month/year)?
• What specific event or trigger moved this from discussion to a formal ADR path now? Options: Contract clause deadline, Threatened litigation, Regulatory pressure, Strategic timing, Preserve confidentiality, Cost/time concerns, Other
• What is the single outcome you would call a clear success for your side?

Where It Hurts — The Procedural Headache

• If you had to name the single procedural headache that keeps you awake about this matter, what would it be?
• How has that issue already impacted timeline, cost, or internal resources? Options: Minimal impact, Noticeable delay/cost, Significant administrative burden, Threatens case viability, Other
• Who on your side is carrying the operational burden day-to-day? Options: Deputy GC / Head of Litigation, In-house counsel team, Lead outside counsel, External case manager / e-discovery vendor, Business unit owner, Other
• Have you previously tried steps to de-escalate or narrow issues (letters, offers, mediation)? What happened?
• How worried are you that one party’s procedural tactics could derail the process? Options: Extremely worried, Moderately worried, Somewhat worried, Not worried

The Rules That Bind You — Clauses & Constraints

• Which clause in your agreement would you bet on — and where do you secretly suspect it might fail you?
• Which of these provisions are present or relevant in your contract? Options: Arbitration clause, Mediation / escalation tier, Choice of law, Forum-selection or jurisdiction clause, Confidentiality clause, Limitation of liability / caps, Statute of limitations clause, Named institution or ad hoc, Other
• Does the clause explicitly name an administering institution, a set of rules (e.g., UNCITRAL, ICC), or a neutral-selection method? Options: Institution named (specify below), UNCITRAL/ICC/ad hoc noted, Neutral selection method specified, No, clause is vague, Unsure
• If the clause is ambiguous, where do you see the highest legal risk (enforceability, scope, joinder, confidentiality)? Options: Enforceability, Scope of disputes covered, Joinder/third parties, Confidentiality limits, Remedies available, Other
• Are there drafting deadlines or notice requirements in the clause we must preserve now? Options: Yes — imminent, Yes — manageable timeframe, No, Unsure

Who's in the Room (and Who Can Block It)

• Who outside the immediate signatories could realistically block or complicate this ADR if they object?
• Please list the named parties and their roles (claimant/respondent/third-party), separated by party.
• Are there third parties who might need to be joined or informed? Options: Subsidiaries / affiliates, Lenders / creditors, Insurers, Regulators, Counterparties to related contracts, No third parties, Other
• Who will be the primary operational contact for the case on your side? Options: Deputy GC, In-house counsel (named), Lead outside counsel (firm), Business unit owner, External case manager, Other
• Do you anticipate any party or counsel challenging the neutral selection process? Options: Yes — likely, Possible, Unlikely, No

Timelines, Money, and What You Can't Afford to Lose

• If the process slips beyond your ideal schedule or budget, what is sacrificed first (commercial leverage, ongoing relationship, public reputation)?
• What is your target resolution timeframe? Options: Under 30 days, 30–90 days, 3–6 months, 6–12 months, Over 12 months
• What is your target budget range for administrative fees + neutral compensation? Options: Under $25k, $25k–$75k, $75k–$250k, $250k–$1M, Over $1M, Undetermined
• How critical is fee transparency and predictable billing structure to your decision? Options: Mission-critical, Important, Nice-to-have, Not important
• Would you be open to expedited or tiered procedures to reduce time and cost even if it narrows discovery? Options: Yes — perfectly open, Yes — with limits, Maybe, No

Evidence & Discovery — What You'd Need on Day One

• What's the single document or piece of evidence you most need to get in front of a neutral or tribunal?
• Which discovery tools do you anticipate will be essential? Options: Document production (PTO/requests), E-discovery / bulk data review, Depositions / witness statements, Expert reports, Forensic analysis, Site inspections, Other
• Are cross-border data privacy or blocking orders likely to complicate discovery? Options: Yes — significant concern, Yes — manageable, No, Unsure
• How much discovery would you accept before costs become prohibitive? Options: Very limited, Targeted and limited, Moderate, Full discovery if necessary
• Who on your team will be responsible for managing production and e-discovery workflows? Options: In-house E-Discovery team, In-house counsel, Outside counsel, External vendor, Not yet decided

