![]() |
Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
ALTA Law Research Series |
![]() |
Last Updated: 7 October 2011
Mediation—Seven Fundamental Questions
Professor John Wade[1]
In parts of many countries, mediation is a commonly used process for managing and resolving conflict. In many other places, mediation is virtually unknown in both practice and theory. People confuse mediation with meditation or medication. Why do these interesting anthropological variations exist? Why are the various forms of mediation relatively uncommon in some cultures and countries?
A vast and growing literature is available on conflict management and mediation.[2]This short comment will outline seven fundamental and recurring questions about mediation.[3]Similar questions can be asked helpfully about every profession, including lawyering, plumbing and judging. Every lawyer should be able to answer these seven basic questions from enquiring clients, or from other lawyers.
What is mediation?
Mediation is a process whereby a skilled helper
assists people to communicate, negotiate and make decisions. There are many
different
forms and processes being used by successful mediators around the
world. There are ongoing research attempts to categorise the different
“types” of mediation---for example,” settlement”,
”problem-solving”, “evaluative”,
and
“therapeutic” mediation. Predictably, as with any labelling process,
rarely does any mediator fit neatly into one
particular type or category.
However, it is essential that lawyers be familiar with the different types of
mediation practice. Otherwise
they will inevitably refer clients to the wrong
service.
Which disputes are suitable for which kinds of mediation?
There are
many diagnostic lists which have been drawn up in an attempt to predict which
conflicts are suitable in content and timing
for negotiation, doing nothing,
mediation, yielding, filing in a court, judicial
decision[4],
arbitration, violence, or therapy. The medical profession is accustomed to using
such checklists when trying to decide upon surgery,
exercise, drugs
etc.
Mediation is particularly worth considering if the disputants have an
ongoing relationship, or fear publicity; have reasonable communication
skills;
have access to skilled mediators; have used mediation successfully in the past;
have several issues in dispute ( rather than
one only);are experiencing strong
emotions and yet are still able to weigh up the costs of ongoing conflict in a
rational manner.
Many courts take the view that all conflicts are suitable for mediation and therefore send every litigant to mandatory mediation. Even cases of violence are then mediated via separate rooms or buildings or over the telephone.
The writer works with a number of lawyers who say that some progress in
decision-making is made at every well-prepared mediation they
have ever
attended, and therefore skilled mediation is always “appropriate”.
These lawyers, like diplomats in Israel,
the Balkans and Northern Ireland have
wisely expanded their definitions of “success”.
Nevertheless,
diagnostic criteria will continue to be a much-debated topic.
A subsidiary diagnostic question is – how far should the particular mediation process chosen be adapted to take into account “cultural” factors?[5]
What value can mediation add to ordinary negotiation?
If a dispute
is suitable for negotiation, why waste money on employing someone to
“assist” the negotiation process? This
is an important question, as
mediation, like any new profession, can become a conspiracy against the laity,
and aim to promote expensive
client-dependence on another class of
“experts”.
However, it is clear that there are many situations where the disputants have not been able to help themselves and need someone to do what they are not able to do. For example, the conflict has escalated and the disputants cannot effectively arrange a comfortable meeting room; or speak clearly; or exchange information; or redefine the problems in mutually acceptable language, organize well-expressed offers; or listen carefully; or increase the number of methods, beyond money, to address problems; or prepare a documented risk analysis on the costs of future conflict;[6] or listen to their lawyers; or use highly confidential information in order to make a wise decision.[7]
Obviously, almost all mediations take place after unassisted negotiations have failed, and necessarily the disputants are saying “we need some skilled help”. In Australia, so many lawyers, accountants and business managers have been to mediation training that there has been a cultural change over the last 15 years. Many lawyers and business people have dramatically improved their communication and problem solving skills, and now are able to prevent and settle more conflicts without the assistance of mediators.
What makes a competent mediator?
