TCM's How to section

This is an interesting dilemma for many mediators that I train and work with. For many of them, the substantive blocks/barriers that the parties present stop the mediation before it has even started - not wanting to sit in the same room as the other party is one of the biggest blocks that a mediator can face.

I have a saying 'for every 1 reason that I have why a party should go to mediation, the party has 1,567 reasons why they shouldn't'

Therein lies the problem

There is always the risk that the mediator will spend as much time as possible arguing the merits of mediation with a reticent party than really understanding the psychological and emotional factors which are giving rise to the reticence. We know that these blocks include a fear of loss, a fear of harm and a fear of the unknown.

Let me illustrate

Party - I don't want to mediate - nothing has worked before and nothing will change

Mediator - mediation brings lasting change and is more effective than litigation. My role is to help you reach a lasting resolution and in 80% of cases, mediation works.

This response would be unhelpful because it centers on the barrier and it is argumentative. It is likely to reinforce the negative perception of mediation by the party and they are unlikely to engage

Another, perhaps more effective, approach might be

Mediator - I understand that you want the situation to change - what do you need to be different in your relationship in the future?

This response will then open the dialogue up - it demonstrates empathy and the party can then respond with the typical structure of the narrative:

Needs, goals, opinions, perceptions, hopes, fears...and so on 

Based on the response from the party, the mediator may wish to explore how mediation could achieve their goals or needs and which alternatives may be open to them if they don’t engage in mediation.

The mediator can then work with the different levels of the narrative, demonstrating empathy at all stages. (Slowly) the reticent party develops trust and a rapport with the mediator.

The mediator never promises anything and they never argue the case for mediation: they listen, they ask questions, they empathise and they help the parties to reframe their own dogmatic/skeptical/polarised/negative language.

One final point - I love working with skeptical and reticent parties. In my experience, when they engage, they really engage. I also find that the outcomes to mediation always seem to me to be more sustainable and more real.

I hope that this helps, David