The Importance of Mediation in Conflict Resolution

Questions:

1. Choose to focus on one of the methods (conflict management, negotiation, mediation or arbitration). Critically review a selection of the literature on your chosen topic.

2. This part asks you construct a model to guide you in making decisions when confronting and managing situations that involve disagreement and/or disputes.
 

Mediation has been widely used as a method of conflict resolution for over decades. Mediation is a case that is put to use in the cases where the conflicting parties have sort intervention but has failed. Mediators in practice could display the use of two or more mediation models. In a summary in one of his works, he pointed out that the main objectives of settlement as a model of mediation is to influence and motivate an rising bargaining attracted to a mutual point between the positions of the two teams where the mediator will be working towards adjusting the stands of the parties off their stand to a compromise. The first step in the process is the identification of the ethical issues that surrounds decision making because solving a moral problem will need one to acknowledge that it is actually existing. After identifying the ethical problem, the professionals involved in the decision making process are to find a driving force from the formulated opinions identified in moral sensitivity. After coming to a conclusion about the course of action, the decision maker must be focused on the choices they have to make. For the plan of action to be executed, there must be a character. The moral agents are expected to overcome the opposition and restrict destructions in the process as they will also be developing tactics and strategies while coping with the associated fatigue. 

Mediation has been widely used as a method of conflict resolution for over decades. Mediation is a case that is put to use in the cases where the conflicting parties have sort intervention but has failed. The mediation process has a third party who acts as the referee to the conflicting groups assisting them in finding the best solution that will be of satisfaction to their problems. It is a process that should be attended to with sufficient knowledge of the issues in the dispute and the authority to decide the settlement after the mediation process. Mediation is a flexible process that can be tailored to the circumstances and assist in concluding negotiations. In the journey through my course, i conducted a research activity with my colleagues to identify the best way mediation could be used in making decisions.

Out project activity went through previously done work that found that that the initial steps that one might follow when organizing for a national or international mediation is the evaluation of the current thinking around the mediation models. I took the liberty to define mediation and conquer with these researches that evaluating the situation is quite significant. In the process, I as well noted that Past research had distinguished between the mediation designs these being “settlement, facilitative, therapeutic and evaluative” negation models. In the activity, we found that mediators in practice could display the use of two or more mediation models. Towards the end of the activity, I noted that the main objectives of settlement as a model is to encourage and motivate a mutual stand between the two victims where the professional will be working towards adjusting the stands of the parties to a compromise (Bingham, 2004).

Different Mediation Models

Further, we discovered that the facilitative model is a case where the mediators are advised to put more focus on the assisting the conflicting parties to define and bring forth third interests with the faith that it would define a common ground to the parties. In evaluative mediation, the mediator attempts to offer a solution to the disputing parties following an evaluation of their negotiating stands according to the legal requirements falling within the anticipated results by the courts. Evaluative mediation is a case that is mostly applicable in the cases where the parties are conflicting over a single entity that occasionally appears to be money. The fourth model, therapeutic, is being known for the focus on the instances where the future relationships of the disputing persons or parties are to be improved (Batson & Thompson, 2001).

We then came to a definition that facilitative mediation is a procedure that is often questioned and practiced among the mediation community.  Its essence is seen to be on the focus of the problem where the mediators are seen encouraging and motivating parties to explore the data as they experience the related problem (Eisenberg, 2000). However, we noticed that the approach is pragmatic and is seen to focus only on the interests and needs expressed by the influential work. The critics of the approach are found arguing that in the process of following the leads of facilitative model, the mediators mainly focus on the information relating to the problem instead of exploring on the border issues that relates to the identities and relationships of the parties. The goal for the technique applied is to come up with a settlement that will be mutually accepted in settling the dispute. According to the research project we conducted, the problem-solving mediation process appears to be a highly directive in the process of trying to reach the goal. It came that the process is controled and the substance of the discussion where they show a lot of focus on the consensus and the resolvable issue. In the process of doing this, the we noted that we will be avoiding the conflicting areas where the consensus is minimal. They also note that although the decisions are left to the disputants, the mediators are significantly useful in the development of the terms of settlement and acquiring the agreements of the parties (Thompson & Chen, 2002).

