mediatorinthemaking.com

This morning, doing one of my favorite things – listing to This American Life – I heard an interview with violence interrupter Tim White of CeaseFire. Tim is a former gang member who now fills an extremely compelling role in the world of conflict resolution.

With an “intimate knowledge of what motivates an urban youth to shoot,” violence interrupters are trained by violence prevention experts and then connected in to neighborhood networks in order to intervene before violence happens. Usually, this means stepping in when revenge violence is likely.

CeaseFire’s efforts have substantially decreased the rate of gun violence in a city suffering what has been deemed a public health epidemic.

As I explore the practice of mediation, I am exploring how it and related practices such as conflict resolution, conflict management, coaching and negotiation, are practiced professionally. Every now and then, I’ll share with you here brief profiles of the career paths I find intriguing, inspiring, or otherwise noteworthy.

Violence interrupters take a unique path into the world of professional conflict resolution, perhaps making their work all the more compelling to me. It is a true community empowerment model. Community members becoming leaders of conflict management within their own communities. Modeling the change they wish to see in their part of the world.

I’m so glad to know that this exists.

For a more in-depth treatment of the program, hear an interview with the director or visit the Executive Summary: Evaluation of CeaseFire-Chicago published by Northwestern University Institute for Policy Research.

I’ve been away from the blogosphere for a while. It’s great to be back! My days have been filled with lots of home projects, and at least a little bit of lounging by the neighbor’s pool … and a whole lot of work digesting all the I’ve learned through fall and spring trainings, and singular small claims experiences. Which brings me to today’s musings.

Many never get to experience the amazing wonder that is small claims.

As a mediator, I remind myself that I am seeing people at anything but their best. I silently assert that for the most part, these might be very sensible, caring, aware people. And that intractable disputes can have drastic effects on anyone.

“I’m going to have fun with this.”
I’ve been doing some reading about the story-telling phenomena. It seems that from our first step on the ladder of inference, we begin telling ourselves a story of what’s happening. Especially in stressful situations, we can become wholly focused on our story and lose our mindfulness of the moment. We perceive the other as what our narrative has drawn, and cease to objectively observe them or the events. By the time these people get to court, they have wrapped themselves tightly in a story which ends with their vindication. They are here for judgment day. And they are especially disappointed when their judgment day is takes a side route into the mediation room.

“I’m just here for the principle.”
Also wrapped tightly in their own story, the person here for the principle is expecting vindication. A judge will wrap a gavel, point down from on high with a bony finger at the evil doer who has wrought such terror within an innocent life, saying, “You have been very bad. Give this innocent angel here a hug. And five dollars.”

“Is this going to be like Judge Judy?”
This person is well versed in the caricatures of Judge Judy or perhaps the People’s Court, their plaintiffs and defendants. They’ve seen poorly behaved or ill prepared plaintiffs and defendants ripped to shreds by sassy judges. They’ve learned from seemingly effective character assassinations, usually goaded on by said sassy judges.

They might tell the mediator they only agreed to mediation in order to impress the judge. They might enter the mediation room with many documents to show that they will come across as the one who’s got it together. They will likely insert interesting and totally unrelated tidbits about the other parties’ former mates, friends, sleeping habits, and anything else that could possibly spark controversy.

It’s not surprising and not the parties’ fault. In addition to how prolonged conflict can impact even the most mindful person, the whole small claims process seems so disempowering from the beginning. The parties appear bewildered when they enter the courtroom which bears no signage and boasts no person to greet or instruct them, or even confirm they’re in the right room. They wait quietly for what must seem an interminable time until the clerk enters to call the list. A far cry from the sassy powerful t.v. mavens with their impressive robes.

And then rather than judgment day, they get me and my co-mediator in a closet with chairs! Look for a future post on the challenges of ‘selling’ the promise of mediation to such crestfallen – or hostile – small claims parties.

