To avoid or not to avoid...
Have you ever called someone when you knew they wouldn’t be home just so you could leave them a voicemail instead of actually having to speak to them? How about sending an e-mail or a text message instead of picking up the phone? People who do this type of thing, me included, are conflict avoiders. I don’t think there is anything wrong with being an avoider of conflict. It doesn’t mean that you let people step all over you it just means that if you can avoid conflict you do.


However, sometimes you avoid conflict for so long that it affects you negatively. For instance, I have been avoiding having a conversation with a family member of mine for months. It is costing me a lot financially because I don’t want to have this conversation.


What’s the worst that could happen if you face a potential conflict head on? Oh my gosh…it could actually get resolved in a way that is mutually acceptable to both parties involved! So let’s pick up that phone when we know they are home and give them call instead of a text. Let’s just face things head on in this new year and remember the ancient proverb: Don’t put off until tomorrow what you can do today.

- Sara Foote

Dating and the Mediator - Part 3

Sometimes I hate being a mediator. Sometimes I don’t want to make that commitment to being a good listener and communicator. A recent incident that demonstrates this desire is a 5 day discussion I had with my boyfriend over the number of glasses that we were going to have in our kitchen cupboard. He had 24 and then became insistent on 18. I had paired them down to 14 – I figured that was 2 a day for a week – it made sense to me. Oh no, that was crazy talk. How could one person be expected to use only TWO glasses a day? My answer was if someone used more than 14 glasses a week than they just needed to learn to do dishes more (I am currently only there on the weekend, all of this is in preparation for my gradual move in).

I noticed both of digging into our positions, so I asked a good open-ended question to try to expose his interests, “Help me understand why it is important for you to have so many glasses.” Well, he gave me stupid answers like, “I drink more than one type of beverage a day and you can’t mix milk and juice.” To which I responded, “So just rinse out the glass and its like you never put the milk in there.” To which he responded, “Ew! You can’t do that, the glass is contaminated!” So again, I asked, help me understand how that is different than what happens in the dishwasher. Soap, my friends, soap, also the glass may not be contaminated but the beverage is definitely watered down by the droplets of water left on the glass and furthermore, it is just too much work to dry the glass. When asked if his drink has ever tasted watered down he responded, “That is not the point, I know the water is in there.” Of course my reasoning was just, “Look, 18 glasses is excessive.”

He finally got me with the symmetry interest – that 18 glasses would be three rows of six, half a cabinet and symmetrical. Finally! An interest we both share! Its organized and pleasing to the eye, a bridge was being built. I wanted to put in one last bid to see if I could win and offered 15 glasses as a way to meet his symmetry argument – that would be 3 rows of 5. No. It had to be 18. I was just about ready to give in and let him have the 18 until he said, “I am putting my foot down about the 18 glasses.” Oh really? Foot down? I thought to myself well, he has drawn his line in the sand, I can continue to collaborate and try to come to a win-win or I can draw my line. I drew my line. I actually was about to give in until the foot came down. At this point the conflict was no longer about what the right amount glasses was appropriate for our storage capacity, but about who was right and who was wrong. This was no longer a problem solving session – it was a competition.

So our conflict was escalated by us each focusing on positions rather than interests and also by both parties not wanting to move much. Also, our positions were fueled a lot by our different world views. We see this in mediation all the time. Sometimes someone has to give up a lot or completely in order to see a conflict resolved. I had to either outwait the king of stubbornness or let him have what he wanted. This is where I had to look outside the walls of my conflict to evaluate what was really important to me. Was it important to me to win and be “right”? What did I really gain? What did I lose? I had to look at these aspects and decide what I really valued was not having hour long discussions on a daily basis about 18 stupid glasses, or really it was 3 glasses since I was willing to allow 15. I needed to look at the big picture. A lot of times this is what clients in mediation need. They get tunnel vision and can only see one aspect of their problem. There is usually a whole other world outside of that one little bit. I realized this with the glasses and I gave in. He has his three rows of six. They are after all, just glasses.

