This month I’m conducting yet another class for people desiring to be volunteer mediators. I have described the objectives the people in the class had for studying mediation. Now, I’d like to describe what people found most difficult to master.

First, I should describe the style of mediation they are learning. There are three major styles: Evaluative, Transformative, and Facilitative.

Evaluative mediators often have legal backgrounds and most often conduct separate meetings with the disputants rather than having face-to-face meetings. Evaluative mediation, then, resembles settlement conferences held by judges. The mediator guides the parties in reaching a resolution by identifying weaknesses in their positions and predicting what a judge might likely do if the case went to court.

Transformative mediation presents the opportunity for participants to transform their relationship. In transformative mediation the participants structure both the process and the outcome of the mediation. The mediator follows their lead. Transformative became widely used when the U.S. Postal Service adopted it for handling internal labor disputes.

Facilitative mediation gained popularity in community mediation centers in the 1960s and 1970s. In this style, the mediator structures the process through which the parties can reach a mutually agreeable solution. The facilitative mediator does not make recommendations, does not give advice nor predict how the dispute might be dealt with in the courts. The facilitative mediator controls the process but the disputants are in charge of their own outcome. To accomplish this, the facilitative mediator asks questions, summarizes and assists the parties to identify interests behind the positions parties take. Facilitative mediation remains most widely used in school peer mediation programs, community mediation programs, church-based mediation programs and volunteer mediation programs in Small Claims Courts. That is the style I help people master.

Most people have no difficulty understanding the importance of a comprehensive opening statement that both informs and motivates the disputants to participate. Most develop question skills and listening skills to help the disputants focus on the issues in their disagreements. Most develop the coaching skills to help participants in the caucus to better problem-solve and negotiate. And most easily learn how to help parties establish objectives, how to use deadlines and how to help participants under the consequences of not settling.

But there are two skills that generally prove more difficult for potential volunteers to learn:

--It may be a cultural preference, but most potential volunteers are too eager to facilitate a compromise solution when there may be opportunities to help the disputing parties work toward a win-win or collaborative solution. As I’ve written in the past, collaboration is more difficult, but it is usually possible.

--Most people who desire to become mediators have been successful problem solvers in their lives and careers. And when they sit with disputing parties as a mediator their first—and natural—reaction is to see just how the disputants’ problems can be easily solved. And when the disputants have difficulty reaching their own solution, the trainee’s frustration becomes overwhelming.  They just want to tell the parties how to solve their problems. The facilitative mediator doesn’t do that. The strength of facilitative mediation is just that the parties solve their own problems with their own solutions.

As the instructor I remain convinced that my students can learn to be effective facilitative mediators. And years of experience support that belief. It can be done!

Over the years it has been my privilege to instruct hundreds of people on mediation skills. This past week I started yet another class.  I’m always interested in why people enroll in a class to learn how to be a mediator. At the beginning of the first session I ask participants what their objectives for the class are. Rarely does anyone say that their objective is to become a mediator for pay.

Instead, the commonly expressed objectives are:

--From law school students and attorneys: To learn more about alternatives to litigation.

--From working professionals: To explore ways to utilize mediation in their profession. (For example, in a recent class, a contingent from a social service unit were there to explore ways of using mediation with parents in child support disputes.)

--From managers and administrators: To learn mediation skills they could utilize at work.

--From retired and those desiring to find volunteer activities: To serve their communities by being available to help resolve disputes.

Overall, though, from whatever sector the participants represented, their major goal was to learn mediation skills to better help people in their organizations and communities deal with disputes.

Months and years after completing the class I often hear back from people who completed the course and two clear trends stand out:

--Those who followed through to become a mediator most often say they found being one personally rewarding far beyond their expectations.

--Almost all commented on how they began to utilize mediation skills in their own lives.

I’ve never had anyone say the class had been a waste of time. One person did tell me how much he had enjoyed the class, but had learned he would never be a mediator. When I asked why he said he learned that he just couldn’t stop telling people what to do—and he didn’t intend to!

I view learning mediation skills similar to learning CPR. We all benefit by having CPR-trained individuals in our families and organizations. Likewise we can all benefit by having individuals trained in mediation skills in our families and organizations.

With this in mind, I encourage everyone to consider the training.