Master Mediator Program – IMI Qualifying Assessment Program
Hello everyone and Happy New Year! Hopefully, this is the year for Mediation in Romania to become the success that we have all been waiting for. So, in order for the year to begin with good auspices, here is a piece of news of major interest for all mediators in this country:
Beginning with January 17th 2012, the Master Mediator Program of the Transylvanian Institute of Mediation has become the first IMI (International Mediation Institute) Qualifying Assessment Program in Central and Eastern Europe. Therefore,TIM becomes accepted among the best international mediators’ assessment institutions in the world, thus granting mediators in Central and Eastern Europe access to international evaluation and recognition of their professionalism. The evaluation takes place according to the procedure described on the website of the TIM (http://www.tim.ultrasilvam.ro/programe.html#programul_master_mediator) as well as on that of the IMI (http://imimediation.org/find-a-qualifying-assessment-program#anchor13).
For further information on the actual program curriculum, and details on how to apply, on attendance and evaluation, feel free to contact me. I am available with answers to all questions regarding the Master Mediator Program as well as other programs on mediation offered by TIM.
The Roles of the Mediator
I mentioned in a previous post (http://www.mediator-chereji.ro/2011/06/07/romana-promovarea-medierii-1-0-ce-este-medierea/) that sometimes we as mediators find it hard to explain our role and purpose. When our potential clients ask us what we can do for them and we start by telling them what we will not do – will not impose decisions, will not provide consultancy, will not notarize documents – we might lose our clientele fairly quickly (there have been plenty of examples of that lately). People are interested in what we do not what we don’t do! In order to meet the expectations of those who are interested I have decided to write this post which will provide an outline of the roles of the mediator, what he/she does exactly and what in particular accounts for the fee that clients will pay. I must, first of all, confess I drew my inspiration from Christopher Honeyman’s article “On evaluating mediators” which can be found on IMI website, at http://www.convenor.com/madison/eval.htm .
Straight to the point – the roles of the mediator are closely linked to the actions s/he performs during mediation. Thus we are talking about investigation, empathy, effective communication, problem solving and control. Let’s take them one by one:
Investigation: the mediator helps parties explore and understand all the facets of a conflict (parties usually get stuck on just one aspect of their dispute), understand their interests and needs beyond the stands they portray and assume on the outside, generate objectives accurately and analyze possible consequences of each action performed on the other party and of the overall process of problem solving.
Empathy: the mediator has to pay attention to the needs of the parties and structure the process of mediation in order to offer comfort and safety to the participants. S/he has to be able to understand the emotional aspects of the conflict (and also display this to the parties involved), to create a suitable space to examine these and use the most befitting procedures for the emotional status of the parties.
Effective communication: the vast majority of conflicts generally start from misscommunication or communication breakdowns. The mediator has to have the ability to actively listen and rephrase messages in order to create the best understanding with the least negative emotional impact. In other words, s/he should be able to pass on an initially negative message in a positive manner in order to facilitate a suitable environment for negotiation. We generally argue because we communicate badly – it is the fundamental role of the mediator to restructure communication in order to make it effective = the best understanding and the least negative emotional impact!
Problem solving: the mediator does not offer or impose solutions; s/he explores possible options together with the parties involved, generates alternatives, evaluates and tests the commitment of the parties towards the agreed decisions, uses persuasion techniques to determine the parties to build realistic offers. The mediator educates and assists the parties in the negotiation process; s/he helps the parties use the information they have in order to make the best decisions regarding conflict resolution and test the validity of these decisions.
Control: the mediator has the crucial role of ensuring the most suitable environment in order for the parties to communicate effectively, negotiate and reach the decisions that are necessary for the resolution of the conflict. S/he is the one that establishes the rules of interaction between parties, guarantees the right and turn of each party to be heard and to present and promote their legitimate interests. S/he ensures equal treatment and equal opportunities across the mediation process (the possibility for each participant to have a relatively equal time available in order to make his points aware and integrate the interests of all in the design of the mediation agreement). S/he controls and denounces abusive and/or counterproductive behavior; mitigates and redirects discussions in order to serve the central objective of the mediation session: reaching a sustainable agreement, based exclusively on the will and legitimate interests of the parties.
This is basically what we, mediators, do. As long as we want to practice mediation (and not undercover legal consultancy, “camouflaged” arbitration or cover up for an attorney transaction through a mediation agreement, in order to recover the stamp charge) these are the five attributes we should refer to; they tell the difference between us and other professionals in conflict resolution.
The Limits to Mediation
On the blog again, after quite a long leave of absence…so many things to do in so little time and such a hectic world. The Arab dictatorships are falling one by one, Qaddafi is gone, the Euro isn’t doing that well either, China is increasing, Europe is decreasing, and Romania is idling (as per usual) – all things considered, what difference does it make what I care to write about mediation?
And yet…
I believe this is just the kind of world that has a growing need of working out a different way of solving its disputes and burn out its conflicts. From families to schools, from private enterprises to public institutions, from ethnic and religious groups to national states – everywhere around we find the same mainstream “resolution” methods with just about the same results – endless conflicts which eat up countless resources and human lives, an insecure, bitter, sad and despairing world.
We can either keep this up and expect the same results, or we can try a different approach. Instead of issuing orders, sentences or decrees, we may try to listen to those who should apply them; instead of force, we may try to use persuasion; instead of the stick, we may try the carrot; instead of asking, we may try offering; instead of competing, we may try cooperating. And instead of deafening each other by pushing through our point of view, we may start by trying to understand the other’s point of view.
In the time between now and my last post, I’ve heard a great deal of opinions on mediation. That it doesn’t “work”, that in a country like Romania it does not stand a chance, that everyone’s trying to rain on the mediators’ parade, that lawyers are against us, that the state doesn’t support us, that judges do not send cases our way. In fact – and this says a lot of the state of affairs in our country – I have even heard mediators who advised parties interested in mediation to opt for something else. This is who we are; we’re far more comfortable complaining on the outside than trying to stand on our own two feet, back straight, passing any obstacles in our way (as opposed to going around them – to which approach we have grown accustomed to for a couple of centuriesnow).
Today’s world, in which the failure of traditional and classic solutions is ever more obvious, offers amazing possibilities to think out of the box – a fundamental lesson taught by Steve Jobs – for those who can escape the trap of the ready-made and already-known. The national state is not what it used to be, and its institutions are rather ineffective; capitalism, as defined by the classics, is essentially flawed; justice is slow, overwhelmed, incapable to keep up, more often than not corrupt and incompetent; traditional structures collapse under the weight of the new, the ultramodern, the unconventional, of unorthodox solutions and out-of-the-box thinking. I can hardly imagine a more suitable environment for mediation to develop as a mainstream method of dispute resolution.
And I continue to argue that the only limits to mediation are the professionalism and imagination of the mediator!