Mediation is an intercession by a third party, unrelated to any of the other parties, when communications over an issue or issues has broken down. A professional mediator has received significant training and has experience in acting in this capacity, often as a facilitator, taking highly emotional and reducing the emotions so parties can focus on the issues rather than each other. Since trust has most likely been broken because during the interactions between the parties in a dispute they need an intercessor who can work within that broken trust or restore trust. Looking at some of the positive aspects of mediation makes it more likely people in dispute will turn to a mediator.

First and foremost in many people’s mind is in restoring a line of communication since most likely it has either broken down or is not productive. A mediator is a good listener, empathetic, and amongst other things a good problem solver. Through a mediators communications kills parties listening abilities are usually enhanced. Often they learn something new, gain knowledge of their disputants perspective, and can hear what they themselves are saying when a mediator reframes or reflects what a party says. Recently there’s been a lot of talk about connecting dots well when a mediator gives the parties a “common” problem statement, at times, light bulbs go off. When a mediator reduces a dispute to areas of common ground, often, parties, start seeing some light where there was darkness.

A mediation seeks to and often turns people from focusing on the past towards looking at the present and turning their attention to the future. Sometimes the past is covered with an understanding, an acknowledgment, a realization of hurt to the other party, and apology. The present is a realization of where parties stand in the now, what their needs are, and turns their attention to the future. Seeing resolution in present into the future is often enough for parties to move towards resolution.

A mediation is an exercise of choice and maintain choice. If parties decide to voluntarily mediate they mutually agree on a mediator and if they have done a good job of interviewing and mutually selecting a mediator that’s a pretty good indication they agree to communicate, put trust into a mediator, and work with each other in some kind of problem solving mode. During mediation they have choice on what they communicate, how they respond, and on their negotiation strategy. They have choice on agreeing on what is common ground, on voicing their needs, on expressing emotion, venting, on confidentiality of the proceedings, what a mediator can and cannot disclose when they are in separate sessions to the other side. Finally they have choice on what they agree to and what goes into an agreement leading to resolution. Resolution can be partial, it can be subject to legal review, it can be in plain language or as highly technical as they agree. Agreement has to be mutual.

And, it can save money and time. That’s not to say there shouldn’t be preparation. In some case preparation can require a lot of work. Lawyers do not have to be utilized for every mediation. Although lawyers can do a lot for preparation and if they are skilled in mediation they can be extremely helpful. If however, they are h --- bent on litigation, winner take all, their utility diminishes. Fortunately more and more attorneys are becoming skilled in mediation or mediating themselves.

Mediation can be fun. If you enjoy negotiating it’s a great venue.