Orientation of "Problem-Solving" Mediation
Mediation is carried out differently by each of its practitioners. However, the general framework that most North American mediators work within is that of problem-solving mediation -- meaning the focus is on solving the presenting problem. This approach was so-named and contrasted to another approach labeled transformative mediation by Baruch Bush and Folger in their book, The Promise of Mediation.[1]
Silke Hansen talks about talks about the problem solving that was required in one very complex humanitarian emergency.
|
In terms of general orientation, the main difference between the two approaches to mediation is how a conflict is viewed or conceptualized from its outset -- how it is defined in the mediator's mind. When mediators using a problem-solving orientation are introduced to a conflict, they immediately see it as a problem that must and can be solved. Usually the problem is quickly framed in terms of seemingly incompatible needs or interests between the parties. The focus is then finding ways to reframe the conflict so that the needs and/or interests of both sides can be met (or come close to being met) simultaneously. Thus, a mutually acceptable, win-win solution is sought.[2]
Characteristics of Problem-Solving Mediation[3]
Problem-solving or "settlement-oriented" mediation is by far the dominant approach in the field today. Its name implies precisely what it is -- a process focused on solving a problem by obtaining a settlement. In the view of a problem-solving mediator, "when conflict exists, a problem exists, and a problem exists because of a real or apparent incompatibility of parties' needs or interests."[4] Therefore, mediators working within this framework will assess the conflict between two parties and assist them in defining their differences in terms of a problem. If a conflict is set up as a "problem," then logically, a solution to that problem exists. Through the process of reframing the parties' positions, the mediator helps parties develop a common definition of the problem. This is the starting point for negotiating a solution that will satisfy the interests of both sides (see integrative bargaining or win-win).
The goal of problem-solving mediation is to help parties generate a mutually acceptable settlement of the immediate dispute. The settlement-oriented mediator usually explains that this is the purpose at the outset and defines a process that will assist the parties to work toward that goal. All of the mediator's actions also are designed to facilitate that outcome. For example, emotions that might escalate anger and thus prevent a settlement are controlled. Issues that are non-negotiable are diverted, while parties are encouraged to focus on negotiable interests. Mediators tend to discourage a discussion of the past, as that often involves blame, which can make progress more difficult. Rather, parties are encouraged to focus on what they want in the future, and develop ways in which their interests can be met simultaneously.
Sometimes the settlement-oriented mediator acts a bit like an arbitrator proposing a solution and working hard to "sell" it to the parties (see arbitration). In other words, mediators will sometimes act as though they are experts and suggest potential terms of agreement. However, because their suggestions do not have any binding power, they must try to persuade the disputants to go along with their idea.
In addition, settlement-oriented mediators often try to keep the parties moving forward. They try to keep the process moving by encouraging the participants to move from one "stage" to the next as quickly as possible. Deadlines are one action-forcing method that can be useful for inducing parties to come to an agreement.
While some mediators allow the parties to proceed in their own direction and at their own pace, thus largely controlling the process, others are quite directive in their approach. In addition to defining and controlling the process, they may also control the substance of the discussions. They will try to narrow the parties' focus to areas of agreement and/or common ground and "resolvable" issues, while avoiding areas of disagreement where consensus is less likely. Although all decisions are, in theory, left in the hands of the disputants, problem-solving mediators often play a large role in crafting settlement terms and obtaining the parties' agreement.[5]
[1] Robert A. Baruch Bush and Joseph P. Folger, The Promise of Mediation: Responding to Conflict Through Empowerment and Recognition (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1994),
[2] Ibid. page 56.
[3] A major portion of this section was drawn from a previous online publication of the Conflict Research Consortium, available at http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/transform/tmall.htm
[4] Robert A. Baruch Bush and Joseph P. Folger, The Promise of Mediation: Responding to Conflict Through Empowerment and Recognition (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1994), 56.
[5] NOTE: Much of this essay is based on a previous online publication of the Conflict Research Consortium, available at http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/transform/tmall.htm.
Use the following to cite this article:
Spangler, Brad. "Problem-Solving Mediation." Beyond Intractability. Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Posted: September 2003 <http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/problem-solving_mediation/>.
Sources of Additional, In-depth Information on this Topic
Additional Explanations of the Underlying Concepts:
Online (Web) Sources
Glaser, Tanya. "Alternate Views of Conflict and Mediation -- Summary." University of Colorado-Boulder: Conflict Research Consortium.
Available at: http://www.beyondintractability.org/articlesummary/10211/.
This page is a summary of the article, "Ideology, Orientation to Conflict, and Mediation Discourse", by Joseph Folger and Robert Baruch Bush. In this article, the authors offer a counter-argument to critiques of mediation that point to its lack of procedural formality and the potential for mediator's own ideologies to influence outcomes. The argument focuses on the authors' opinion that these critiques of mediation come from a problem-solving perspective and that it is only one way to see mediation. They argue that this perspective is popular mainly because it is tied to deeper ideology about how society works. Then they contrast their transformational approach to mediation with that of the problem-solving perspective.
