Somewhere in my browsing wanderings, I came across the idea that

A mediator’s job is providing punctuation.

A metaphor that makes sense, since punctuation gives structure and clarity to a flow of words.
Which got me thinking about

!@#$ [%^&*():;<&gt] ;,.?’”~ 

There’s probably no place for it in the Handbook, so I post it here for your amusement.
 

Initial capital — signals the start of a new topic.

. A period says the parties have had their say and it’s time to move to the next thing.

, , ,  Commas when a pause is in order, or the mediator is separating out categories

— Dashes for asides and reassurances.

[Brackets for reminders, for stray ideas]

(Parentheses for extra clarification and for examples.)

;; Semi-colons to separate out each piece when conversation becomes too confusing.

‘s  ‘s  s’   Apostrophes to make sure everyone knows whose responsibility or role something is.

Hy-phens for hold-ing group me-mo-ry be-tween meet-ings.

! for some verve and excitement

* for places where the parties still need to define, to fill in the fine print

+ – for evaluating ideas

“Quotations to make sure each person’s speech and ideas are recognized”

? for raising lots of them.

Because, despite the definitive <.> period, the ellipsis reminds us we can never know anything for sure … either what happened before or what will happen next….

 

We’ve been experimenting with sketching parts of our mediation process. Here’s what we think is happening in the Exchange, during the first part of the mediation when people are exploring the situation. The green boxes are what the mediator is aiming for, what needs to happen for the parties to reach emotional resolution or start effective problem-solving.

All those arrows! The Exchange is an interactive mediation phase, overflowing with feelings and information.

So this next sketch details the right hand side of the Exchange flow sketch above. It’s still not quite right, and we’re chewing over the definition of an interest, and also how to show the repeated questions and reflections that lead to an “interpretation & emotion free” way of describing behaviors and interests. Of course there IS no such thing as an interpretation free statement. Nor are we dismissing the importance of people talking about their emotions and interpretations. What we’re trying to get at is a tactful way for the mediators to talk about people’s problems and hopes. Stripping out interpretations:

1. provides specific information that lends itself to practical solutions. (i.e. “George stacks papers and reports on the floor by his desk and I have trouble finding things there”, versus “George’s work area is a disgusting, distracting mess.”
   
2. allows each participant to say “yes, that’s a problem I want to work on” rather than “that’s HIS point of view!”
   
3. keeps the mediator impartial towards all sides, and neutral about the veracity or significance of each party’s views.
   

We’ll post our next version soon. Meanwhile, we’d appreciate your thoughts.

A flood of complaints, worries, demands, long stories, accusations, and explanations is pouring out. Where is a mediator to start?

Here’s a new guideline we’re using to help mediators facilitate the “Exchange” phase. It elicits the information participants will need for problem-solving, and also helps people have a deeper conversation that is less accusatory and more informative.

Complaints, accusations, blame, assertions, namecalling, “mind-reading” the other side…

Behavior examples:
Can you give us an example?
What happened?
Specifically what does she do that makes you say that?

Impact:
How does that affect you?
How did that change the situation?

Worries

Examples: What are you afraid they might do or say?
What happened before that makes you think they might do X?

Impact:
How would that potentially affect you?
How might that change the situation?

Then check out the assumptions behind their worry.

Positives

(Bring these up if the participants don’t.)

Example:
What has worked well in the past?
What aspects of the current situation would you like to see continue?
Impact: How did that help the situation?
What benefits does that bring?

Demands

Also positions, hopes, requests—any statement about what they want the future to look like.
Look for what information about their interests their demands/hopes reveal (rather than treating it as a proposal that’s on the table):

Examples: Skip asking for specifics–vivid descriptions of the future can solidify their positions. Request those descriptions during the “Options” phase of problem-solving. Instead ask about the past/present:
What problem are you trying to fix?
What happened before that you are trying to prevent from happening again?

Impact:
How would this proposed solution make your life (or work) better?

As of June 2010, the 3rd edition of the Mediator’s Handbook has sold more than 50,000 copies!!!