Mandy Stallings

Perception is Reality

“Perception is reality.” I heard this phrase at a meeting recently and have come to understand that this “perception” is “reality” and is at the root of most conflicts.

Think about it. Someone sends you an email and you sense or “perceive” that the sender is upset, angry or distressed with you. What’s going on internally for you at that moment? For many people that “perception” becomes the reality: they know the sender is upset or angry with them. They then react based on that “reality”. Meanwhile, the email sender has their own “reality” which often is different from the receiver’s perception. So when they receive the response from the other person they are baffled and they create a new perception which becomes their reality.

Email isn’t the only culprit – phone calls, conversations – direct and overheard, comments, written communications – all these forms of communication fall prey to this simple “reality”.

So what do we do about this? The key seems to be to remember this simple principle and, before “reacting”, take a step back and consider: “Is my perception truly the reality of the situation?” Then, communicate openly with the other person to get clear on what that person meant by that communication. It could be your perception was correct. On the other hand, you might find you were way off base and, simply by “checking in” with the person were able to avoid a tense conflict situation.

Karen Richards

Chasing the Sunset

It was dusk and I was driving west on I-64 last week. The pink light of sunset was waning in the west. If I could just drive faster, maybe I could catch it – overtake the sunset. But the closer I “got” the faster the light waned and eluded me.

Finding a resolution to a conflict can seem just as elusive as chasing a sunset. People often hold on to their “position” – what they want or think they want – for so long that they end up getting nothing. They end up chasing the sunset. The more they “drive” their position, the more fleeting the resolution becomes.

Mediation helps people to focus on their interests rather than their positions. Interests are the reasons behind the position – the “why”. When people can let go of their position and concentrate on their interest, a resolution to the conflict can become a reality.

Karen Richards

Mediation.
It's everywhere we want it to be.

Sometimes we forget we are mediators, especially in dealing with other family members. But the techniques we use in mediation also work to difuse a conflict in our personal lives.

Recently, my son drove from Oregon, with his two cats, to pick up some items I had been holding in storage. (Was it really more than two years ago that I put him and his cats on the midnight flight to Argentina? It was a scene straight out of the movie "Casablanca" except I didn't shoot a German officer.) He was on a tight schedule and planned to be here for about 24 hours. Like his dad, he is very organized and inventoried his storage boxes and what was in them.

He was particularly anxious to retrieve some disks which he uses to program music and other activities in his computer. He found the box, but no program disks. He became increasingly agitated as he searched our "computer room" for the disks. The disks were expensive, he said, and were the prime reason he drove across country to retrieve them. He had just wasted two weeks and said some other things about my lack of responsibility.

I could tell he was angry, and suddenly, without realizing it, I went into mediation mode. I affirmed his anger and frustration, without rebuttal, and assured him that if they were in the room, I would find them and send them to him. I allowed him to vent without expanding the discussion into other areas of our relationship. In a few moments, he was calm again and seemed to accept he did not have his disks. We went outside, where I said hello to his cats, sitting in crates on the front seat beside him. We parted on friendly terms.

Five days later, he called. He had a safe and uneventful trip to the west coast. "Oh by the way," he said. "I found the disks in another box." We laughed, and I said nothing about his anger. Now he is setting up another sound studio, happily using his disks. Mediation. It's everywhere we want it to be.

Chuck Hardwick

It is with a heavy heart that we announce the retirement of Ken Ferebee. Not even Superman himself could organize so many mentees for court, mediate with such grace and deal with some of our most difficult clients. Yet, somehow, Ken has done this - and so much more at CMC.

In 2002 Ken was searching for an organization that could use his experience working with media sales and a victim-offender program. Luckily, he found us! Because of Ken's efforts the General District Court mediation program grew from its infancy with less than 50 GDC cases a year, and now we are mediating over 300 per year, and regularly offering on-site mediation services in 2 local courts. After two years of volunteering at court, Ken became an AmeriCorps VISTA volunteer and served for an additional 3 years. In this role he was able to receive a small stipend to continue his fabulous court work. In addition to working at local courts Ken is an excellent advocate for mediation, consistently working with clerks, judges and other court professionals encouraging the referral of mediation cases.

