What is the rules-relationships continuum?

What is the difference between a rule-

oriented litigant and a relationship-oriented one? Elaborate on this. (files “rules”

The rules relationship continuum is described as the intercultural advancement field,

which defines orientations towards to the breadth of cultural similarities and differences.

These connections can be seen in a variety of ways, from such a monocultural thinking to a

global or multicultural perspective depending the manner it is perceived in various coutries.

Differences are maintained and achieved as a result of evolving cultural viewpoints and

connecting actions across artistic divides. Not even all litigants gain from such flexibility in

an unstructured court proceeding where the standards of evidence are eased and eyewitnesses

are allowed the opportunity to convey their statements in free narratives. The presentations

are divided into two categories: rule-oriented and relationship-oriented litigations. Although

rule-oriented litigants are victorious since they deliver the appropriate answers in

chronological manner, their relationship-oriented peers always lack success because they

depart from the asked questions by providing irrelevant information. This makes the rule-

oriented ligigats to be the most preferred method. Furthermore, they make continual

inferences to opinions and feelings, emotions, experiences, and assuming previous

understanding of their audience and thereby leaving essential information out (Conley&

O'barr, 1990). Rule-oriented litigants, on the other hand, does make no assumptions about

previous knowledge, understand the logic, and are clearly understood more by court since

they back up their assertions with proof. Although both sides share their stories in a similar

setting, the content of their stories differs. The rules-relationship continuum is at work here

because, while both sides are similar in many ways, they have separate extremes.

The rule-oriented litigant, the specialists, and the jury concentrate on the law that

must be followed in order to achieve a goal or meet a predetermined quality standards in their

profession. The methodology is heavily influenced by the legislation and rules that govern
their jurisdiction (Thanasegaran, Haemala 178). Governance, on the other hand, is marked by

a relationship-oriented, exploratory approach. The emphasis is on group member motivation,

contentment, and well-being. The majority of the time, protocols are ignored. The major goal

of contrasting the two different modalities is to see how the outcomes vary in various

situations. Relational litigants comprehend and explain conflicts, rights, and duties based

on social status and relationships; rewards and penalties are anticipated to be enforced in

accordance with social needs entitlements. Rule-oriented lawyers concentrate at the system of

rules, whatever the law decides, and analyze disputes, privileges, and duties in terms of

universally applicable rules and principles.