Thursday, August 23, 2007
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Dealing with Indefensible Positions
Leo Hura, a commercial mediator and volunteer at the Mid Pacific Mediation Center, has a suggestion about how to handle court cases where it is obvious one party does not have a case.
If you know that one party will obviously lose if they go back into the courtroom, it is useful to try to help that party realize the indefensibility of their position. As a mediated settlement is almost always better than a judgment, even cases like this should be mediated. Hura recommends using separate caucuses where you tell the party that is being unreasonable that not making an offer could be dangerous as they risk not getting anything at all if they go back to court. Hopefully, this will loosen them up a bit.
However, Hura says that this is not the primary purpose of the caucus. He believes that you should find the underlying interest as to their position and try to address that when you go back in. Perhaps the person doesn’t have the money necessary to pay the other party. If that is brought out, perhaps a payment plan could be made that fits both party’s economies.
This is especially important when mediating at court, where the mediations need to be quick to meet the schedule of the court.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Recently at Community Mediation Center we hosted a Training Bonanza. Sounds like fun, right!?
It’s such an easy way to get all of your recertification credits in one day. Plus, active volunteers at the Center usually get a substantial discount.
It made me start thinking about the recertification process. For anyone who is unsure, recertification is required every two years for Virginia Supreme Court certified mediators. As a mediator, you would take course work in your certification area, an ethics course, and also show evidence that you completed 5 cases or 15 hours of mediation since your certification. It’s a process that some mediators save for the last minute (and I know because I help them register for courses!).
Although sometimes it’s seen as a burden or a pain to stay certified, it has great benefits.
For one, attending something like the training bonanza helps you meet other mediators in the community. Not only might you volunteer as a co-mediator with them some day, you might even develop a friendship! Another benefit is the courses. Always interactive, never dull – the courses are full of new information, techniques, or help you get back to your mediation roots. But the best benefit of all (in my humble opinion) is the learning for your co-classmates… the other mediators. Participating in group discussions, mediator peer consultations, or even just a chat at the water cooler has led to all kinds of interesting topics. It seems like everything from the mundane to the deeply philosophical to the mediating dangerously approach gets covered. There’s nothing like talking shop… especially with our volunteers!
So, why wait for one day every two-years to get all these benefits?! Just because recertification isn’t due for another 730 days doesn’t mean you can’t come in for workshops and cases! Plus, you get a great jump on next year’s requirements.
Hope to see you around (before I flip my calendar to 2008!).
Amanda Burbage
Community Relations Director
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Not too long ago we put up a list of some of the programs in the country at colleges and universities that deal with conflict resolution and global studies relating to peace. Continuing our research in this area, we have also found a number of organizations that deal with conflict resolution on an international scale. For example, the Center for international Conflict Resolution (CICR) is a “network of professionals, scholars, and practitioners contributing to the resolution of international deadly conflict through research, education, and practice.” Organizations like these practice mediation and alternative dispute resolution in a different way that the Community Mediation Center or private mediation firms by working on conflicts on a national or global scale rather than a personal one. They also include people from around the world.
We mention this in order to provide some perspective on the conflict resolution world. It is larger than a number of people generally think, spanning all the continents and working on all types of conflict. In other words, the principles of conflict resolution have universal applicability and cannot be written off as just good advice for your day to day life.
It is also worth noting that because of these types of organizations, individuals who are not interested in mediation on the personal level may still be able to find a role to play in the conflict resolution world. One could carry out research into conflict, prepare reports, work with government agencies, etc. Below is a small sampling of the types of organizations out there. You can also find a comprehensive list of International Conflict Resolution Sources here.
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: Conducts studies, discussion, and education in issues of foreign policy as they relate to peace.
- Centre for Conflict Resolution: A UK organization that tries to combine research in peace studies into practical applications for practitioners.
- Conciliation Resources: A group that serves as a resource for community and national groups pursuing conflict resolution initiatives.
The more all of us in the conflict resolution world work together, the more we can accomplish.