Risk, Enforcement, and Cross‑Border Worries

• If an award is delivered but cannot be enforced in a key jurisdiction, what would that mean for your objectives?
• In which jurisdictions might you ultimately need to enforce an award? Options: United States, United Kingdom, European Union member(s), China / Hong Kong, Middle East, Latin America, Other (specify)
• Are any parties sovereign or state-owned entities which carry special enforcement considerations? Options: Yes, No, Unsure
• Has enforceability been analyzed under the New York Convention or relevant local law yet? Options: Yes — fully analyzed, Partial analysis done, Planned but not done, No analysis
• Do you anticipate needing interim relief (attachments, provisional measures, injunctive relief)? Options: Yes — immediately, Yes — maybe later, Unlikely, Unsure

What Would Success Feel Like for the Business

• Picture the day you accept the final award or settlement — what changes immediately for your business?
• Which non-monetary outcomes would matter most? Options: Specific performance / compliance, Confidential settlement terms, Preserved ongoing business relationship, Clear precedent avoidance, Public record avoidance, Other
• How will you measure whether the process itself was a success (speed, cost, enforceability, relationship preservation, clarity of ruling)? Options: Speed/time, Total cost, Enforceability, Business relationship outcomes, Procedural fairness / clarity, Other
• Who must sign off internally to proceed (final decision-maker(s))? Options: CEO / President, CFO, General Counsel, Board of Directors, Business Unit Head, Other

Ready to Move — Decisions That Unlock Momentum

• What's the single decision you could make today that would unlock forward motion on this matter?
• Which neutral-selection method would you prefer if speed and subject-matter expertise are both priorities? Options: Institution appoints from curated roster, Party-appointed neutrals (each side) + chair by institution, Party shortlist with strike-and-rank, Panel agreed by parties, Other
• What hearing format do you prefer and why (virtual, in-person, hybrid)? Options: Virtual, In-person, Hybrid (mix of both), Undecided — depends on case
• Are there any non-negotiable procedural guardrails we must include (e.g., strict document limits, timeline caps, confidentiality terms)?
• What is the best way for our administrators to keep you informed (preferred contact and cadence)? Options: Email — weekly, Email — ad hoc, Phone updates, Secure portal notifications, Messaging (e.g., Slack), Other
• Would you like us to draft a proposed procedural timeline and fee estimate tailored to your top priorities? Options: Yes — please prepare, Maybe — need more info, No — not at this time

• Solution Experience Prep — Current State & Consequence Intake
• Scenario Mapping Workshop — Neutral Expertise & Procedural Timeline Simulation
• Enforceability & Jurisdiction Risk Assessment
• Institutional Pathway Recommendation & Validation
• Alignment & Next Steps — Commit to Pilot Case Plan