This is it! The day the world has been waiting for! (Well, at least a few people in different parts of the world might have wondered occasionally when this day might come.) I’ve decided to reveal myself. I’ve considered how best to do this, and it seems like the best thing to do is just go ahead and post my resume. It gives you a pretty good idea of the path that’s brought me here. Further details can be revealed as it makes sense in the context of this blog.

Thank you all for reading, and I’m pleased to meet you!

During my recent and very fabulous vacation to Iceland (I highly recommend it), I had the opportunity to witness quite an exchange on a plane. Many people tend to not be at their best when traveling.

As we boarded the plane for our late evening flight, two men became a bit entangled. One was standing in the aisle, taking longer than some might like to get situated (we’ll call him Man #1). The other, having fully lost his patience, barked.

Man #1 (who I know to be generally mild mannered) chose to respond to Man#2 with matched annoyance. They went round a couple more times — at least six rows away from each other — before both were finally settled in their seats, and thankfully quiet.

What was gained or lost in this moment of conflict? Here are my observations:

1. The stress level of a number of passengers was at least momentarily increased.
2. Man #2 became increasingly heated with each response from Man #1, and so certainly nothing was solved with any of Man #1’s responses.
3. Had Man #1 not responded, the moment of conflict would have ended before it began.
4. Both men just wanted to get into their seats. Neither achieved this any more quickly or enjoyably through their spates.
5. Man #1 realized that Man #2 and a bunch of other people wanted to get to their seats, but thought that with a number of other people also in the aisle ahead it would make no difference if he rushed. Bottom line? He didn’t mean to be in the way.

My pearls of wisdom on this one …

• By assuming the worst of each other, both turned a perfectly harmless event into a harmful one.
• Giving back just what you get might not get you anywhere good, when you don’t like what you get.
• You never know who you’re talking to. Man #1 and Man #2 turned out to be staying in the same hotel in Iceland, making for more than one unnecessary awkward moment.

The following is a selective listing of Boston area mediation, conflict resolution and negotiation trainings and events for April and May 2008.

Find additional training listings at Mediation Works, Inc. (basic training or advanced) and the Harvard Program on Negotiation.

________________________________________________
April 9, 2008 2pm to 4pm
ADR Professions Colliding:
Addressing the Tension Between Mediation and Collaborative Practice
from Massachusetts Council on Family Mediation, Inc.
Presenters: Lynda J. Robbins, Esq., and Karen J. Levitt, Esq.

Location: Arnold Room, Wellesley Free Library, 530 Washington Street, Wellesley, MA

________________________________________________
April 13 - 16, 2008
International Ombudsman Association Annual Conference
3rd Annual Conference of IOA: “Making a Difference-The Ombudsman Impact”
The Boston Park Plaza Hotel, Boston, MA

________________________________________________
April 16, 2008 8:30 - 10am
(Continental Breakfast at 8am)
Dispute Resolution Forum
from Harvard Law School and the Program on Negotiation
Speaker: Rikk Larsen, mediator, trainer, conflict coach, Managing Partner at Howell Larsen Associates, founding partner of Elder Decisions

Location: John Chipman Gray Room, 2nd Floor, Pound Hall

________________________________________________
April 17, 2008 2pm - 5:30pm
Assessing and Addressing Power Imbalances:
Abusive Relationships and the Collaborative Process
from Massachusetts Collaborative Law Council
Presenter: Professor Margaret Drew, University of Cincinnati College of Law

Location: The Walker Center, 171 Grove Street, Newton, MA

Attendance is limited, so register early at Massachusetts Collaborative Law Council
________________________________________________
April 28, 2008 9am - 4pm
Managing Conflict in the Workplace
from Cape Mediation
$150.00($125 by 3/28)

Location: Willy’s World Wellness & Conference Center in North Eastham

“Workplace conflict is inevitable … Learn a proven problem-solving model
and practical skills to help deal with conflict between staff, management, and customers.”