Ken has an excellent way with community members, helping them understand the benefits of mediation and getting them into the process. Not only does he communicate in mediation, he also is great at communicating with crowds! It has been said that Ken does the best “try mediation” speech, and that he is helped by his smooth Virginia Beach native style and calming tone. Plus, Ken is responsible for designing CMC’s famous logo – the dove/hand and heart. He put his graphic design talents to work again by creating posters for each of the local general district courts, encouraging readers to try mediation.

Ken will truly be missed, not only for his efforts training mediators and organizing cases, but also for his experience, encouragement, and caring spirit around the office.

Children of Divorce

I often ask myself why I teach the Saturday morning Co-Parenting class. Not being a morning person, it is difficult for me to get up at 6:30 a.m. I'm not very comfortable talking in front of groups. Yet here I am, on a Saturday morning, waiting for the parents to arrive and wondering if I am going to do a good job for them. Then I remembered a phone call from a young man I have known for years.

He began talking about his growing up time. "It seems everything was normal and we were a happy family," he said. "Then there was a lot of arguing and yelling. It was a very stressful situation and it was not pleasant. I did not know why my parents fought, but it went on for years." He talked about his parents' separations. His father was gone, then home, then gone, then home and finally out of the house for good. And in between, there was tension and arguments that drew him and his siblings into the fight. "No one told us what was going on," he continued. "I just remember there was a lot of anger."

We talked for a few minutes and when the conversation was finished, I told him the same thing I always tell him at the end of our phone calls. "I love you, Thom," I said. "I love you, too, dad," he replied.

I reflected on my son's comments as I watched an Ophra Winfrey special on children of divorce. Parts were very difficult to watch and tears welled up in my eyes. I heard a noise behind me and turned to see two Center staff members dabbing their eyes with tissue. The separation process can be very painful for children and leave them damaged as adults. Co-parenting classes had not been invented when I went through the process. I may have done things much differently if I could have attended a class that talked about communicating with children, not arguing in front of them and not blaming the other parent for all that went wrong in the relationship. Why do I teach the Saturday morning Co-Parenting class? Partly as an atonement for putting my children through the hell of my divorce. But mostly because I have an opportunity to reach out and help parents not make the same mistakes, and to keep their focus on their children, not on themselves or the other parent. From time to time I reach a mom or dad and I know I have made a difference in their lives and the lives of their children. It's still painful, but maybe I have helped them think about what they are doing and how it is affecting their children.

The parents in this class have registered, paid their class fees and have settled in the training room, nervous and not knowing what is going to happen to them. I take a deep breath, gather myself for a moment, walk into the room and stand before them. "Good morning, parents!", I say. Another Saturday morning parenting class begins. And I know why I am here.

Chuck Hardwick

The Pervasiveness of Conflict Resolution

It's been about a month and a half since I left the Center but the topic of conflict and conflict resolution has yet to disappear from my routine. Among the everyday reflective listening skills and I messaging that I do, it has also become a topic of study for me within my philosophy MA program.

The Boston College Philosophy Department holds a graduate conference every year and I am helping to put the next one together. Lo and behold, when I got on the committee, it turns out the topic is "violence and non-violence". While in the conference description we have steered clear of the word "conflict" (since we recognize, as the Center teaches, that not all conflict is bad), our discussions have inevitably come back to the topic itself. What is at the root of conflict? Is conflict the end of all things, or can it be removed from experience? Is philosophical reflection a type of conflict? How, if possible, does conflict shape cultural experiences like sexism and racism?

On a fundamental level, this shows something that the Center tells every trainee that comes through - conflict is everywhere and is something that you will have to deal with constantly, so be prepared. However, I think there is another message to take away. That is, the levels on which conflict exists are more than just our everyday experience (such as dealing with our co-workers). Conflict exists fundamentally on an intellectual and a phenomenological level (the latter being the level consisting of intuitions and unconscious reactions which shape our perceptions of experiences before we conceive them). A complete understanding of conflict should consider what is means on these levels as well. I don't yet have an answer, but I am going to submit a paper for the conference, so hopefully I'll gain a better understanding before the year ends.