• Secure a decision on the next immediate action (proceed to pilot, refine pathway, or pause).
• CustomerNode admin: Prepare a short-list of 4–6 neutrals with CVs matching mapped profiles for client review.
• Case team: Produce a simulated Gantt timeline for each scenario showing key milestone owners and risk points.
• Client: Flag any internal scheduling constraints or mandatory witness availability windows.
• Pre-work summary
• Produce a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction enforceability heatmap with clear high-risk flags.
• Agree an enforcement mitigation plan (seat choice, interim relief steps, evidence collection) tied to timelines.
• Decide whether the recommended pathway needs structural changes to address enforceability showstoppers.
• Customer: Provide counsel memos or prior enforcement outcomes for the listed jurisdictions.
• CustomerNode legal: Draft recommended seat and interim relief approach with estimated time-to-enforcement per jurisdiction.
• Client counsel: Compile essential documentary evidence and asset-location notes required for enforcement.
• One-line recap of Current State and Consequence
• Obtain explicit customer validation that the recommended pathway resolves the quantified consequences and meets success signals.
• Identify any remaining objections and required pathway changes with owners assigned to address them.
• Pre-work review
• CustomerNode admin: Produce a concise 'Pathway Proposal' document (1–2 pages) tied to scenarios and timeline evidence.
• Customer: Provide formal validation or list of objections to the proposed pathway within 3 business days.
• Case team: If accepted, schedule the Mutual Commit meeting and circulate draft institutional clause and fee schedule.
• Confirm pathway acceptance
• Agree a short pilot plan with named owners and measurable milestones to test the recommended pathway.
• Ensure all immediate tactical items (engagement, fees, filings, neutral invitations) have owners and deadlines.
• Establish a clear communication cadence and escalation process to prevent procedural delay during the pilot.
• Customer: Execute engagement form and pay any administrative deposit required to start the pilot.
• CustomerNode admin: Issue neutral invitations to the shortlisted candidates and confirm availability windows.
• Case team: Publish the pilot plan with milestones and schedule the first progress check-in within two weeks.
• Produce and lock a single, unambiguous Current State sentence.
• Quantify the primary consequences (cost/time/risk) tied to the dispute under current practice.
• Agree the specific scenarios, attendees, and pre-work for the Scenario Mapping Workshop.
• Customer: Deliver finalized one-sentence Current State and upload key documents to the shared folder.
• CustomerNode admin: Confirm roster of required subject-matter experts and schedule scenario workshop dates.
• Customer counsel: Provide any jurisdiction-specific enforcement notes or known asset locations.
• Brief recap of Current State & Consequence
• Produce scenario-specific neutral profiles and a 0/30/60/90-day timeline estimate per scenario.
• Identify top 3 procedural bottlenecks and candidate mitigations tied to institution rules.
• Get explicit validation from customer that the mapped timelines and neutral needs reflect operational reality.
• Craft the one-sentence Current State
• Assign owners and milestones
• Scenario 1 walkthrough (most likely)
• Recommended institutional pathway (concise)
• Jurisdiction enforcement matrix
• Proof points and timeline evidence
• Surface the Consequence
• Seat choice & applicable law implications
• Scenario 2 walkthrough (worst-case procedural escalation)
• Immediate tactical steps
• Mapping back to problems
• Interim relief and asset-protection strategies
• Communication & escalation plan
• Define Success Signals & Constraints
• Neutral expertise mapping
• Validation & decision checkpoints
• Mitigation plan and evidence needs
• Agree scope and participants for scenario sessions
• Procedural timeline simulation
• Close and confirm deliverables
• Identify mitigations and decision triggers
• Validation and next-step decision
• Immediate next-step options
• Validation checkpoint

• Administer Institutional Arbitration Proceedings
• Administer Institutional Mediation Sessions
• Provide Curated Neutral Roster with Biographies
• Operate Secure E‑Filing and Document Repository
• Provide Virtual Hearing Platform and Tech Support
• Deliver On‑Site Hearing Facilities
• Issue Procedural Orders under Institutional Rules
• Enforce Document Production Protocols and Timelines
• Administer Emergency Interim Relief Procedures
• Prepare and Issue Final Arbitral Awards
• Provide Certified Transcripts and Hearing Recordings
• Administer Multi‑Party Joinder and Consolidation
• Administer Expert Determination under Institutional Rules

Administer Institutional Arbitration Proceedings

• What is the dispute type and governing contract clause (e.g., construction, IP, international sale; cite clause if available)?
• How many parties are expected to be involved? Options: 2 (bilateral), 3-5, 6-10, More than 10
• Are you seeking expedited procedures or standard institutional timelines? Options: Expedited (shortened timelines), Standard timelines, Flexible/negotiable
• Do you require specific limits on discovery (e.g., document custodians, page/volume caps, no depositions)? Options: Yes — propose limits, No — follow default rules, Unsure — need recommendation
• Will hearings be virtual, in‑person, or hybrid? Options: Virtual, In‑person, Hybrid (mix)
• Is award enforceability in particular jurisdictions a material concern (list jurisdictions)?
• Are interim or emergency measures likely to be needed during the arbitration? Options: Yes, No, Possibly — unsure

