Traditional arbitration is based on the legal system, uses the rules and cost structure of the legal system, and is enforced by the legal system. It is founded on legal principles lacking a clear universal set of patterns (apart from common law precedent) and devoid of "soft variable" values. It is administered by legal professionals steeped in the litigation and argumentation practices of the profession. Little in the process or attendant skills suggests effective, demonstrable, fair outcomes over the lifetime of the engagement, although talented (and usually highly-paid) lawyers have achieved great individual success in complex arbitratrions, distinct from the process itself.
Coflict provides a cost-efficient, timely, and fair-minded alternative which is both transparent to and accessible by normal people. It uses scientific principles of systems modeling combined with normative cultural patterns to capture the full sweep of expected inputs and outputs during arbitration. It is transparent, uses universally-tested behavioral patterns as templates, and enables all parties to the arbitration equal inputs to the models and outcomes. As a result, buy-in to both the process and the outcome is more readily achieved, reducing time and costs.