This course introduces you to the concept of conflict transformation and how it differs from conflict resolution, management, and prevention. We’ll see how conflict offers opportunities for constructive change, and we'll explore different tools and methods for engaging conflict constructively. Regardless of your familiarity with the topic, you'll get insightful tips, portable handouts, lively demonstrations, and personalized assignments to bridge and enhance your own knowledge and history within the conflict narrative. In any area of your life, you'll benefit from the practical techniques and transferable information offered throughout this five-week journey.
Phases of the Mediation Process
Loading...
来自 Emory University 的课程
Conflict Transformation
99 个评分
从本节课中
Doing Well in the Middle
This module will discuss mediation and circle processes and guidelines for facilitating or participating in one of these processes.
与讲师见面
Ellen Ott MarshallAssociate Professor of Christian Ethics and Conflict Transformation
Candler School of Theology
We have two lessons now on mediation process.
Whether you observe a peer based mediation in the middle school or a formal mediation
of a civic dispute you'll see similarities In the phases of the process.
You will see two parties guided through a process by a neutral mediator,
someone whose job is to guide the process, not to advocate for a particular outcome.
It's crucial that the parties enter this process of mediation voluntarily,
and that they work together to identify a mutually agreed-upon outcome.
Mediations work when people feel recognized in the process and
empowered to craft their own agreement.
There are four basic phases to a mediation process.
Introductions, storytelling, problem solving and agreement.
The introductions phase seems really simple, but it's crucial.
This is the point where you are trying to set the tone in the room.
You first introduce yourself as the mediator and then invite the participants
to introduce themselves and say what they would like to be called.
Now let's just pause here, because that very simple
act conveys what important issues are already being discerned.
When I asked two parties what they should like to be called and
one person says Mark and the other person says Dr. Johnson, then immediately
you know there is something in play, their power issues are already unfolding.
So, the simplest tasks of an introduction can tell you a lot
about the dynamics of the scenario.
The second part of the introductions, is an affirmation, a word of affirmation.
It's important that the parties know that you
know that what they're doing is difficult.
Then you need to recognize that this is hardwork and
it takes courage to enter into a mediation process.
The third step in the introductions phase,
is an explanation of the process and the mediator's role.
For many people, mediation is new territory and
it's certainly a different way of communicating.
And a different way of structuring And
really experiencing what we usually experience as an argument, right?
It's a whole different environment so it take sometime to explain to people what's
going to unfold and make sure that they are comfortable with the process.
The last step relates to that and that last step that mediator set some
ground rules for the process itself and this is partly to help
the participants know what to expect, but also so that they understand
that there are parameters around this procedure that they need to agree to.
Some of the stay underground rules are,no interruptions and
to treat each other with respect.
The second part of a mediation, is called story telling.
This is the phase where the mediator invites each party,
to take turns telling their stories without interruption.
During the story telling phase the mediator is doing two kinds of listening,
and each challenging..
The mediator has to listen for
the details of the story from two different perspectives and retain that.
But the mediator is also listening for
things that the participants don't say necessarily.
The mediator is trying to pull out some unstated needs or
deep Interests that are beneath the stated positions.
And that material that gets pulled out from underneath will be very helpful
in subsequent phases of a mediation.
The third phase is called problem solving.
And it's in this point when the hopefully the party is shift
from an adversarial posture to more of a collaborative posture.
The mediator is helping them to clarify some issues.
To see some common concerns and then to select an issue to focus on.
There are also in this phase of the process making night shift from stated
positions to a level of interests, what's underneath the positions and
hopefully even deeper to needs that they might have in common.
As the parties shift from an adversarial position to a collaborative position,
they can also generate together some options that allow the parties to move
forward in a collaborative fashion what's really important about this,
is that the options are not being offered by the mediator.
The mediator is helping them to see some common ground, so
that they can generate options together.
The fourth phase, is agreement.
Key to a successful mediation is a mutually agreed upon outcome.
If the previous phases have unfolded with honest identification
of underlying issues, and genuine concerns and interests,
then parties to reach a point where they see some common interest to build upon,
this is that shift from adversarial to collaborative pestering.
In the manual for community mediators Ron Kraybill, Robert Evans and
Alice Fresure Evans named characteristics of good agreement
their list is helpful not only for mediators in a formal setting, but
for anyone who is trying to work with people toward a solution.
The first feature, is that good agreements are clear, specific, and balanced.
Instead of saying I'll be nicer or we'll make policies that are more adjust.
Agreements need to specify what constitutes niceness or justice right.
They need to be clear and specific.
Mediators need to listen for balance here too.
Is one party working harder than the other?
Is one party accommodating the other?
Perhaps agreeing to things that do not really meet the needs they
have articulated so far.
A second quality of a good agreement, is that it's realistic.
Mediators can help people to be honest about what they really can and
cannot do It is not helpful to the relationship
if the parties make promises at this point that they really can't keep.
Mediators, like trainers or coaches, can help the parties be clear
about what they need to do to move forward and what they actually can do.
It's also important that the agreement is proactive that it looks ahead.
So the agreement should build end strategies for addressing subsequent
problems that arise as the parties try to implement the agreement.
Now, not all mediations proceed neatly through these four phases.
Mediators are remarkably adaptable people.
And they have to be.
Their job is to guard a process that's proven to be helpful.
And also,
attempt creative interventions along the way if the process is not progressing.
So for example, they might invite the parties to caucus to meet separately,
and then come back together.
Or they might need to pause the mediation to bring in some new information.
Either way, what mediators are doing is to preserve a process that's trustworthy,
but also not keep it so rigid that they can't think creatively
in order to address emerging needs of the parties moving through the process.
So let's move now from the ideal phases of mediation to focus more fully
on the mediators themselves and see what we can learn from them.