Administer Institutional Mediation Sessions

• Do parties prefer a mediator from the institution or an agreed external mediator? Options: Institution roster, External agreed mediator, Either — need suggestions
• How many mediation sessions do you anticipate and what is the desired scheduling window? Options: Single session, Multiple sessions, Ongoing/rolling
• Should mediation be fully confidential under institutional rules (including settlement communications)? Options: Yes — full confidentiality, Limited confidentiality, No — not required
• Will sessions be virtual, in‑person, or hybrid and do you need venue assistance? Options: Virtual, In‑person, Hybrid
• Do you require pre‑mediation written briefs, position statements, or settlement inventories to be exchanged? Options: Yes — required, Optional, No
• What level of settlement authority will each party bring (e.g., counsel only, officer with authority, executive present)? Options: Counsel only, Officer with authority, Senior executive present, Other

Provide Curated Neutral Roster with Biographies

• What subject matter expertise is required of the neutral (e.g., construction arbitration, fintech regulation)?
• Which jurisdictions or legal systems should shortlisted neutrals have experience with?
• Do you require published decisions, peer rankings, or academic credentials as part of the biography summary? Options: Yes — all, Some — specify which, No — CV only
• Are language abilities or interpretation experience required for the neutral? Options: Yes — specify languages, No
• Would you like availability windows and estimated daily rates included in the roster entries? Options: Yes, No, Partial — rates only
• Do you need conflict checks and past representation disclosures performed and delivered with the shortlist? Options: Yes — full conflict checks, Basic conflict screening, No

Operate Secure E‑Filing and Document Repository

• What confidentiality/access model do you need (e.g., party-only, counsel-only, public redacted)? Options: Party-only, Counsel-only, Public redacted, Custom
• What maximum single file and total case storage limits should be provisioned? Options: Small — up to 5GB, Medium — up to 50GB, Large — 50GB+
• Are there specific e‑discovery features required (e.g., searchable OCR, metadata export, tagging)? Options: Yes — specify features, No
• Do you require role-based redaction tools, privilege logs, or automated confidentiality stamping? Options: Yes — all, Some — specify, No
• Will third‑party vendors need access to the repository (e.g., expert, translator)? Options: Yes — list vendors, No, Limited — by approval
• Are retention and export requirements needed after case closure (e.g., 7 years, immediate export)? Options: Retain (specify period), Immediate export, Delete on closure

Provide Virtual Hearing Platform and Tech Support

• How many concurrent participants and observers do you expect in hearings? Options: Up to 25, 26-100, 101-500, 500+
• Do you require features like breakout rooms, simultaneous interpretation, transcription, or exhibit labeling? Options: Breakout rooms, Simultaneous interpretation, Live transcription, Exhibit labeling, All of the above
• What level of on‑demand technical support do you need (e.g., 24/7, business hours, rehearsal only)? Options: 24/7 support, Business hours support, Rehearsal/day-of support only
• Do you require secure access controls (multi‑factor authentication, IP restrictions) for participants and witnesses? Options: Yes — MFA & IP restrictions, Yes — MFA only, No special controls
• Will hearings require recorded/archived video and controlled access to recordings? Options: Yes — record & archive, Record only with permission, No recording
• Are platform compatibility or bandwidth constraints (e.g., participants in low‑bandwidth locations) a concern? Options: Yes — many low bandwidth, Some participants, No