Newberry, Sterling. "Problem Solving Versus Transformative Mediation?." ,
Available at: http://www.mediate.com/articles/redwing1.cfm.
This brief article addresses whether people seeking mediation services need to be careful about choosing a mediator who adheres to either a transformative approach or a problem solving approach. The author argues that all mediators must possess certain qualitites and skills, and that having those skills is more important than the general approach the practitioner takes.
Burgess, Heidi and Guy M. Burgess. Transformative Mediation: What It Is.
Available at: http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/transform/tmall.htm.
This page offers a detailed summary of the concept of transformative mediation as it is presented in Bush and Folger's book, The Promise of Mediation. The page discusses the two key concepts of recognition and empowerment, compares transformative to problem-solving mediation, and offers suggestions for finding a transformative mediator.
Offline (Print) Sources
Fisher, Roger, William L. Ury and Bruce Patton. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In, 2nd Edition . Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., April 1992.
This is an updated version of Roger Fisher's and William Ury's classic 1981 text, Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. In this bestseller, Fisher, Ury, and Patton, describe what they call "principled negotiation, which is basically interest-based bargaining with a few extra twists. Key ideas include: 1) separate the people from the problem; 2) negotiate interests, not positions; 3) look for mutually beneficial options; and 4) use objective criteria. This work is considered essential foundational reading for anyone interested in negotiation and its main ideas form the core of the problem-solving approach to mediation. Click here for more info.
Folger, Joseph P. and Robert A. Baruch Bush. "Ideology, Orientations to Conflict, and Mediation Discourse." In New Directions in Mediation: Communication Research and Perspectives. Edited by Jones, Tricia S. and Joseph P. Folger, eds. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1994.
The authors begin by describing a current criticism of mediation. They attempt to "show how the discourse that occurs within and about mediation is linked to broad ideological orientations about the nature of the social world, its structures and processes." The authors then demonstrate that opening critique of mediation may be met by appealing to an alternative, newly emerging social ideology.
Click here for more info.
Folberg, Jay and Alison Taylor. Mediation: A Comprehensive Guide to Resolving Conflicts Without Litigation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, April 1, 1984.
This is a slightly earlier book on the process of mediation, which was aimed at helping professionalize and institutionalize the practice. It pulls together what was known about mediation at the time into a fairly comprehensive work. The general framework of mediation presented here fits into the problem-solving orientation. The authors trace the historical evolution of mediation and discuss its uses in various social and cultural contexts. They also outline the stages of mediation, the concepts useful for developing mediation skills, and various approaches to the process. Click here for more info.
Noce, Dorothy J. Della. "Seeing Theory in Practice: An Analysis of Empathy in Mediation." 15:3, July 1999.
The author asks whether and how ideology affects mediator practice. She describes the individualist ideology that supports problem-solving approaches to mediation, and the relational ideology that informs transformative approaches. Click here for more info.
Mayer, Bernard. The Dynamics of Conflict Resolution: A Practitioner's Guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 2000.
Generally working within the framework of problem-solving mediation, this work focuses on ways for conflict resolvers to think about or conceptualize conflict and its resolution. It is less about specific techniques for resolving conflict and more about concepts the author has found useful in his career as a conflict resolution practitioner. Click here for more info.
Moore, Christopher W. The Mediation Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict, 2nd Edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1996.
This book discusses the characteristics of mediation and the increasing breadth of situations in which mediation has come to be used for resolving disputes. Without explicitly stating it, the work promotes the framework of problem-solving mediation as the process outlined is primarily focused on how to reach mutually acceptable agreements between parties. In terms of step-by-step advice, it is one of the most comprehensive works on the topic of mediation. Click here for more info.
Bush, Robert A. Baruch and Joseph P. Folger. The Promise of Mediation: Responding to Conflict Through Empowerment and Recognition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, September 1, 1994.
This book is the seminal work on the subject of transformative mediation. In exploring the transformative potential of mediation, the authors contrast their perspective on the practice of mediation with the more traditional problem-solving approach. They believe empowerment and recognition among participants, should be the primary goals of the mediation process. It is argued that these effects are more valuable in the long-term than the immediate settlement of a dispute. Although this work is designed to promote transformative mediation, it offers good information on problem-solving mediation as well. Click here for more info.
Return to Top
Examples Illustrating this Topic:
Offline (Print) Sources
Crocker, Chester A., Fen Osler Hampson and Pamela Aall. "Is More Better? The Pros and Cons of Multiparty Mediation." In Turbulent Peace: The Challenges of Managing International Conflict. Edited by Crocker, Chester A., Fen Osler Hampson and Pamela Aall, eds. Washington DC: United States Institute of Peace Press, September 2001.
This chapter discusses the phenomenon of multi-party mediation as it has occurred in the post-Cold War world. The authors discuss definitions of mediation and multi-party mediation and examine the costs and benefits of such an approach to conflict resolution. The conflict in the Balkans is employed as a case example. Multi-party mediation as it is discussed here, is certainly focused on solving problems.
Return to Top
|
