• Christopher Honeyman has been serving (2003-2007) as evaluator for an ambitious pilot effort, funded jointly by the U.S. Department of Education and the European Union's equivalent, toward closer alignment of U.S. and E.U. practices in teaching dispute resolution, including negotiation, arbitration, mediation, and dispute systems design. Partners in the project include three U.S. law schools and three European law and graduate schools.
• The Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution published three Broad Field Project articles exploring the often surprising regional variations in what is nominally a national-scale (or larger) movement (Vol. 5, No. 2.) These are "Boundaries to Practice" (about the conflict resolution culture of New York City and its environs), by Christopher Honeyman and Lela Love; "The Odds on Leviathan" (Washington, DC's culture in this field), by Christopher Honeyman and Carrie Menkel-Meadow; and "Competition in Cooperation-Building" (San Diego's dispute resolution culture), by Ellen Waldman and Christopher Honeyman. All of the Marquette Law Review and Cardozo Journal articles are available on Lexis-Nexis and Westlaw.
• An article in Negotiation Journal (October 2004) compares mediation experience in Chinese, Australian Aboriginal, and Western settings, and arguing that across sharply different cultures, parties are seeking two things from a mediator beyond the skills the mediation field has sought to teach:
  • "Skill is Not Enough: Seeking Connectedness and Authority in Mediation", by Christopher Honeyman, Bee Chen Goh and Loretta Kelly.
• The Marquette Law Review published a special issue, of 25 articles, on the Broad Field Project's Canon of Negotiation initiative. (Vol. 87, No. 4, Spring 2004.) Please see the Canon pages for descriptions. The Project subsequently completed a round of sixteen conference sessions at four major conferences, designed to gather critiques of the Canon's first series of articles and prepare the way for a still more comprehensive series. That in turn has now been published as The Negotiator's Fieldbook.
• The Penn State Law Review published 17 articles in its Summer, 2003 issue (Vol. 108, No. 1) on the theme of the symposium Penn State's Dickinson School of Law held in collaboration with Broad Field earlier in 2003, examining the threat of capitulation to the routine --- i.e. the risk that without a conscious strategy, conflict resolution work may become "routinized."
• In June, 2003 Broad Field organized / presented seven sessions at the annual meeting of the International Association for Conflict Management (i.e. twenty per cent of the conference.)
• The Summer, 2003 issue of Conflict Resolution Quarterly contained nine articles resulting from the Project's Albuquerque meeting in 2002.
• Negotiation Journal published its Fall, 2002 issue as a special issue on the results of the 2002 Hewlett Theory Centers meeting. The meeting, and the editing of the papers that resulted, were a collaboration between two of the Theory Centers (the City University of New York's Dispute Resolution Consortium, and George Mason University's Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution), the Hewlett Foundation itself, and the Broad Field project and the predecessor Theory to Practice project. The Proceedings of the meeting are also now available, without charge; please see http://johnjay.jjay.cuny.edu/dispute/conf.htm or www.gmu.edu/departments/icar/hewlett/.
• Albuquerque conference: The first event of the new "Broad Field" project represented a transition from the prior Theory to Practice project. This innovative conference, the second in a series begun under Theory to Practice, was designed to challenge the assumptions of conflict resolution's teaching models, and was held in collaboration with the University of New Mexico Law School.
• IACM 2002: Seven related symposia were designed in anticipation of "Broad Field" for the 2002 meeting of the International Association for Conflict Management. (Six were actually presented.) They have sharply varied subjects, but arise from a single perception — that the concept of "interdisciplinary" in academic networks has developed in narrower ways than our field now needs.

• Hewlett Theory Centers Conference, March 2002, New York. As the closing  event of the five-year project, Theory to Practice collaborated with two Hewlett Theory Centers (CUNY-DRC at the City University of New York, and the Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution at George Mason University) to host the 2002 conference of the nineteen academic centers funded by the Hewlett Foundation to develop new theory in conflict resolution. This innovative meeting used the deep expertise in practical conflict handling developed by four highly varied "communities of practice" in New York to challenge scholars to make more consistent and more creative use of practitioners' experience. Both the formative questions (What don't we know? What do we need to know? How would we find out?) and the approach taken were designed to create a straightforward and real discussion between experts from many practical and academic domains over several days, as a spur to new thinking. By two months later, dozens of short articles resulting from this meeting were already being compiled. (A description of the meeting by Russ Bleemer, editor of CPR's Alternatives, can be found in the journal's April, 2002 issue, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 83-86.)

  ---

Selected Earlier Publications

Please see the Broad Field section's Articles page for a list of 2002-2004 publications under the Broad Field project; there are too many to duplicate the list here.

• Here There Be Monsters, by Christopher Honeyman, Bobbi McAdoo and Nancy Welsh (with dozens of colleagues participating), draws together what we have learned in years of work on creating better integration of scholars' and practitioners' knowledge across the conflict resolution field. It became the principal article in The Conflict Resolution Practitioner, a monograph published by the Office of Dispute Resolution, Supreme Court of Georgia to highlight the need for integration of scholarship and practical wisdom in conflict resolution.
• Cracking the Hard-Boiled Student is a nuts-and-bolts description of the experiments that led to creation of exercises that "get across" important social psychology findings relevant to practice, but rarely read by practitioners. By Jeffrey M. Senger and Christopher Honeyman, and published in the monograph described above, The Conflict Resolution Practitioner.
• Not Quite Protocols: Toward Collaborative Research in Dispute Resolution describes one of the Theory to Practice project's "moveable feasts" -- an effort to start to define terms on which scholars and practitioners might work together more productively, in the face of working environments on both sides whose influence can be insidious. By Christopher Honeyman, Barbara McAdoo and Nancy Welsh, with 21 colleagues. This article was first published in Conflict Resolution Quarterly, Fall 2001.
• Have Gavel, Will Travel: Dispute Resolution’s Innocents Abroad describes another moveable feast, to begin to examine the risks created by American conflict resolution practitioners and scholars working abroad -- often, in cultures they don't take the time to understand. By Christopher Honeyman and Sandra Cheldelin This article was originally published in Conflict Resolution Quarterly, Spring 2002.
• The Wrong Mental Image of Settlement discusses a distortion in what people think "settlement" means --- a distortion that has serious consequences for the field. By Christopher Honeyman. This article was originally published in Negotiation Journal, January 2001.
• System Disorders: Trying to Build Resolution into Managed Care Trying to Build Resolution into Managed Care is the report of another "moveable feast" --- this time, examining the huge but often hidden problems created by disputes among health care professionals as well as between HMOs and their plan participants. By Brad Honoroff and Christopher Honeyman. This article was first published in Alternatives, October 2001.