A question to those of you out there who have published extensive training materials online as well as published paper versions. First of all, we THANK you –James Melamed, Conflict Resolution Network (Australia), Beyond Intractability, Madaripur Legal Aid (Bangladesh) — and many others.
Do you find that the online availability cuts into your printed material sales? Does it increase requests for training and advising? We’d appreciate hearing other organizations’ experiences.
Excuse the interlude while I’ve been in Greece. My internet connection to the blog is blocked by the place I’m working….
Came across a particularly felicitous post on mediate.com a few days ago: Michael Jacobs on Finding Common Ground. Felicitous because his ideas are thought-provoking AND he presents them eloquently (what is it in England’s water that makes so may Brits excellent writers?).
It’s true that looking for mutual interests can often end you up with smushy generalized statements “of course you both love little Suzy and want the best for her”, when the combattants disputants are acutely aware of and furious about their differences.
Not only is Jacobs right that exploring differences brings the conversation down to the ground of specifics, from a negotiation perspective, identifying differences is useful also. When parties have somewhat different needs and resources there’s more room for trading off or sharing. It’s easier to assign workshifts when one person prefers weekends and the other week nights. It’s easier to work as a team when each member has their own expertise.
The reason we look for “common ground” is mostly because we know that if you like or empathize with someone, you’re more disposed to accommodate them. No wonder disputing parties resist any suggestions that they are simliar to the other side.
Anthropologists know that “differences” are what help people define and protect their sense of identity–as individuals and as members of groups. WE aren’t like THEM! Group Q will focus inordinately and gleefully on the differences and grievances between them and Group X (which to an outsider looks a LOT like Group Q, hence the need to reinforce those differences).
Don’t know if any of these thoughts will make it into the Handbook but it’s interesting to think about. Maybe in the discussion of interests and mutual goals and laying out options.
Most of what I’ve posted so far has to do with words. Each word we choose will channel the mediator-reader’s attention and understanding in a particular direction. This is good, we want the words to do that.
The more you know, the harder it is to pick the “best” word — because each word has its own cluster of associations and meanings, and those never map exactly onto real life experience.
Why sweat it? Well, writing is really the process of THINKING. (That’s why writing is hard work.) This rewrite is a chance to RETHINK. Where are the words we’ve been using to structure a mediator’s attention and thought, what mood do they create, what associations do they imply?
Fortunately, writing is also a process of making decisions — hundreds of decisions small and large. So write me your opinions soon, before I bite the bullet and set these choices into print!
The “about” page was posted today, if you’d like to know more about the Handbook and its authors.
Why is the site so GREEN? someone asked… Maybe because the view out my office window, as I work to put the site together, has been as luscious green as I can remember, thanks to weeks of rain here in Philadelphia.
It’s also because the 3rd edition is an unusual color: celery green. 13 years ago, when we received a mock-up of the cover just before the initial print run, it was a pale salmon PINK! I had visions of it being shelved with the toddler parenting books and chick lit. Fortunately we were able to convince them to switch and they picked this intriguing shade of green.
The last reason is because — like a book cover — it’s useful and fun to create a webpage and blog which look distinctly different from “the usual” without being fancy. Color can do that.
