Arbitration & Mediation

Facilitative? Transformative? Evaluative? Whatever gets the case settled?

By Christopher Annunziata

Geoff Sharp and Vickie Pynchon raise some interesting points in their posts today. Geoff asks, “Can settlement orientated mediators like me cherry pick from transformative process?” Vickie suggests that it is more complicated than simply using the right mediation “process.”

I’ll be frank, I know little about “transformative” mediation, and I bet few of you do as well.  According to one site linked by Geoff, transformative differs from the ?other? type of mediation-problem-solving. The site explains:

The goal of problem solving mediation is generating a mutually acceptable settlement of the immediate dispute. Problem solving mediators are often highly directive in their attempts to reach this goal–they control not only the process, but also the substance of the discussion, focusing on areas of consensus and “resolvable” issues, while avoiding areas of disagreement where consensus is less likely.
* * *

The transformative approach to mediation does not seek resolution of the immediate problem, but rather, seeks the empowerment and mutual recognition of the parties involved. Empowerment, according to Bush and Folger, means enabling the parties to define their own issues and to seek solutions on their own. Recognition means enabling the parties to see and understand the other person’s point of view–to understand how they define the problem and why they seek the solution that they do. (Seeing and understanding, it should be noted, do not require agreeing with those views.) Often, empowerment and recognition pave the way for a mutually agreeable settlement, but that is only a secondary effect. The primary goal of transformative mediation is to foster the parties’ empowerment and recognition, thereby enabling them to approach their current problem, as well as later problems, with a stronger, yet more open view.

My clients do not hire me (or if I may generalize) any other mediator in this market to “foster empowerment and recognition, thereby enabling them to approach their current problem, as well as later problems, with a stronger, yet more open view.” Mediators are hired to help parties reach a resolution.

That does not mean, however, that the techniques and theories of transformative mediation cannot be useful. Again, I am learning on the fly here, but what I have read so far about transformative technique does not seem revolutionary. A little “touchy-feely” maybe, but clearly not as mutually exclusive as the “founders” would like you to believe.

What I find somewhat amusing is the fact that a field (mediation in general) that promotes self-determination, communication, openness and collaboration problem solving can be so fragmented and territorial. I, for one, will not reject a useful technique becuase it does not promote some ideological goal. Mostly because I have no ideological goal. I’m there to help the parties and if that means they want to “transform” their relationship, more power to them.

Full post as published by CKA Mediation and Arbitration Services Blog on October 01, 2008 (boomark / email).