mediatorinthemaking.com

I was writing up a leadership tutorial today, creating a mini-collection of the leadership methods I’ve learned from various sources — including mediation training — and put into practice in my work. As often is the case, my mind wandered into various related corners and so lead me to consider the benefits of a transparent approach to working with people in multiple contexts.

My focus was on training the volunteer leaders I work with to put into practice some of the same leadership skills I use working with them. I hadn’t been full conscious of the fact that to date I had not yet provided this information quite so transparently. Why? I work with very capable and experienced people. Perhaps it was a fear that revealing all of the ‘tricks up my sleeve’ would render them less effective.

This seems to be the flavor of conversations I’ve had with experienced and novice mediators regarding the benefits and pitfalls of varying degrees of transparency in the mediation room. Like in many of the situations I find myself in at work, I think the degree of transparency appropriate in the mediation room depends on the situation: the person, the content of the conversation, even the timing.

In this brief moment of clarity, I find that I am much more hopeful about the benefits of transparency in leadership than I realized. And I am eager to be more conscious about testing the waters of transparency in the mediation room — as well as in difficult conversations during which I get to employ some mediation magic.

I’m not certain that I’ll have a whole lot of opportunity to test the waters of transparency in my small claims work. But in other settings both professional and personal, I might find opportunities. And it’s something I’ll remain mindful of as I explore new venues to flex my mediation muscles.

Anyone have any resources to suggest for further study on the subject?

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.

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.

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.

It’s a big day for the Mediator In the Making! Yesterday, I had my first glimpse into small claims mediation. I can’t wait to go back.

I’ve got pages and pages of notes I’d love to share with you all. Instead of publishing my first ebook, I’ll let it all simmer and explore one thing at a time. (No need to thank me. I realize you might have lives away from my blog.)

Perceptions. A heavily weighted word, and quite rightly so.

It seems to me that each mediator is constantly performing an amazing balancing act. We have our own perceptions of the process, the parties, our performance, our co-mediators. Within each of those, we’re building perceptions of appearances, body language, eye contact, tone of voice, and of course the words we’re hearing. We’re gauging - and maybe hearing - our parties’ perceptions of us, the process, and our co-mediator. And we’re hearing and gauging that of our co-mediator.

Just steps away from perceptions, we will find assumptions. Sometimes baby steps. So then we balance ourselves on the cusp of allowing our perceptions to give way to assumptions, which then would have us leading rather than facilitating or following the parties.

My, my, my! We would all make great circus acts, wouldn’t we? Balancing atop that tight rope, music playing, crowd gasping, and any number of additional distractions.

It was exciting to get to practice the process of recognizing and utilizing my perceptions, acknowledging and setting aside any assumptions which I might give way to in weak moments when I allow myself to not be fully present. To acknowledge and brush off, rather than suppress, any assumptions which could then give way to judgments, and allow myself to proceed with a clear mind and neutral perspective.

There’s another amazing characteristic of perceptions in the mediation room. Others’ perceptions might surprise me, or even directly conflict with my own. Yet there they are. And so I must acknowledge and respond to them. Management and customer service conventional wisdom tell us something similar, and useful here. It doesn’t matter if the customer’s perception seems to be reality from where we sit, or fits with what we mean to have them think. Because it is there, we must acknowledge and respond to it. Allow them to know that they have been heard (notice I do not say “feel heard”). In the mediation room, I guess this could be described as incorporating perceptions into the process.

Of course these are all my very early perceptions of this process. They are my foundational building blocks and I can’t wait to get back in there to continue my learning!

Well, it’s over. The Colts lost to the Chargers. The Cowboys lost to the Giants. And I - along with most fans - was certain both games would turn out exactly the opposite.

Because I was sure the outcomes of these games had been written in the stars, and apparently I had a special line to those stars, I barely watched these two great games. I glanced up every now and then to see who had just inched past the other.

I didn’t really pay attention until the last five minutes of each game (that’s playclock minutes for you non-footballers out there. sorry, no time to explain.) And what exciting minutes! Two close games, two teams I assumed would win just, well, sort of folding in on themselves.

Where am I going with this? Really, there is a connection. I entered into the situation assuming I already knew the outcome. So I missed out.

If I enter into a conversation, a mediation, etc., assuming I know what will happen — or at least what I think I need to know — I miss out. I will either inadvertently control and lead the conversation. Or I will never get to learn what I could from this unique and knowledgeable person (everyone is themselves and so unique, and everyone is knowledgeable about something I’m not, yes?). Or I will not reach the resolution I could because I’m so busy driving towards my predetermined destination.

And that’s what I learned from the NFL playoffs this weekend.

Oh - also that the Pats are seriously the best team that has ever played the game, to date.

And now back to our regularly scheduled programming … my first series, “On Listening.”

I am consistently and profoundly moved by the power of listening.

I used to sense a wave of anxiety come over me when encountering an angry person. Whether or not they were angry with me. Until my most recent chance to get it right.

I listened without communicating judgment. I asked open ended questions truly meant to learn more and convey curiosity, rather than to lead. I did my best to follow my conversation partner wherever he went.

I recall clearly the moment I realized that this angry person, who had inspired such knots of stress, was no longer angry. Anger had receded and in its place was what I might even describe as a sense of comfort. I had guided this person in transforming conflict into an opportunity for something positive to happen.

We spoke for quite a while, and I learned quite a lot that I would not have had I been focused solely on solving the problem as I had identified it. I allowed myself to approach this person’s conflict from a place of patience, respect, and comfortability with my abilities. And I allowed myself to accept not knowing everything, sort of allowing a large space within myself which could be filled with this person’s story — where previously I might have stored up my own assumptions.

I think we humans, perhaps we in the U.S., have severely undervalued the art of listening and the rare experience of being heard. Is it our U.S. culture? Is it human nature? Does it begin within the family?

Whatever it is, the moment when we become conscious of our power to listen is profound.

I’ll get back to my Mediation Musings On Listening soon. For now, I’d like to discuss something that’s fresh in my mind. Perhaps my hordes (alright, maybe trios) of readers will have some insights to share.

I had a funny conflict diffusion experience today. The scene: a meeting (yes, shocking, since I work in an office). The players: well, office people … including your mediator-in-the-making and one colleague I know to be an experienced and skilled mediator, and one office person becoming possibly frustrated.

Mediation ensues, in the hopes of transforming potential conflict into constructive conversation before conflict even occurs. Yay, mediators!

How do our super heroes do this? Why, listening, of course. But where would listening be without reflecting and reframing? A big thank you to Moshe Cohen and his listening triangle for giving me a mental picture for the wonderful game of questioning, listening, and reflecting back.

As soon as I heard my colleague employing this skill, I listened carefully. And I watched an interesting thing take place. It was a sort of endless feedback loop. A reframe refrain (a link for the non-musically inclined).

I jumped in. Each time I reflected and reframed, the person I was reflecting … reflected back to me. Not to correct me, but to agree that I had accurately echoed their sentiments.

We went round a few times, as had my colleague, until I feared we could do this endlessly and so summarized that we all seemed to be in agreement and were short on time so really should move on unless there were any objections.

So my questions to the mediation blogosphere are these. Have you ever found yourself inside a reflect, reframe refrain? How do we land there? How do we gracefully exit?