Deliver On‑Site Hearing Facilities

• Which city or region should the hearing facilities be located in?
• How many hearing days and breakout/deposition rooms will you require? Options: 1-2 days, 3-5 days, 6+ days
• What AV and connectivity needs are required (live streaming, simultaneous interpretation booths, secure Wi‑Fi)?
• Do you need on‑site support (IT, court reporter, registrar) and for which hours? Options: Full‑day on‑site support, Partial hours, No on‑site support
• Are accessibility, security screening, or special privacy arrangements required for attendees? Options: Yes — specify, No
• Do you require catering, travel coordination, or hotel room blocks arranged through the institution? Options: Yes — all, Some — specify, No

Issue Procedural Orders under Institutional Rules

• Will the institution be authorized to issue binding interim procedural orders (e.g., scheduling, discovery bounds)? Options: Yes — institution issues orders, Only at parties' request, No — parties propose orders
• Do you want pre‑approved standard order templates (e.g., confidentiality, document protocol, hearing protocol)? Options: Yes — use templates, Customize templates, No templates
• What target timelines should orders set for key milestones (e.g., initial disclosures, document production, hearing dates)?
• Should the institution include enforceable sanctions for non‑compliance in orders? Options: Yes — include sanctions, No — discretion to parties, Case-by-case
• Do you require automatic electronic service and docketing of all orders via the case portal? Options: Yes, Optional, No
• Will orders need to be tailored for multi‑jurisdictional service and recognition issues? Options: Yes — specify jurisdictions, No

Enforce Document Production Protocols and Timelines

• Do you want hard deadlines with calendar enforcement for productions or rolling productions? Options: Hard deadlines, Rolling productions, Hybrid approach
• Should the institution administer privilege logs and dispute resolution for withheld documents? Options: Yes — institution to manage, Parties manage, institution adjudicates disputes, No intervention
• Are ESI collection and forensics required (specify custodians, systems)? Options: Yes — list custodians/systems, No, Possibly — need assessment
• Do you require standardized production formats (e.g., TIFF/PDF, native with load files)? Options: Yes — specify format, No preference
• Would you like the institution to appoint an e‑discovery neutral or concierge to manage large productions? Options: Yes, No, Undecided
• Should cost‑shifting rules or cost caps be incorporated into production protocols? Options: Yes — cost caps, Yes — cost shifting allowed, No

Administer Emergency Interim Relief Procedures

• Is emergency or provisional relief likely to be sought before a full panel is appointed? Options: Yes — likely, No, Maybe
• Do you require availability of an emergency arbitrator outside regular hours (e.g., 24/7 contact)? Options: Yes — 24/7, Business hours only, No
• Should emergency procedures allow ex parte relief and what notice provisions are acceptable? Options: Allow ex parte, Require prior notice, Case-by-case
• Are expedited service and shortened briefing timelines required (specify target hours/days)?
• Do you require expedited security for evidence preservation (e.g., forensic measures, sealed documents)? Options: Yes, No, Unsure
• How should emergency costs and fees be handled (advance deposit, cost allocation, security)? Options: Advance deposit, Party funding then allocation, Other — explain

Prepare and Issue Final Arbitral Awards

• Do you require fully reasoned awards or short awards with limited reasoning? Options: Fully reasoned, Summary award, Either — depending on case
• In which language(s) should the award be issued and do you need certified translations?
• Will multiple procedural awards or interim decisions be needed before a final award? Options: Yes — expect multiple, No — single final award, Possibly
• Do you require the institution to review awards for formal compliance prior to issuance (e.g., signature, date, service)? Options: Yes — formal review, No — arbitrator issues directly
• Should costs and fees be itemized in the award and include enforceable fee orders? Options: Yes — itemized, High‑level only, No

• Institutional Rules Acceptance
• Neutral Nomination & Appointment Procedure
• Statement of Work (SOW)
• Fees, Deposits & Payment Terms
• Fee Escrow Authorization
• Discovery & Document Protocol
• Hearing Format & Logistics Consent
• Mutual Procedural Obligations & Anti‑Delay Protocol
• Confidentiality & Data Protection Agreement
• Emergency Relief & Interim Measures Consent
• Communication & Case Management Contacts
• Enforceability & Governing Jurisdiction Acknowledgement