________________________________________________
May 2-9, 2008
CDSC Basic Mediation Training
from Community Dispute Settlement Center

Location: CDSC, 60 Gore Street, East Cambridge, MA
Cost: $695 ($650 if registration recvd. by April 3)

________________________________________________
May 21, 2008 11:30am to 2pm
(Social Time 11:30am to 12pm)
Overcoming Impasse – Tools to Empower Parties to Reach Agreements
from Mediation Works, Inc.
Presenters: Chuck Doran and Josh Hoch

Intended Audience: MWI Court and Divorce Panel Members
“Participating in mediation can be difficult for parties. After time, impasse can seem too difficult to overcome. Join Chuck and Josh for some advanced mediation skill training as they share techniques and discuss strategies for empowering parties to be able to overcome impasse, stay focused, and reach agreement.”

I am enjoying reading my peer mediation student’s blog over at Better Than Misery.

The latest post, Newsflash: No money in mediation,  of course caught my attention.

I can relate to this:

I think it has to do with the general public learning what it means and why its beneficial. Lately I have been thinking about alternative kinds of manifestations of my conflict management degree, including online dispute resolution projects.

You might have read me wondering here if most careers are careers in conflict resolution, and if conflict is just too sexy for most people to care to resolve rather than fight to the win/lose bitter end.

It amazes me to read a mediation student in Israel writing thoughts and experiences so similar to my own in the U.S. It’s nice to know I’m not the only one exploring these questions right now.

When working for my undergrad, I felt like I was going at light-speed with the knowledge that I would reach the light at the end of the tunnel, my professional life would start and my work would pay off. Seems like sometimes we mediation students feel like we could just be spinning our wheels.

Partly because I’m not doing the professional work I expected with my undergrad,  I’m ok with not knowing where this mediation work will lead. I know I really enjoy it, I seem to have aptitude for it, I’m finding opportunities as I go, and I’m using these skills every day in both professional and personal settings.

Any other mediation students out there? Pros who’ve been there? What are your thoughts?

I had a great learning moment in my PON class last night.

We were role playing a fun case. After our joint session and one private session for each party, we started exploring what we were each seeing in our process. We looked at what we were struggling with, what had gone well.

Our student mediator shared that not being a judge, not being able to provide any legal advice or make any decisions about the case, he was uncertain where to go. As mediators, if we reveal this all to the parties, what would they think? What power would we have?

That’s when light bulbs blinked on over all of our heads. We could see it. The power of the mediator lies in the process.

It’s a different way of thinking. Most people are used to thinking about power over rather than power with people. It can take a very conscious effort to recognize, respect and constructively engage power with people.

When we do, we can facilitate a process that parties couldn’t or didn’t drive on their own. Which is what landed them in mediation. We can empower others to recognize their own and others’ needs, how to meet those needs, and how to find a mutually beneficial way out of their bind. (I realize many see empower as a very loaded word, and some are ambivalent to its use in the context of mediation. For now, it’s the best way I’ve found to communicate an idea about the power of the process.)

In that sense, mediators are very powerful. Depending on your point of view, perhaps even more powerful than the decision-makers to whom we’re used to deferring.

I love that the more I learn, the more I realize there is for me to learn. Case in point: having patience with people who don’t have the same training … and defining who I am in conflict.

It seems that the deeper I go into conflict management and resolution, something interesting is happening. Dealing with people either unaware of or unskilled with good approaches to difficult conversations … either it is now more difficult for me to employ good practices with them specifically, or am I now more aware of when I’m not doing so.

My impatience is especially strong in the face of rampant negativity. When attention and care are not given to providing constructive feedback, when complaints are rattled off so that it almost seems like a person is railing against me, when someone beats the same point over and again. I try to employ good active listening, move toward understanding. But I feel attacked. I feel my work is attacked. I want to defend, disagree. I want to bring us to an agreement … an agreement that agrees with me.

