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.

Use of commonly used terms via example

Having provided definitions let’s share and test ourselves in our ability to recognize and use the terms through an example.

Consider a Dealer or Seller and Byer involved in a car purchase transaction. Seller wants to sell a car at a profit. For the buyer price is also important but in a different way. Buyers love a bargain. A contract is signed for purchase of the car. Buyer drives out with his new car. Seller banks the money. Their interactions have just begun. There are warranties, both stated and implied. While driving Buyer experiences what they think is unintended acceleration. Buyer goes back to the Seller who tries to reproduce the condition. Seller fails to find anything wrong. There is a difference of opinion, a debate. Seller gives buyer a free car-wash. The end result is Buyer takes the car back on the road. Over the next several weeks others in the household believe they too have experienced unintended acceleration. Buyer feels threatened. Buyer returns to the dealer. Seller runs a more thorough series of checks including a driving test, once again finds nothing, and tells the buyer that with all the publicity about unintended acceleration with another car company in the recent past its natural to be over-sensitized. Buyer feels they have no choice. On the way home buyer notices that severe break action is necessary to keep the car from hurtling forward while stopped at a red light. At the same time Buyer observes the rpm indicator is running at a very high level. This time the Buyer strongly opposes Dealers assurances they can find no identifiable problem. The buyer insists the dealer takes action to correct a problem while Seller, based on tests conducted to date, denies there is any problem.

Can you identify which of the terms we defined in the definitions blog can be applied to the above case and where? Here’s my partial list, from a Buyers perspective.

Interests - Buyer benefits by buying a car at what he believes is a reasonable price while Seller is satisfied with the profit.

A Relationship between Buyer and Seller is created in the sale of the car and the warranties which come with the purchse

Agreement is reached when Buyer and Seller have agreed on the sale of the price and a level of harmony is reached between the two.

Disagreement occurs when Buyer and Seller debate whether or not there is an unintended acceleration problem.

Avoiding conflict by the attempted by Seller when he provides Buyer with testing results and a free car wash.

Conflict occurs when Buyer returns the second time based on reports by household members they too experienced unintended acceleration. There’s now a threat to Buyer and his household members safety.

Dispute occurs when the Buyer strongly opposes Sellers test results. For Buyer the debate is over, the threat is now so real, he needs not only acknowledgment of the problem but also a “fix”.

Do you agree with the above? Do you have other examples of how the terms we listed in the definitions blog to add?

What’s the point of defining commonly used terms and the above example?

We’ll address those questions and more in a subsequent blog entry.

Definitions - in context of this blog

We’ll start and continue this blog by forming its foundation around definitions in the context of the subject matter. The terms will be commonly used in the blogs which follow. This is my first attempt at creating a tailored list. We will periodically refine, expand, and update this list. As you’ll see over time, some of the terms can themselves generate blogs, examples, and discussion to explain their meaning in the field of conflict resolution.

Dispute is an issue within a relationship which has grown to the point a persons need creates strong opposition from other people in a relationship.

Conflict is an issue which creates a perception of a threat to an interest.

Disagreement creates a difference of opinion in a relationship.

Agreement creates mutual harmony for people in a relationship.

Collaboration is a process of working together.

Interest is something that provides us with a benefit.

Issue is a point in a relationship impacting an interest.

Need is a want or requirement lacking in a relationship created by a conflict over an issue between people.

Relationship is a state created by and between people in which there are mutual dealings which can be in a business with business, business with client or customer, or interpersonal context.

Avoid is what people do to keep away from conflict.

Prevent is what people do to keep conflict from happening.

Resolve is an agreement in which people mutually conclude needs have been met, an issue closed, and in an acceptable way to them, an interest satisfied.

Impasse is a term we stay away from other than to say it is, a state in a relationship in dispute in which the people involved have not yet quite figured out how to resolve their issues.

What are we going to discuss in this blog

We know that in any human endeavor involving more than one person there are going to be disagreements. It is in our nature. We have differing perspectives, interests, issues, and needs. We're imperfect communicators. We have different personalities. We all have emotions. We're individually unique. The challenge is to deal with disagreements so they don't become conflicts and conflicts into disputes. In this blog we will inform, educate, and promote processes and techniques by which we can prevent, avoid, and resolve conflict peacefully, giving relationships a chance to survive, (and as stated by one of my colleagues) turn conflict attitudes and behaviors into resolution attitudes and behaviors. We'll try to be conservative on the number of words and use many examples to make our points. My research into this area will be internet based unless otherwise indicated. .

You'll hear an awful lot about mediation, quite a bit about facilitation, and some about arbitration but very little about litigation. Although we acknowledge advocacy for a cause and a win lose result from litigation we believe that in many cases litgation is a last resort.

Join us in this journey by subscribing to this blog and submitting feedback, questions, and comments.

Aloha to my blog site

Aloha:

I am so happy you stopped by to visit my new blog site.

This site is dedicated to preventing, avoiding, resolving conflict and moving away from a conflict to a resolution culture!

I hope you will make this site one of your favorites.

I have two other blogs wherein I discuss various issues in the conflict resolution arena:

http://email.mediate.com/blogs/leoblog/

http://email.mediate.com/blogs/mediatewithkh/ (includes "legacy" entries)

What I do on this site is to more extensively cover a particular subject than I do on my weekly or so entries in the other blogs.

I'm open to "chats" on this web site even if it isn't a real "chat room". Send me your feedback!

Have a conflict free day!