Nathan Eckstrand

Mediation and Dating, Part Two

In my last blog I wrote about dating and the mediator. I recently went out on a date that once again showed me how relevant mediation is to everything.

I met this guy; we really hit it off and decided to go out on a date. We decided to meet at a middle-priced restaurant in an area of town where there really weren't inexpensive choices for dinner. I let him pick the restaurant figuring he would be paying and I didn’t want to pick out a pricey place at his expense. We have dinner – its great. The food is good; the conversation is good, and I’m pretty sure the attraction is there. The bill comes and he asks me, “Do you want me to pay or do you want to split it?” I just looked at him. I had no idea what to say to that. I thought things were going well. I kind stumbled over some words before saying, “Uh, well, if you get dinner, I’ll buy you a cup of coffee.” He seemed very reluctant to pay. We dance around the paying and finally he agrees to pick up the check. I felt so bad about the fact that he didn’t want to pay that I had the waiter split it. He had gone to the bathroom during this exchange and was surprised to see the two checks when he returned. He asked me why I split the checks and I told him it was because he seemed very resistant to paying. I also told him I was confused by that because we seemed to be getting along very well and in my experience you only split the bill if at least one person isn’t feeling the date. He told me he was very much enjoying the date but in his experience you always split the check on the first date. Oh! (forehead smack) Unspoken rules!

Yes, that’s right, unspoken rules almost ruined my date. If I had not expressed how I felt about the check then its possible the date would have ended right after dinner and we would not have talked again. Luckily, we did discuss our own personal dating rules and have since gone out on more great dates.

This instance made me realize how important it is to get clients to reveal their unspoken rules. How many times in mediation have we realized the root conflict stems from different ways of approaching the world and different expectations of behavior that result from having unspoken rules? How many times do conflicts appear to be misunderstandings gone horribly wrong? Too bad we don’t come with manuals.

Mandy Stallings

Feelings of Detachment

I find that I experience feelings of detachment and intrigue when working with a general mediation case and the parties are dealing with working through their interest vs position issues. Yet I find that I have feelings of disappointment, sadness, and disbelief when working with a family mediation case and the parents are not able and/or willing to put their personal interests/positions aside and put what’s best for their child or children as their primary focus!

Lucretha Hyman

Mediator Tips
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.

All Recertification Credits in a Day

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

International Conflict Resolution Groups

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

Mediation and Dating

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.

Mandy Stallings

Mediator Tips
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.

Trainee Tips

Youth Programs

Anyone who has been around the Center in recent weeks has probably seen the numerous boxes of materials we have stored for the youth program we are doing at the Workforce Development Center. The program, which is being done as part of Norfolk's Learn and Earn program, has been a topic for much discussion and planning as we go through putting together the curriculum and arranging for guest speakers.

One of the more successful days we had was when we taught about constructive criticism, how to give it and get it. In suggesting how to give it, the reasons we mentioned included:

- Face the person and look him/her in the eyes

- Only give criticism about things a person can change

- Explain why you feel the person should change their behavior

- Explain again if you need to

In discussing how to receive constructive criticism, the reasons we mentioned included:

- Listen carefully to the person

- Ask for more information if you do not understand

- Tell your side and then listen to what the other person has to say

The tip to be found in all of this is: when putting together a program like this, make sure to be clear and engaging. The bullets above were put on a handout given to the kids and were explained in concise, straightforward language. While the kids are there to listen and learn, they will not be interested if your talk resembles a lecture at a biology conference. Additionally, the best presentations had activities and prizes for participation included in them. It's like all the people in the communication field say: remember your audience and tailor your presentation for them.

Why do parents ask for sole custody?

It was brought to my attention recently that on the mediation video that we show potential mediation clients at the Center and at local courts and Social Service agencies, there is a scene where a legal professional is saying that usually when one parent files for sole custody of a child they are often just really angry with the other parent and want to punish them. To some extent I believe that is true. Parents often use their children as a pawn in situations of divorce or separation and try to “one up” the other parent.

