Intro to the Field of mediation facilitation

The field in which I practice includes mediation and facilitation where I intercede on behalf of people who need a third party involved in reaching consensus and or resolution on an important issue involving business to business, business with client, or interpersonal relationship.

In my previous two blog entries I provided definitions (in context) of commonly used terms in our field of, avoiding, preventing, and resolving conflict followed by an example of a car purchase demonstrating where these terms are applicable.

This blog entry is meant to introduce what we do in our field. I also discuss some of the tools and skills I bring to the table.

Did our car dealership avoid or prevent conflict? They did not. We can ascribe a variety of reasons why not. My opinion is that the result we see – dispute – is avoidable and preventable and one of the key tools to attain this state is to know when to call for outside help. A third party and specific processes designed to provide objectivity and such tools as reality testing is a critical component of avoidance and prevention.

As a mediator or a facilitator I become a third party in a relationship.

Why would people in a relationship want to engage me as a third party?

Here are a few reasons why utilization of a third party and agreeing on a process in the formative stage of a relationship can be very advantageous:
· People entering into a relationship realize that in their endeavor there will be disagreements which can grow into conflict or dispute if debates grow into issues and issues generate needs which must be satisfied in order to regain harmony in their interactions.
· They see a third party and process using a third party being available as a benefit to their relationship. For example, they may plan for a time in their relationship when they need to call for outside third party help because communications are breaking down. However, they do want to maintain control in who will intercede, in selection of a process, and in decision making. They may want to forestall concerns that emotions will over-run their ability to focus on developing issues. They may want to guard against power imbalances, desire a level playing field, and some assurances about safety and confidentiality in what is discussed. They may have concerns about timeliness and want to know if the trigger is pulled there will be no delays in implementing their resolution process. They may be concerned about inconsistencies between when multiple people are involved in multiple transactions or dealings during a relationship. A third party focused on process can bring such consistency. And, they may have concerns about the potential adverse impact all of the above have on a critical relationship. Proactively resolving issues is as critical as any other factor in their relationship.
· Assisting in negotiations, mediation, or facilitation requires tools, skill sets and experience. It is really interesting that a lot of people claim they utilize mediation and facilitation skills every day. Their claims do not necessarily mean they do it well enough for a particular situation which arises in a relationship. Having a third party available gives them an option to turn to a professional in the field. In some cases utilizing a person within the relationship who is engaged in the dispute as a mediator or facilitator may be the worst thing they can do. In some cases engaging someone totally unfamiliar with the substance of an issue is the best person to tackle that issue. In other cases knowledge about a subject may be critical.

In our example case, a car dealership is relying on a salesperson to be all things to all people - a loyal employee, communications, spokesman roles and kind of a mediator or facilitator. We now know from experience that un-intended acceleration issues can be highly complex issues with potentially grave consequences for all who drive the car, the salesperson, dealership, and the car manufacturer. Disconnects and gaps in communications can often result when there isn’t a third party involved to listen and hear, dispassionately and with empathy, what each party has to say about an issue in a relationship.

Interests initially held can be crushed in a relationship gone bad and trumped by circumstances. In our example case we mentioned the Buyer and Sellers price interest. Seller wants a profit. Buyer wants a bargain. Harmony is created when they agree on a purchase price. However, as the Buyers claim of un-intended acceleration grows from debate or opinion, to a perception of a threat to his person, and finally strong opposition to the Sellers insistence there is no problem, Buyer sees safety as the priority interest. Sellers priorities in interest will start shifting from profit, to customer satisfaction to reputation, to concerns about potential product liability. Skilled third party intercessors have to be able to identify and deal with their clients interests.

Communications between Buyer and Seller may have begun with a sense of harmony or agreement, turned to debate, to growing mistrust, and finally into opposing views with, potentially, very different needs. A skilled third party has to be able to ascertain the differences and similarities between the parties perceptions and look for and find common ground.

Common ground is an interesting term in our field. Common ground forms a foundation of a relationship a sharing in interests. As disagreement grows into conflict and conflict into dispute, gaps and disconnects are formed in the relationship and a skilled third party has the ability to enable the parties in filling the gaps, close disconnects, and re-establish harmony. A key third party skill is an ability to listen to parties explain their problems in terms of interests, issues, and needs. One way to demonstrate this understanding is through the formulation of a common problem statement.

If Buyer and Seller in our car purchase example were to engage in a mediation a problem common problem statement might look like the following:

Buyer your issue is with the performance of the car – unintended acceleration and in order to resolve your issue you need a “fix”.

Seller your issue is that you have not been able to reproduce an instance of an unintended acceleration in Buyers vehicle and your need to actually see an actual instance of unintended acceleration to objectively confirm the problem through testing.

By using the problem statement I am not making a judgment. I am putting forth my understanding of Buyer’s and Seller’s perspectives on an issue impacting their respective interests and influencing their behavior toward each other.

Can you see the power of a common problem statement? It clearly shows the similarities and differences between Buyer and Seller. One difference is that Buyer perceives the problem is ever so real. Seller wants objective evidence from its own sources. A similarity may lie in a “fix”. But before I get further ahead of myself or you grow tired of reading this blog let me end this entry here.