Many judges and arbitrators aspire
to be mediators of some kind----often as a post-retirement job. However, few
succeed in the reskilling
and marketing required. Most are disappointed and
discover that no-one wants to hire them. In Australia, only three retired judges
have successfully made the transition from judge to respected and regularly
employed mediator. In the USA, a larger number of retired
judges have
successfully made careers as evaluative mediators. That is, they are
employed to give a clear opinion, or to raise doubts about the range of possible
outcomes of a conflict
if it escalates to a court hearing. However, the vast
majority of judges, even in the USA, do not make a successful transition to
evaluative mediation(which often resembles a familiar form of arbitration),let
alone to the less familiar and more difficult forms
of problem-solving
mediation.
Surveys of, and one-way mirrors observing, commercially successful mediators suggest that the skills, processes and attributes which they have developed include: patience, a strong emphasis on an easily understandable process, a reluctance to give advice until trust has developed, persistence, emphasis on visuals and whiteboards, reframing and summarizing, listening, preparation, and expanding the presenting “monetary” problems to include a wider range of interests and emotions.[8]To repeat, so counter-intuitive are these vital measures of competency, that many lawyers struggle to reskill, while some engineers, managers and counsellors are able to make the transition more readily.
How successful is mediation compared to ------?
This is a very
important question for both clients and policy-makers.
Clients ask this
question every day to their lawyers. “Is it worth spending time and money
on mediation?” ”Would
we be more successful to file in court? Or to
do nothing? Or to organize a meeting between just the lawyers? Or to employ a
therapist
or management consultant or police officer? etc”.(Diplomats in
the Middle East ask analogous questions every day).
Clients are very interested in comparative costs, risks and “success” rates. At mediation training courses, participants practise how to answer these standard client questions with a degree of honesty and clarity----no easy task!
Apart from individual clients, governments and policy makers in every country are focused on this “comparative success” question. This is because all governments only have limited funds to spend on conflict management services. There is no bottomless pit of money. Which services should receive the majority of government conflict management budgets?---therapists?, arbitration?, educational workshops?, judges?, evaluative mediation?, problem-solving mediation? Should the emphasis change according to the substantive field of conflict?---for example, injuries in the workplace, disputes over rental properties, conflict in families, motor traffic injuries, disagreements about commercial contracts, retrenchments and loss of jobs.
The competition for limited money leads to constant claims that ”I can prove that my service is better that yours” and the preparation of less than reliable statistics about “success”. All measurements of success will be unreliable to some extent, as: (1) it is impossible to assemble say 10 large control groups, send them to 10 different conflict management services over several years, and to observe details of process and outcome; and(2) it is very difficult to measure all the different criteria of “success” which are important to different clients---for example low cost, speed, signed agreements, durable agreements, sense of control, preserving relationships, being listened to. There are over 20 measures of success which clients and governments say are important in any mediation or conflict management service.[9] For example, an arbitrator may impose a quick and enforceable “resolution” and claim “success” on those two criteria. However, the clients may decide that the outcome was a complete failure as the arbitrator did not understand the complexity of their businesses, and the attribution of fault has imposed an expensive strain on all future business relationships between the parties.
How to market mediation services?
Marketing any new product is a
challenge. Mediation is particularly difficult because:
Successful mediators market their skills by:
How can the standard of mediation practice be
improved?
This is a much-debated topic in many countries at
present.[12] However
the debates should be placed in the perspective that every working group faces
this question---doctors, lawyers, salespeople,
builders etc. There is sometimes
an unnecessary moral panic that mediators should instantly have higher
competencies than other working
groups. This panic is sometimes strategically
encouraged by competitors in the conflict management market.
It is very difficult to regulate a new profession when the practice of
mediation has so many different and “successful”(on
some definition
of “success”) forms.
Nevertheless, predictable methods used in
other industries in an attempt to improve standards of practice are gradually
being applied
in the many different parts of the mediation industry. These
include:
Conclusion
These seven fundamental questions about
mediation are being asked regularly by clients, lawyers and policy makers in
every country.
Problem-solving mediators and managers are reknowned for trying
to ask the right questions rather than finding premature solutions.
