Alternative Practices Of The Grand Mediation Organizations

In recent years, as the organizational reaction to the surge of conflicts and disputes,the Grand Mediation, which the main characteristics are the organic combination of thepeople’s mediation, administrative mediation and judicial mediation, has causedwidespread concern in theory and in practice. In order to achieve diversification ofdisputes resolution, a nationwide campaign lauched, how the network forms and how itworks? In this mobilization process, what’s the relationship between the differentmediation organizations? How does this relations influence the practice of the GrandMediation?Based on the relationship between organizations as the research object, usingsociological analysis method and the New Institutionalism perspective, throughempirical research of the Grand Mediation mechanism of Z City,G Province, SouthChina, this paper reveals the alternative relations between the organizations and thepractice logic-"alternative practice", namely in the specific organizational field,especially in the overlapped and interleaved field of resource network, the organizationwith dominant resources tend to replace the goals,rules,identity,authority and preferenceof other organizations in practice and impose their own operation-mode to othermembers and replace the innovation activity by its traditional approaches or pragmaticway.The main findings are:Firstly, in the Grand Mediation at basic level practice, the pressure of systemenvironment forges the isomorphism of different mediation organizations,i.e.thesimilarities among the different mediation organizations at the structural and practicallevel. Isomorphism is resulted in unifying the different mediation organization,excessively depending on governmental system supply, losing their respectiveadvantages and reducing the selectivity. The institutional pressure including thelegitimacy mechanism,asymmetrical power relations and multiple institutional logics.Secondly, the so-called standard mode replaces the other modes in the process oforganization isomorphism, in which the origination with dominant resource impose itsown institutional structure and operations mode to other organizations. Such alternativepractices come from the replacement of the logic of multi dispute resolution by the keylogic, namely the unified social control. Under the pressure of administrative systemand social stabilization, local governments are accustomed to resolving social conflictsand disputes by the resource monopoly, bureaucratic system and quantitative indicators.The case of Z city shows that the higher the degree of coercion, the more possibilities ofthe replacement among organizations.Thirdly, alternative practices in the Grand Mediation organizational field causedeviation between governance structure and organizational action. Organizational actorsfollow the logic of dominant organization, regardless of whether these practices in linewith the actual needs of non-litigation dispute resolution.This leads to the gap between the top-down organizational structure and the bottom-up dispute resolution practices.The practice mode of unified social control take place of the institution design of multidispute resolution, as a result,the pressure of maintaining social stability is not releasedbut increased.From characteristics embodied from the empirical study in the city of Z andsimilarities showed by other regions in contemporary China, there are the lack ofautonomy, the rule of law and the logic of the market as well as the overflow of thesocial stability and administrative logic.Therefore, the emerging Grand Mediation organization study not only has the vitalpractical significance in restructuring China’s dispute resolution system and innovationof the social management system, but also has important theoretical value in theorganizational analysis.