The article provides that the ten neuro-commandments suggest that the type of process

that is used is likely to have a huge effect on the outcome. The Conflict Escalation Theory is
considered a vital element to take into account when designing ADR processes because such
concept is of great help in identifying where the conflict currently stands, and its propensity to
escalate further or to de-escalate. Once the stage of the conflict has been identified through
Glas’s escalation model, this will allow the parties to have an idea of their current position and
which area of the scale they would like to resolve the dispute. For us, this simple act of
identifying the position of the parties in the scale may lead to a greater awareness of the steps
to avoid if one party wants to prevent a problem form escalating out of control. We think that the
scale is very helpful in analysing conflicts from a neurobiological perspective and when thinking
of appropriate procedural interventions. If this concept will be applied in the resolution of cases,
this can help the parties to reflect on possible neurobiological mechanisms affecting the process
which may cause the escalation of the dispute. Hence, resolution of cases will be much easier.

It is possible to see from the illustration of the Glasl’s escalation scales how the nine
steps corresponds to the “ten neuro-commandments”, and to understand how each of the ten
social and behavioural drivers can be affected by procedural interventions as the conflict
escalates. At this stage, it is important to realise the how the presence of an evaluative or non-
evaluative neutral (a mediator, conciliator or arbitrator) can make a big difference. We found out
that mediation can be effective for de-escalating the conflict at any stage while arbitration can
be effective for managing late stage conflicts. It is vital for these neutrals to realize the potential
impact of their additional presence, and to adapt themselves and their social behaviour to build
upon pre-existing cooperative and “in group” behavioural reflexes. Also, we also learned that it
is important for the neutral not to act evaluatively and not to assert a high sense of status for
they can also be treated as a threat. Haviing said

Lawyers and ADR practitioners should be encouraged to try to understand conflicts in

terms of what may be going on in the human brain and how it affects the decision-making
process of people