However, there are often times as well when one parent truly feels that it is in the child’s best interest to be in their sole legal and physical custody. Maybe it is because the other parent has a history of violence, drug or alcohol abuse or because that parent is inconsistently in and out of the child’s life. I wonder what percentage of parents waste their time and money in court filing for sole custody just to get back at the other parent and what percentage honestly feel that they are protecting their child in some way from the other parent?

Sara Foote

Continuing your studies in Conflict Resolution

There has been a growing trend in the United States (and several other countries) to offer programs that teach Conflict Resolution in concert with Peace and Global Studies. Numerous colleges and Universities are beginning to offer it as a major while several Universities have also developed graduate programs for people who want to study conflict resolution or peace in a graduate program.

Take for example Earlham College's Peace and Global Studies program. It is an undergraduate program that attempts to help students understand the basics of international relations as well as techniques which can be used on both the local and national level to create positive change in the world. Students even get to practice conflict resolution skills in a classroom environment, learning how to accomodate for gender and racial issues as they do so.

Here are some examples of Conflict Resolution and Global Studies programs across the country:

Earlham College - Peace and Global Studies
Lesley University - Conflict Resolution and Peaceable Schools Specialization
School for International Training - Conflict Transformation
Nova Southeastern University - Conflict Analysis and Resolution
University of Denver - Conflict Resolution
Arcadia University - Peace Studies

For a comprehensive list of all programs in Peace Studies Graduate Programs, visit this site.

CMC Staff

Mediator Tips

Work Relationships and the 4-phase model

For various reasons, work relationships can fall apart. More and more, businesses have been hiring mediators to resolve these disputes in order to try and re-develop a good working relationship between the co-workers while also making sure that both sides are satisfied with the outcome.

Mediators who undertake this task have been known to use the 4-phase model (it is very similar to the model taught by the Center). It works like this:

1. In phase one, the disputants tell their story directly to the mediator. At this point, neither has contact with the other. The mediator uses reflective listening to make the party feel heard and tries to elicit the underlying issues.
2. In phase two, the disputants come face to face and listen to one another (hopefully in a respectful way). This is done to start developing a better relationship between the parties by helping each understand the other.
3. In phase three, the mediator summarizes the perspectives. He helps to let the parties realize the new relationship they have built.
4. In phase four, the disputants try to reach a resolution through brainstorming.

Mediator Tips

Parables of Mediation

There are many great stories that illustrate the fundamental principles and value of mediation. One that we tell in our training which reveals the difference between interests and positions is about a librarian who comes across two people bickering about whether or not to have the window open. She asks the first one why he wants the window open, and he says "Because it's hot." She asks the second one why he wants it closed, and he says "To avoid a draft." The librarian thinks for a moment, and then goes into the next room to open the window in there. Returning to the table where the men sit, she says "Now both of your problems have been solved."

Different cultures have developed parables and tales that illustrate other valuable aspects of mediation. I want to share two with you. The first one is about how people who stick to incorrect assumptions in the face of facts often find themselves in trouble. Here it is:

"An old Chinese tale tells of the same advice given by two different men after the wall of his home was damaged by heavy rains. His neighbor advised him to repair the wall quickly in order to protect himself from thieves who might come in the night. He suspected his neighbor’s motives and failed to make the necessary preparations. Later, his son gave him the same warning, whereupon he took the advice but could not complete the job before nightfall. When thieves did come in the night, the rich man continued to suspect his neighbor’s motives but concluded that his son had indeed been smart. "

The second discusses how sticking to assumptions can blind you to the facts. Here it is:

"Another Chinese story tells of a man who lost his axe and insisted that his neighbor’s speech, dress and behavior identified him as the thief. The man subsequently found his axe buried under dirt in his own cellar. And when he next saw his neighbor, there was nothing different about the neighbor’s speech, dress and behavior. "

Not surprisingly, the principles of mediation have been shared by even ancient civilizations.