Iit seems that my someone else in these situations often can only be satisfied with an apology. Or better yet, a commendation for being so right and pointing out so rightly how wrong I am/it is/we are.

If my someone else seems not even interested in understanding, then what? What if when time is a major factor? Or in person communication is not possible? This is where one of my new favorite books comes into play. Difficult Conversations.

I’ve generally felt utterly stuck when I didn’t know what to do next in a difficult conversation. I’m now feeling like I’ve gotten my hands on some very good keys.

Perhaps people who tend to need to ‘hammer home’ their points over and again do so because they don’t feel heard in the conversation, or generally they don’t feel heard in life. If I know how to hold a constructive inner monologue, I can control my reactions better. I don’t have to take a difficult conversation so personally, or see negativity as attack.

It’s much harder than I expect, every time, to practice in real life authentic curiosity with someone displaying hostility or conveying biting negativity.

It’s more frustrating to watch a conversation go in a less than ideal way, now that I can see how it could go better … without always knowing how to get it there.

It’s all part of the journey for a newbee in this world. I’m loving it!

My old gym has been trying to bring me back. Almost weekly, they email me invitations to take advantage of their ‘fabulous’ offers exclusive to former members.

I get that they’re a business. They want success. As many members as possible, paying as much as possible.

They seem to think I will rejoin simply because they email me an invitation to do so. I see no consideration of the possibility that I have interests here too. They’ve not once asked me why I am no longer a member. So they have no idea how to bring me back - only that it is in their interest to have my dues.

Perhaps had they thoroughly reality tested their chosen options for meeting their obvious interest, they would have learned quite a lot. Here’s a quick sampling of how they compare to my new gym.

1. They offer more classes.
   But those classes are always overcrowded and often the only way to have a spot is to spend 30 minutes waiting in line.
2. They have very similar machines.
   But there is less variety and always a wait. We have to sign machines out and are kicked off by the next customer as soon as our time is up.
3. They offer towels. If you pay extra.
4. They charge twice as much for membership.

What lessons have I learned here that we can apply to mediation and principled negotiation?

• It’s not enough to identify your own interests, and options to meet them.
• To reach an agreement that satisfies you, you might have to consider the other party’s interests as well.
• If you don’t do so, agreement can still be reached. But it might not be your ideal. In this case, I went somewhere new once my membership was up at that old gym.

A retired judge in the DC area is helping grow the online dispute resolution world with Virtual courthouse.com.

What’s this, you say? Our Mediator-in-the-making is exploring situations in which conflicts are resolved without any face-to-face work? Yes, I am intrigued by the ODR world. But please note as I have that this method is not for everyone or every case.

“The ideal case for Virtual Courthouse has only two parties, involves a dispute over money (as opposed to other forms of relief) and is not emotionally charged, he said. Fender-bender lawsuits fit the bill; custody cases and nasty disputes between neighbors do not.”

That makes sense to me.

It also seems that parties need to have certain resources in order to choose this route. For instance, as noted below, one would need access to a scanner to upload images of necessary documents. Money is also more of a factor here than in small claims, as “Virtual Courthouse charges each party a filing fee of $50 and the arbitrator or mediator charges the parties $300 total.”

Another consideration … insurance companies (or their lawyers) often do not agree to online dispute resolution. But Virtual Courthouse’s founder does feel that the legal profession is warming up to ODR.
Enough of this talk of limitations. How does it work?

“A plaintiff starts the process by registering with Virtual Courthouse, which e-mails the defendant to see if he or she will agree to ODR. If so, the parties pick a neutral from Virtual Courthouse’s list … (then) each party types in a statement of the case and uploads scanned images of any necessary documents, such as doctor’s bills. The neutral then decides what the case is worth.”

Cases have taken anywhere from 15 minutes to 45 days to complete.

And lest you think I’m on the verge of abandoning my face-to-face is best platform, the article noted that about 1/4 of Virtual Courthouse cases end up in face-to-face mediation.