Felicity Steadman

I was recently asked to describe my style as a mediator. I found myself reading up about what Riskin has to say about mediator style and wondering whether I am facilitative or evaluative, broadly or narrowly??

I can confidently say that I am facilitative, but whether I am broadly or narrowly facilitative will depend on the circumstances of the case.  

I aim to assist parties define, understand and resolve the problems that they wish to address by focusing on underlying interests rather than legal positions and issues. I encourage parties to explore the personal interests and perceptions in their dispute, not just the commercial and legal dimensions. I will generally not express a view on the strengths or weaknesses of a party’s case, or give a view on the options for settlement; rather I will encourage the representatives to do this. I find it helpful to have lawyers and other representatives present in mediation.

 I like to work with parties in joint session for as long as possible because I find that this creates an opportunity for parties to hear directly from one another about what is important to them. In my experience mediators can achieve a lot through careful, flexible management of process, so I take a great deal of care when setting up mediations and talking to parties before the mediation day; I work flexibly on the day; and I always follow up with parties after mediations to hear how things are working for them.

Feedback that I have had from parties indicates that they feel supported by me through the process. My neutrality and impartiality has never been questioned. Parties comment that I establish good rapport with them and that they feel they can be open, show emotions and reveal fears and concerns. I belive that I am able to do this in mediations where I am working with a more narrowly facilitative style , the typical employment and commercial mediation, as well as in mediations where I work with a broader definition of the problem, the typical workplace or interpersonal type mediation.

Feedback from a party following  a recent mediation prompts me to write this. He said:

“Thank you for the follow-up. I think a lot of issues were discussed at the meeting, which was helpful, and a lot of comments were made which were a surprise to me I must say. Things have settled down and hopefully it will continue.  I believe that our meeting was helpful and I thought that you were an excellent mediator.”

Besides the nice pat on the back to me as mediator, I was struck by the party’s observation that he had been surprised by many of the comments made. In this mediation the parties’ relationship had deteriorated after one had been appointed as senior to the other. They needed to work together and the company valued both employees.  The conversation between the parties in the mediation was quite charged, by the end they had reached agreement on a range of things. More importantly they had spoken to one another and said things and heard things that they had not said or heard before.

So the point of mediation is not just settling a dispute, but it is also about engagement between the parties about their relationship and how they interact as employees and as human beings!

VIVA mediation!

I received this pleasing feedback recently after a workplace mediation:

“I wanted to thank you for your help in facilitating the meeting today and (for your) guidance along the way. Your intervention at crucial moments in the meeting helped us keep on track and maintain a clear focus on reaching an outcome that we are all happy with. Whilst these situations are never enjoyable, I certainly feel it was a productive meeting and allowed us to reach closure of the situation and move forwards.”

The comment about providing ‘guidance along the way’ reminded me of the role that mediators play as coaches to parties.

Throughout the mediation process the mediator has opportunities to coach the parties and their advisers, while strictly preserving neutrality and confidentiality. The purpose of the coaching is to enable all parties to participate as fully and effectively as possible. The mediator coaches directly, through sharing experience, making process suggestions and managing the parties’ expectations; and indirectly, through setting the tone, maintaining the energy and purpose and leading by example in terms of attitude and approach.

In this mediation I was aware that the parties found my guidance at the pre-mediation stage helpful. I talked to them individually about who should start and why, and about how to present their opening statements. We also discussed their concerns about confidentiality and I made process suggestions about how these concerns might be addressed.  By the joint meeting I had established good rapport and trust and was able to be both supportive and challenging in my questioning and feedback.