• Award Issuance & Enforceability Confirmation
• Enforcement Risk Triage — Jurisdictional Deep Dive
• Roster & Process Retrospective (Post-mortem)
• Shared Channel & Continuous Improvement Kickoff
• Client Closeout & Knowledge Transfer

• Create the shared channel in the agreed platform, add invited participants, and set initial permissions.
• Update enforcement tracker with jurisdiction-specific tasks and risk ratings.
• Objective & Metrics Review
• Produce a documented evaluation of neutral and administrative performance against objective KPIs.
• Identify root causes of process failures and prioritize corrective actions with owners and timelines.
• Agree measurable success indicators for future cases to validate improvements.
• Complete and store neutral evaluation forms with concrete examples and ratings.
• Draft prioritized improvement plan for roster curation, rule amendments, or admin SOP changes.
• Schedule implementation review checkpoints and assign owners to each improvement.
• Share a summarized post-mortem report with stakeholders and the roster management team.
• Purpose & Scope
• Stand up a governed shared channel with clear roles, SLAs, and templates for effective post-award coordination.
• Agree a review cadence and metrics that will demonstrate whether the channel improves issue resolution and enforcement coordination.
• Ensure all stakeholders are invited to the channel and understand escalation paths.
• Current-state Recap
• Publish SLAs, escalation contacts, and feedback templates to the channel.
• Schedule the pilot review meeting at the end of the agreed pilot period.
• Assign a channel owner responsible for weekly triage and monthly reporting.
• Final Deliverables Overview
• Ensure the client has received and can access all final case materials and enforcement documentation.
• Reconcile fees and agree on payment or retainer arrangements for any ongoing enforcement support.
• Capture client feedback and confirm the administrative closeout and archival plan.
• Deliver final case package and confirm access credentials and storage location.
• Issue final invoice and reconcile outstanding payments or retainers as agreed.
• Send client satisfaction survey and compile responses into the post-mortem report.
• Record archival dates and retention policies; log any items that require continued monitoring.
• Confirm the award is authentic, complete, and ready for enforcement filings.
• Establish enforceability path(s) for all targeted jurisdictions with identified risks and mitigations.
• Assign clear owners, deliverables, and deadlines for immediate enforcement actions.
• Secure stakeholder validation that the agreed plan addresses their cost, timing and enforcement priorities.
• Obtain and circulate certified/final award copies, translations and apostilles as required.
• Engage local counsel in jurisdiction(s) A/B for enforcement filings and obtain written enforcement opinions.
• Prepare and file recognition/recognition-and-enforcement petitions per agreed sequence and deadlines.
• Create enforcement tracker with owners, deadlines, and status updates in the shared channel.
• One-line Current State & Consequence
• Identify legal and practical obstacles to enforcement in each jurisdiction with clear risk levels.
• Select enforcement filing sequence and interim measures that optimize probability of recovery and cost-effectiveness.
• Secure budgetary and owner commitments to execute agreed actions.
• Retain/confirm scope with identified local counsel firms and request written enforcement timelines and fee estimates.
• Prepare asset-attachment filings or provisional measures in prioritized jurisdictions.
• Approve budget for immediate enforcement actions and document funding source.
• Channel Structure & Access
• Document Verification
• Neutral Performance Debrief
• Billing & Fee Reconciliation
• Jurisdiction-Specific Legal Barriers
• Enforcement Support Handoff
• Enforceability Assessment
• SLAs & Escalation Paths
• Administrative Process Review
• Asset & Enforcement Target Mapping
• Immediate Enforcement Actions
• Mitigation Options & Costs
• Feedback & Issue Templates
• Root-cause Analysis of Issues
• Client Feedback & Satisfaction
• Decision on Filing Sequence & Funding
• Review Cadence & Metrics
• Prioritized Recommendations
• Archiving & Access