In fact, since most litigation results in settlement, not trial, ADR is often an alternative to trial preparation, including discovery. Even though only five percent of civil cases go to trial, the courts have become increasingly crowded with discovery disputes and to other collateral matters. The cost of litigating a matter from its inception to a final trial, and possibly a subsequent appeal, has grown exponentially. As a result, many courts, lawyers, businesses, and individual litigants have turned to alternative ways to resolve much matters. ADR should not be considered a substitute for all litigation, and may not be the solution for everyone. Even those who champion the increased use of these alternate methods concede that there are some matters that can only be properly resolved through the courts.

ADR is often most effective when it is used as an adjunct to the litigation process, sometimes called court-annexed ADR. The threat of continued litigation, with all of its costs and uncertainties, helps encourage parties to resolve their disputes. Regardless of whether suit has been filed, it is strongly recommended that courts, lawyers and citizens become more aware of the dispute resolution choices available to them, and consider in every case the possibility of using one of those alternatives. It is hoped that this "Roadmap" will increase such awareness and provide insight into some of the methods and advantages which are part of this vast world of ADR.