CMC Staff
Thursday, August 02, 2007
I am a single woman in her late 20’s. My last serious relationship ended about 2 years ago, so after the soul-searching and healing that happens when a potential marriage falls apart, I decided to start dating again. I am also a mediator, and as I have gotten deeper into practice, it has become exceedingly difficult to cut my mediator self off when I’m not working. This is both a blessing and a curse. My friends and family laugh at me, and often go, “Stop mediating me!” In my platonic relationships it is just a funny quirk, but when dating, it can really create some interesting situations.
It is helpful because I can draw people out in conversation. I ask those open-ended questions that allow people to talk about themselves. Sometimes this works against me, like with the guy who talked about himself for 3 hours so loudly I got a headache. Also, I warn men in advance, that I pry into people’s personal lives for a living, so where someone else might ask about their favorite color, I will ask about their childhood. I often start sentences with, “Help me understand….” or “Tell me what that was like for you…” or “Explain to me what you mean by…” Often at the end of a date, I like to clarify next steps (yes, I actually have said that).
Once, I was trying to plan a get together with someone I was seeing, but things just kept falling through. To take the pressure off the situation I said, “My interests are seeing you and getting some exercise, so as long as those interests are met, I’m happy.” If there is a situation that has multiple outcomes that I’m nervous about I have been known to say, “I’m nervous about this, what are the possible outcomes and how do we deal with them?” or I might say, “What would it look like if…” Once I posed that question to someone and he said, “I don’t understand, what you are asking? Don’t understand? Oh no!
When I’m upset with a situation I try to think of the best “I” message to use. My friends have told me, “You just need to be an angry woman, forget this mediation stuff.” My reply is, “But, that wouldn’t solve the problem. I’m interested in creating a dialogue so we can understand each other’s needs, so those needs can be met. Just yelling doesn’t solve anything.” Yeah, it runs deep.
Being an open communicator can backfire. I have a commitment to myself to be as open and honest as possible. I think it is important to be clear about how you feel, your expectations, and also what you need. This tactic doesn’t work with everyone, and it can scare off some men (just try to discuss expectations for communication and time together with someone you’ve just started seeing), but those whom it doesn’t scare off, really seem to appreciate my openness.
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
The Power of Apology
It’s something of a debate in the mediation world about the efficacy of apology in mediation. Does it do anything valuable in helping the parties reach a resolution? How do people react to hearing apologies? Also, what role – if any – does it play in arbitration and litigation?
In litigation, and other parts of our society, apology is seen as an admission of guilt and a weakness. Even when people apologize, the cynicism of others keeps the apology from being accepted, implying that the apology is being made insincerely or for personal gain.
However, in mediation the apology can play a useful role in transforming the relationship between disputants and helping them move towards a resolution. An agreement does not require an apology, but getting to the point where one party realizes the harm or frustration they have done to the other helps in making the parties more agreeable towards brainstorming ideas for a solution. It can also salvage a functioning relationship between the parties instead of having an agreement where each person agrees to go their own way from the other.
Darrell Puls, in his article “Apology: More Power Than We Think,” commends the power of apology but cautions the mediator to realize that what may be a sufficient apology for one person may not be for another. As a result, he comes up with 4 levels of apology to be aware of. If a mediator can figure out what constitutes a sufficient apology for a party he or she can work towards helping the party get to a point of making an apology. Here are the 4 levels:
- The lowest level of apology is a “confession where the perpetrator acknowledges what he or she did.” The perpetrator admits to responsibility for the actions and the harm they caused without expressing remorse.
- The second level of apology combines the first stage with an admittance of remorse. The perpetrator regrets what he or she did.
- The third level of apology combines the first and second levels with a discussion of repentance. The perpetrator says that his or her reflecting on the action has caused him or her to change how they act to keep something like this from happening again.
- The highest level of apology combines the first three levels while adding an element of justice. Not only is the act admitted, regretted, and disavowed, but it becomes a catalyst for doing what is right to fix the problem. The harm caused will be alleviated as much as possible and any reparations will be made.
Apology may not always be possible or even the right way to proceed, but keep it in mind as you proceed in a mediation. It may be the trick you are looking for.