Blog

Neutrality and perhaps as important the perception of neutrality is one of the most precious assets a mediator brings to a mediation.  In facilitative and evaluative mediation, the two predominant models used in civil case mediation, mediators work hard to maintain their ability to engage the parties from a position of neutrality.   This tension is never higher than when we use evaluative skills as a neutral.   To the extent we evaluate the claims — either voluntarily or at the request of a party — the perception of neutrality can evaporate quickly.  Once a neutral expresses an opinion or evaluation, the parties may perceive that the mediator is defending that opinion instead of serving from a position of neutrality.  Facilitative mediation training spends a great deal of time dealing with this issue. Narrative mediation theory, which I have been exploring here, posits that actual neutrality is impossible because we are

As briefly described in a previous post, I have been studying a mediation model called narrative mediation and implementing some of its techniques in my practice.  Narrative mediation techniques are focused on improving the relational aspects of conflict — that is improving the relationship of the parties.  This is why narrative mediation has a strong foothold in family mediation and community mediation in some places and why it is not a predominant model in civil litigation. However, after a year or two of studying this model and using it in my civil litigation practice, I believe it is a mistake to ignore what we can learn from it simply because the model is focused on a different (broader) goal than just resolving the dispute. Mediators and advocates alike can gain insights and sometimes a pathway to settlement that can be missed in a more traditional problem-solving model.  As a way

For the past 18 months or so, I have been studying and trying to implement in my mediation practice, techniques from a “discipline” called Narrative Mediation. Narrative Mediation is not new even though it is relatively new to me. John Winslade and Gerald Monk published “Narrative Mediation: A New Approach to Conflict Resolution” in 2000. Winslade and Monk’s work in turn grew out of narrative family therapy concepts in use in Australia since the mid-1980s. At the risk of over-simplifying, the techniques championed by Winslade, Monk, and others are based upon the idea that people understand facts within the context of a story or narrative. In a conflict, the narratives lead to differing understandings of those “objective” facts. Those narratives are based upon one’s point of view such that the facts are rarely completely objective. In other words, we all see facts through an interpretive lens.  A person’s point of