Over blueberry muffins, hot from Caroline’s oven…..

We’re wrestling with what to do if we replace our familiar terms (“exchange” “uninterrupted time” “interests” etc.) with ones we think are more accurate or more useful. Will the new purpose-centered names for the process stages confuse people who learned mediation with the earlier editions? In what ways might it be aggravating for trainers to make the switch? New names are here: Building Blocks.

My preference is to go with the new conception, and have some kind of reference in the text or sidebar that clues in folks who are used to the previous terms. The point of putting out a book (or training people, for that matter), is to help people mediate effectively. If we have better ideas about how to do this than what we previously taught….shouldn’t we present those ideas front and center?

OK, and I admit to an irrational bias: for years I’ve sponsored a contest to get rid of “uninterrupted time” as unspellable, unpronouncable, focused on what we DON’T want (interruptions). I remember when we invented the term “Exchange” and have been bemused to watch it spread through other mediation manuals. In the end, it doesn’t really help — it just says “warning, messy communication ahead”.

Let us know what you think.

So what to call the skill set that in the previous Handbook was CONTROLLING THE PROCESS? Subheads include skills and decisions such as: directing conversation, summarizing, restating, protecting, intervening, when to quit. Each of the following verbs contain a fistful of assumptions about what actually happens or “should” happen in a mediation.

Controlling the process — the mediators are in charge, they structure the conversation, decide what content and behavior are acceptable, prevent hostility from getting out of hand.

Directing the process — similar goals, with a gentler hand, and with the implicit or explicit permission of the parties.

Managing the process — the mediators structure and facilitate, while consulting and persuading the parties to participate effectively. Implies that the process is never complete or perfect, requiring attention and tweaking as discussions progress.

Overseeing the process — the mediators and the participants are collectively creating the process, with the mediators in the role of consultant, designer, advisor, facilitator, and/or teacher.

Facilitating the process — the mediator is charged with making the process easier, making it work. It leaves open the question of whether the participants or the mediators design the process and make process decisions along the way. [I'm tilting towards using this one]

Guiding the process — the mediator is piloting the process, but not necessarily actively facilitating it. They may be backstage advising or coaching.

Advising the process, process consultants — the participants are in charge, and ask the mediators to assist within a given set of criteria.

Thoughts appreciated.

Here are the mediation “building blocks” proposed for the main Mediation Process section. We renamed them to indicate what the purpose of each part is, rather than a description of what people do. (thus “listening to each party” rather than “uninterrupted time”, etc.) It’s more cumbersome when you want to refer to it as a unit (“During the Exchange” vs “During the ‘Understanding the Situation’ phase”) but probably more helpful to mediators in the long run as it reminds them of why the X or Y segment is valuable.

It seems that getting people TO a mediation session deserves to be a full-fledged phase of the mediation process. In the book it will be a short chapter before the chapter on “The Mediation Session”.

I’m looking for (your) suggestions for one or two word shorthand labels for each “block”.