NewsWise reports on two new studies, which “found that an apology favorably affects the prospects of averting lawsuits and promoting settlements.” (Full Apologies Deter Lawsuits, New Studies Find, Aug. 26, 2003)
“Several factors, such as the nature of the apology, the severity of the injury and other evidence of responsibility, affect the capacity of an apology to facilitate settlement,” said Jennifer Robbennolt, professor of law at MU, who conducted the studies. “Policymakers and litigants must take into account these complex issues when making decisions about the appropriate role of apologies in settling civil disputes.”
Robbennolt’s article on her studies, entitled “Apologies and Legal Settlement: An Empirical Examination,” is scheduled to be published in an upcoming issue of the Michigan Law Review.
The lesson: “full apology” needs to be on the good lawyer’s list of options and strategies. (Thanks to Tara Calishain and her new PR Bop.com — weird and wonderful and off the wires — for the pointer. Tara notes that Monty Python was right.)
- Supplement: After posting this item, it occurred to me that the studies’ finding is such a truism that perhaps only lawyers would need convincing on the point — only people steeped in the myths of an adversarial dispute resolution system (and also making their living from creating and extending disputes) would be likely to deny the benefits of apologies. Certainly, mediators (with formal training or informal common sense) know this point well and use it whenever possible.
- Jerry Lawson left a Comment that I’d like to share: “Studies have shown that the injured party’s perception of their doctor’s attitude is a key factor in whether they file a malpractice action. Even if there was gross negigence and serious injury, people are much less likely to sue if they believe that the doctor cared about them and did his best to try to help them. I haven’t seen any studies on lawyers, but I suspect the result would be similar.”