It is also seen that the transformative approach to the mediation process does not rely on the immediate problem resolution but they seek an empowerment as well as a mutual recognition from the parties conflicting. According to researchers, empowerment is the process of allowing the parties to define their issues and to seek solution to their issues. For recognition, they believe that it stands for allowing the parties an opportunity to have a look and understand their points of view regarding the case at hand and also to have an understanding on the definition of the problem and the need to seek solution for them (Mayer, 2004). It is found that empowerment and recognition are factors that pave way for a mutually agreeable problem-solving that come without a secondary effect. The main goals that are associated with the transformative mediation are believed to be, fostering the empowerment and recognition of the parties allowing the parties a chance to define the appropriate approach to their problems current and later. According to literature, the approach makes it easier for parties to avoid the issue of the defectiveness of the mediators that is often witnessed in the process of problem-solving mediation. According to winslade and monk 2000, a narrative approach is often offered during the re-examination of the traditional approaches that are offered to conflict resolution through mediation where the stories told about the conflicts to be solved are told are told (Jossey-Bass NADRAC, 2001). According to the author, there are theories that challenge the natural assumptions arguing that the needs of the people are not necessarily from their desires. Rather, people are seen to come up with conflict from the narrative that describe the turn of events. In the process of the mediation, there’s a safe place that is set for the conflicting parties where they are to tell their sides of their stories and their relationship to the conflict (O’Fallon, & Butterfield, 2005). They then leave the rest to the mediator who is to work on the issue in attempts to uncover the assumptions that the parties have brought to the table. Immediately the biases and the assumptions in the case have been uncovered, there are alternative approaches that are considered. Then, new stories and theories about the conflict are created with intentions that the disputing parties would be moved from their intractable situations to the newly formed stories based on their understanding, their respect and collaborations (Paleker, 2003).

Settlement Model Objectives

There have as well been a significant debate trending internationally since the release of the publications; “the promise of mediation” and “narrative mediation” by Bush and Folger (1994) and Winslade and Monk (2000) respectively. These have been the models that have been positions as alternatives to the interest-based processes that have for a long time been dominating the mediation practices. Picard and Melchin (2007) have been out pointing that the mediators [practicing insight mediation have views for different insights to the facts the conflicting parties believe in through the discovery of the things that the parties care about and how it threatens other parties. according to the transformative model, the probing of information about the problem forces the parties to remain locked into a dispute. As such, to gain a resolution, there must be a shift that is to be made from the issue. Contrary to this belief, the two authors found out that through the focus on the problem and through exploring on the concerns of the party about the issue, there could be a breakthrough to an deeper understanding of the relational issue to the problem. Cloke (2002) came out with another vision of mediation and the processes of resolving conflict. In his work, he seemed to aim at the evaluation of the essence of the process rather than the procedure setting out the challenge to the mediators questioning them about their assumptions to the issue of handling conflicts. He states that each and every conflict and resolution comes with a spiritual dimension and energy (Thoma, 2006).

We then declared that strategic mediation is an approach often used when the mediator is in a position where they have to attend to the underlying dysfunction that is being seen as a propelling factor to the conflict. He also notes that despite the fact that the model is illustrated in the divorce mediation, there are no enough documents to support it. There are many writings that are seen to reveal some evidence on the mediators who search for the underlying causes of conflict and attend to them (James, 2000).

In the process of trying to find the best way to coming to a conclusion regarding a certain case, there is a need for one to construct a model that will best guide in driving to the decision. The components that could be used in developing a better decision in solving a conflict are as discussed. In the discussed model of decision making, there is a need to involve a neutral party to assist in the process as they will have to study various aspects and attributes of the conflicting parties. There are many available models in the ethical decision making and action. In our case, we are to use a four component model by James Rest that was later branded the Rest’s model (Lipsky & Avgar, 2004).

The first step in the process is the identification of the ethical issues that surrounds decision making because solving a moral problem will need one to acknowledge that it is actually existing. It is believed that recognizing the problem will need to consider the way a person would be affected with our behavior. Then, there is need to identify the possible course of the action and determine the consequences of the possible potential strategy. Research has proved that empathy and perspective are skills that appear to be essential to moral action when it comes to decision making (Cloke, 2006). Understanding the reaction of others causes the decision maker to be more sensitive to the possible negative effects that the choices made can cause and can also help in predicting the resulting outcome (Alexander, 2002). There are factors that may prevent people from recognizing the ethical issues in the decision making process. one main factor is the reluctance to use the moral terminologies in describing the decision made because of wanting to avoid controversy. In the process, the professional used in arriving to the decision regarding the case would have to follow some aspects to reach a conclusion (Connelly, Helton-Fauth & Mumford, 2004). It is advisable that one becomes an active listener and role playing and also imagining other perspectives in the process. Also, they will have to step back from a case to allow them to determine whether they have any moral implications. Avoiding euphemism and refusing to execute misbehavior are as well other aspects that could guide moral sensitivity in a decision making process. One would be expected to keenly pay attention to personal emotions in cases when they are faced with ethical dilemmas (Keystone Conference Final Report, 2006).

Facilitative Model Objectives

After identifying the ethical problem, the professionals involved in the decision making process are to find a course of action from the generated opinions identified in moral sensitivity. In this case, they will be making judgment regarding the things that are believed to be right or wrong to be done in the situation. This is a component that has been found to generate more research than the other components in the rest model (Winslade and Monk, 2000). The investigating teams in the model have displayed a partial interest in the moral cognitive development, which is a process that people get to when developing personal reasoning abilities in most cases. It is argued that people progress through the series involved in the moral strategy the same way they attend to the physical ones. Each of the stages appears to be advanced than the previous step and people engage in complex reasoning in their process of progression and they as well become less-self-centered developing broader definitions of morality (Danesh, 2002). The identified levels of development are seen to be three;

Procurement thinking believed to be the most primitive one focusing on the consequences. It is as well-known too be a form of reasoning that is mostly found among children who are avoiding punishments by choosing to obey. Also, they might be choosing to follow the rules so that they can meet certain interests (Picard & Melchin, 2007).

