Fundamentals of Mediation

Politics of Cooperation
This workshop will focus on moving from "position to interest" to
help persons in conflict reach that elusive win/win.

Gary Direnfeld, MSW, RSW
www.yoursocialworker.com

Agenda – Oh yes, there is always an agenda…
 Who’s who?
 What are we really talking about?
 What’s involved?
 How do we do it?
 What’s it like?
 What did we learn?

Goal: This workshop will improve participants mediation
skills by developing their ability to move clients from their
respective positions to common interests.


What we are really talking about is
mediation…

A process for achieving resolution between parties
subject to a dispute with the aid of an
impartial/neutral third party, where the third party
has no authority to impose a resolution and where
the parties subject to the dispute accept the
resolution voluntarily.


Types of Mediation

Transformative
Evaluative
Facilitative/Interest Based


Transformative
Empowerment and mutual recognition over
resolution
Settlement is less the goal than the parties
recognizing one and other’s needs and
issues.
Theoretically or paradoxically, settlement
may thus occur when not the focus.
(Sounds Rogerian in design)


Evaluative

Respective positions are heard and
assessed by mediator who then advises on
likely outcomes with the view of reaching
a settlement.


Facilitative/Interest Based

Seeks a mutually acceptable outcome
May provide advice
Active listening important
Self-determination important
Meeting mutual interests over exclusive
positions is key


Safety First


Domestic Violence

Can a party who is scared or intimidated or
threatened negotiate or be said to enjoy self-
determination?
Screening for domestic violence and power
imbalances…


Setting Ground Rules


Ground Rules:
You are in charge of your life.
I am in charge of the mediation process!

 Role of the mediator
 Reasonable/respectable tone.
 Appropriate language
 Appropriate behaviour
 Stop when asked
 Breaks
 Caucus
 Refreshments


Mediator’s Role
 Helping parties communicate better by detoxifying their language
with each other
 Assisting parties to identify separate and mutual interests
 Helping parties investigate what is really important behind a
particular demand or position
 Probing for specific information that might help explain or
otherwise analyze a demand
 Help parties determine what will be gained by reaching an
agreement
 Keeps the process moving and manages impasses


Principles

Focuses on issues; not personalities
Focuses on interests; not positions
Creates options to satisfy both mutual and
separate interests
Evaluates options according to standards; not
power


Assumptions
Communication enhances relationships
All parties receive benefits
Each party should help the other
Open discussion expands interests and options
Standards replace power
Anger / frustration / anxiety is defused


Steps

1. Identify the issue
2. Discuss all interests
3. Generate options
4. Select standards to evaluate options
5. Evaluate options using standards
6. Develop solution and capture in writing


Managing Impasse or How To
Motivate Movement
 Breaks
 Caucus
 Obtain more information
 Slow the process down
 Consultation (bring in the tribal elder)
 What if?


What the #*&@!

BATNA
◦ Best alternative to a negotiated agreement
WATNA
◦ Worst alternative to a negotiated alternative
MLANTA
◦ Most likely alternative to a negotiated alternative


Position vs. Interest
So what’s the difference?

There was once only one orange left in a
kitchen and two prominent chefs were
fighting over it.

"I need that orange !"
"Yes, but I need that orange as well !"



Time was running out and they both needed an
orange to finish their particular recipes for the
President's dinner. They decided on a
compromise: they grabbed one of the large
kitchen knives that was lying around, split the
orange in half, and each went to his corner to
finish preparing his meal.



One chef squeezed the juice from the orange
and poured it into the special sauce he was
making. It wasn't quite enough, but it would
have to do. The other grated the peel and
stirred the scrapings into the batter for his
famous cake. He too didn't have as much as he
would have liked, but given the situation, what
else could he have done ?



The better solution may seem obvious to you
now: both chefs would have been better off if
they had peeled the orange and had simply
taken the part they needed. Instead, the chefs
had focused on each other's position (the what)
and not on each other's interest (the why).

http://web.mit.edu/negotiation/www/NBivsp.html


Compromise vs. Prioritize:
What’s the difference in negotiations?

Compromise Prioritize
◦ Lose to win ◦ Play to what’s important
◦ Give something up ◦ Not giving anything up
◦ Feel like you’ve lost ◦ Feel accomplished
something


Role Play


Lessons Learned?


Agenda – Oh yes, there is always an agenda…
 Who’s who?
 What are we really talking about?
 What’s involved?
 How do we do it?
 What’s it like?
 How did it work?
 What did you learn?

Goal: This workshop will improve participants mediation
skills by developing their ability to move clients from their
respective positions to common interests.


Fundamentals of Mediation

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Semelhante a Fundamentals of Mediation

Semelhante a Fundamentals of Mediation (20)

Mais de Gary Direnfeld

Mais de Gary Direnfeld (6)

Último

Último (14)

Fundamentals of Mediation

Notas do Editor