The writer has found that reflecting upon these seven questions has provided a helpful antidote for the many clients, lawyers and policy-makers who prematurely suggest quick solutions to complex conflicts ”To every complex social problem there is a simple answer, and it is wrong”.
[1] Professor John
Wade, Director, Dispute Resolution Center, Bond University, Gold Coast,
Queensland, Australia, e-mail john_wade@bond.edu.au. Thanks to Amber
Howard and to Alan Chan, who patiently taught me computing skills at Bond
University, while I wrote this note during
their
classes
[2] For
introductory reading see, R. Fisher and W. Ury, Getting to Yes (Houghton
Mifflin:Boston,1981); C. Moore, The Mediation Process (San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass,1996); L. Boulle, Mediation (Sydney: Butterworths,1996);
The Mediation Quarterly (San Francisco:Jossey Bass); K. Kovach,
Mediation ( St Paul: West,1994); M. Deutsch and P.T. Coleman The
Handbook of Conflict Resolution-Theory and Practice (San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 2000); G.Tillett, Resolving Conflict: A Practical Approach
(Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 2000); Z. Rubin, D. Pruitt and S. Kim,
Social Conflict: Escalation, Stalemate and Settlement (New York:
McGraw-Hill,1994)
[3]
These questions are foreshadowed particularly in J.Kelly, “ A Decade of
Divorce Mediation Research: Some Answers and Questions”
(1996) 34
Family and Conciliation Courts Review
373
[4] eg J.H. Wade,
“Don’t Waste Your Time on Negotiation or Mediation: This Case Needs
a Judge” (2000)18 Mediation Quarterly
259.
[5] See R. J.
Lewicki, D. M. Saunders and J. W. Minton Negotiation (Boston: Irwin,
1999) ch 11 “Global
Negotiation”
[6]
J. H. Wade, “Systematic Risk Analysis for Negotiators and Litigators: But
you never told me it would be like this!” Bond University Dispute
Resolution Newsletter, October, 2000, website
http:www.bond.edu.au/law/centers/index
[7]
For a categorization of how mediators can “add value” to the
negotiation process, see J.H. Wade, Representing Clients in Negotiation and
Mediation, (Bond University Dispute Resolution Center,
2000)
[8] Ibid, Wade
at pp 90-101.
[9]
Ibid Wade note 7 at pp
58-61.
[10] See R J
Bodine, D.K. Crawford, and F. Schrumpf, Creating the Peaceable School—A
Comprehensive Program for Teaching Conflict Resolution (Illinois: Research
Press, 1994)
[11]
See F. Mosten ,The Complete Guide to Mediation (Chicago: American Bar
Association, 1997) chapter
21-“Marketing”
[12]
eg. In Australia see, National Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory Council,
(NADRAC) The Development of Standards for ADR (Canberra:Commonwealth of
Australia,
2000).
[13] eg The
growing number of dispute resolution centers at Universities. See Australian Law
Reform Commission, Managing Justice: A review of the federal civil justice
system, (Report no. 89, 2000), ch 2,”Education ,training and
accountability”.For example, Bond University in Queensland in Australia
offers 19 postgraduate
subjects in a conflict management program in the schools
of law, business and psychology. Analogous programs are offered in several
universities in the USA, including Pepperdine, Ohio State, Southern Methodist
University, and Harvard, to name a few. Where dispute
resolution courses become
fashionable and nominal additions to already overcrowded curricula, there is the
predictable risk that
scholarship and teaching will be shallow---how to preserve
standards once
again!
-
[14]
For example, in Australia, practising as a family mediator was legislatively and
prematurely prohibited in 1996 unless certain minimum
training, supervision and
procedural steps are followed. See J. H. Wade “Family Mediation-A
Premature Monopoly in Australia”
(1997) 11 Aust. Journal of Family
Law 286. Predictably, these prohibitions will be modified by legislative
amendments proposed in
2001.
[15] See D.
Schon, The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action (
Basic Books, 1983).See also Deutsch and Coleman, ante note 2; and the work of
Christopher Honeyman in the USA which encourages
theory and practice to inform
each other, www.convenor.com
AustLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/ALRS/2001/8.html