Conventional thinkers who are seen to be the ones who choose to look for other people for guidance when making decisions. The stage three people are believed to be living up to the expectations of the people they respect and the value concern for others. The stage four individuals are seen to follow a broader perspective depending on the entire society for direction (Tillett, 2006).

Post conceptual or principled reasoning seen to be the advanced ethical reasoning where the stage five persons are guided by the utilitarian principles. These are the people who are concerned with the needs for the whole team and they are up to making sure that the rules and set laws are serving for the best of the group (Kressel, 2007).

After coming to a conclusion about the course of action, the decision maker must be focused on the choices they have to make. They are expected to recognize that the moral values are often seen to conflict with the other important values. According to psychologists, the acts of hypocrisy and self-assessment are seen to undermine the moral motivation of a person. In other instances, it is seen that people might want to do the right things but their integrity comes to be overpowered on discovering that they must pay a personal cost for their ethical actions. Other people do not intend to follow the ethical courses but engage in the moral hypocrisy (Alexander, 2009). For the decision makers, they would want to appear moral and avoid the cost of acting in a moral way. Practically, they believe that assignments should be distributed in a fair manner when they are assigning themselves desirable tasks and leaving the others less desirable ones. In the same context or moral focus, also believed to be motivation, rewards are said to be important aspect in the ethical follow-through. People are more likely to give their ethical values a high priority when they get rewarded through raises and promotions amongst other forms. However, the moral motivation is seen to drop when the unethical actions are found to be reinforced by the reward system. It is advised that for the professional decision maker to increase their motivation and that of their followers, they have to seek out and create and ethically rewarding system (Cloke, 2001).

Evaluative Model Objectives

For the plan of action to be executed, there must be a character. The moral agents are expected to overcome the opposition and restrict destructions in the process as they will also be developing tactics and strategies while coping with the associated fatigue. The latter explains the existence of the moderate correlation between the moral judgment and the moral behavior where in most cases, deciding does not lead to doing. It is believed that integrity encourages the leaders to be true to themselves and their choices (Hoffman, 2006). Humility is seen to force the leaders to address the challenges that might be a barrier for taking action. The personal traits of an individual are also believed to be a contributing factor to the moral action. The people possessing a strong will and self-confidence are the ones with high chances of being persistent. The people who are internally oriented have a control over their lives and they can easily determine their happenings. The externally oriented persons have a notion that their life events are beyond their control and are a product of fate or luck (Brown, 2002). 

Conclusion

Mediators in practice could display the use of two or more mediation models. In evaluative mediation, there are invites to offer a solution to the disputing parties following a realistic evaluation of their negotiating positions according to the legal requirements falling within the anticipated results by the courts. Therapeutic, is being known for the focus on the instances where the future relationships of the disputing persons or parties are to be improved. Problem-solving mediation process appears to be a highly directive in the process of trying to reach the goal. Transformative approach to the mediation process does not rely on the immediate problem resolution but they seek an empowerment as well as a mutual recognition from the parties conflicting. Empowerment is the process of allowing the parties to define their issues and to seek solution to their issues. The main goals that are associated with the transformative mediation are believed to be, fostering the empowerment and recognition of the parties allowing the parties a chance to define the appropriate approach to their problems current and later. It is advisable that one becomes an active listener and role playing and also imagining other perspectives in the process. Also, they will have to step back from a case to allow them to determine whether they have any moral implications.  

References

Alexander, N (2002). Mediation in the Modern Millennium. Conference Paper XVITH Congress of the International Academy of Comparative Law. The University of Queensland, Brisbane.

Alexander, N (2003). Global Trends in Mediation. Walters Kluwer Law and Business.

Bingham, L.B. (2004). Employment Dispute Resolution: The Case for Mediation. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, Vol 22, no 1-2

Brown, C.J. (2002) Facilitative Mediation: The Classic Approach Retains its Appeal Accessed on mediate.com

Cloke, K (2001). Mediating Dangerously: The Frontiers of Conflict Resolution. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.

Cloke, K (2006). The Crossroads of Conflict: A Journey into the Heart of Dispute Resolution, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass

Danesh H.B. and Danesh R. (2002). Consultative Conflict-Resolution Model: Beyond Alternative Dispute-Resolution.

Hoffman, D.A. (2006). The Future of ADR Practice: Three Hopes, Three Fears, and Three Predictions. Negotiation Journal, October, 467-473.

Kressel, K. (2007). The Strategic Style in Mediation. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, Vol.24, no.3, 251-283.

Lipsky, D.B. and Avgar, A.C. (2004). Commentary: Research on Employment Dispute Resolution: Toward a New Paradigm. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, vol.22, no 1-2, 175-189.