Solutions

Mediation can be effective not just for personal matters, but also in the workplace. For internal matters, e.g. when it comes to sharing out tasks, planning holidays or tricky subjects such as smoking. Or for external matters: dealing with disagreements about terms of delivery and how contracts are fulfilled or negotiated.

It takes two to argue, and a third to mediate

When solving problems using mediation it is never about pronouncing a “judgement” saying who is right and who is wrong. Instead, the aim is to achieve constructive “win-win” solutions. This means that all of the people involved need to be able to live with the solution found, without anyone feeling they have drawn the short straw or been taken to the cleaner’s. After all, people can only continue to work constructively if a conflict really is solved by mutual agreement.

With mediation it makes little difference how the conflict arose. The point is not to prove that someone acted wrongly; if anything, mistakes are only tracked down so that they can be avoided in future. The goal of mediation is to look forwards and plan together what is going to happen next.

The mediator’s job

In an argument it is often very hard to stay objective and truly listen to the other person. You get stuck in your particular position, seeing everything your “adversary” says as fundamentally wrong: it feels as if all he wants to do is undermine you, and he is just thinking of his own interests. In this situation, you need an impartial person who can take you to one side, calm you down and discuss the matter coolly. That is what mediators do. They act as a kind of buffer, making sure the discussion takes place in a calm, objective atmosphere. More than anything else, mediators are facilitators who ensure people keep to the rules. They do not decide what people talk about: they just check how they do it. The main thing is that everyone has the right to express their opinion and be heard out. To make sure that every message gets across properly, some mediators attach great importance to adversaries repeating what the other person says in their own words. This is especially useful when the atmosphere is tense. It helps avoid further misunderstanding – though some people can find it annoying and stilted.

What makes for successful mediation?

The people involved, and they alone, need to decide what is discussed: the only way to find a solution is for both parties to be open and show an honest interest in achieving a result, so it goes without saying that mediation is only successful if everyone involved takes part voluntarily. If people are forced to join in against their will, or reluctantly, they will not be open to others’ arguments. Mediation is all about give and take, not about domineering, and no-one can force or order people to give and take.

This is why the difficult job bosses have is to persuade their workers or business partners how useful mediation can be, before the actual process takes place. Often the battle lines are so firmly drawn that long discussions are needed beforehand.

Suggest that the combatants have a “taster” by trying initial discussions, to see whether further mediation might help – bearing in mind that your staff will probably be more forthcoming if you are not present. And whatever you do, don’t try being the mediator yourself. Mediators need to be impartial, and you very probably won’t be, depending on how well you know the sparring partners.

How does mediation take place?

Before mediation can even start, some groundwork is required. The participants need to get to know the mediator (and possibly one another, if the matter has so far only been discussed in writing or on the phone) and develop trust. And joint rules need to be set out defining how the negotiations will take place. The mediator already plays an important role in this, as emotions can run especially high at the start.

Then comes the second phase: the two sides describe the conflict from their point of view. The mediator makes sure no-one is interrupted or contradicted: they all have a right to the way they see things. Once everyone’s position has been made clear, the participants summarise all the points on which consensus has already been reached. The aspects which are the subject of disagreement are also defined, and a list of disputes put together. This also requires a good facilitator, as people who are emotionally involved generally find it hard to create a clear structure.

Finally, work starts on the disputed issues. Everyone listens and accepts the fact that opinions differ. Unlike the first phase, this part is forward-looking. If there is more than one option, the mediator lists them and puts them up for discussion. It is important that all the ideas come from those involved in the dispute, and that everyone gets their say.

Ideally, the two sides then agree on a path that they both believe is the best way. If this does not happen, the search is on for compromises. In the worst case, the only acceptable solution is for the two parties to stop working together. Even when a consensus has been reached the mediator still needs to deal with the case, in case any new problems turn up.

The advantages

One major advantage of mediation is that people work on the solutions themselves, giving them greater motivation to stick to what has been agreed – not the case with a compromise found by some other person and which satisfies no-one.

The process takes place in private, making it very discreet. Of course, one condition for any kind of mediation is that discussions are treated with confidentiality.

Today a large number of consultancy companies provide trained mediators. It would be a major fallacy to think that the job is an easy one: avoid any false economy, and hire an expert to take care of it. A facilitator who cannot keep a grip on the process or who fails to remain objective and calm can cause a great deal of damage.

Image: Getty Images