• Save
Advanced Mediation Boserup
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Like this? Share it with your network


Advanced Mediation Boserup

Uploaded on

A PowerPoint presentation of advanced mediation. The six mainstream styles of mediation, their structure and grounding. Get an introduction to the PP by mailing hans.boserup@gmail.com......

A PowerPoint presentation of advanced mediation. The six mainstream styles of mediation, their structure and grounding. Get an introduction to the PP by mailing hans.boserup@gmail.com

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 9

http://www.slideshare.net 5
http://www.slashdocs.com 2
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 1
http://learn.valenciacollege.edu 1

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide
  • ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk


  • 1. Nordic Forum for Mediation
    • Mediators' challenge – Deadlocks and Impasse in mediation
    • Helsinki, May 26 – 28, 2006
    • Nordic Conference 2006
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 2. How to avoid Deadlocks? - Breaking the Impasse! ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 3. Hans Boserup
    • Mediator, Mediation Activist,
    • Appointed Mediator at Western High Court (DK),
    • Senior Lecturer,
    • Attorney at Law (Admitted to Supreme Court)
    • www.mediator.dk
    • [email_address]
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 4. Privileged Hans in Pakistan in unbelievable aftermath of Cashmere earthquake 2005 ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 5. Overcoming mediators' nightmares in mediation
    • How to avoid impasse?
    • The more you:
    • take over the responsibility for solving the matter,
    • focus on results in a particular direction ,
    • share legal knowledge,
    • ask linear questions
    • the more you will meet impasse
    • Breaking the impasse!
    • Private meetings (caucus),
    • Free storytelling rather than questioning ,
    • Circular questions,
    • Focus on empowerment and recognition ,
    • Awareness of the micro dynamics in the mediation room,
    • Can break impasse
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 6. What is conflict?
    • Conflict can be defined as tension between a party, needing change and a party, needing status quo or another change
    • Conflict can be defined as unmet needs
    • Conflict can be defined as a breakdown or a crisis in the parties' interaction
    • The style of mediation adopted depends on how you define conflict
    • The party in power to define the issues of conflict also possesses the power to identify solutions
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 7. What is Impasse or Deadlock?
    • The definition is closely connected to your definition of conflict
    • Tension do not decrease
    • Needs are not met
    • Breakdown or crisis is not repaired
    • Context is not recognized
    • Disempowerment is not changed into empowerment
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 8. The Magic of Empathy
    • Genuine empathy empower; – artificial empathy disempower
    • Empathy in turns while the other party is watching is by the parties accepted as useful and not seen as sympathy or being impartial
    • The invisible curtain while taking turns of empathic listening
    • Don’t only listen to the party; - be him with all his special personality, values, fear, pain and pride. – Conceive the world as he perceives the world.
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 9. It takes genuine empathy to get behind these resolute faces ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 10. Mediating in Afghanistan ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 11. Empathize with all parties ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 12. Empathize with all parties ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 13. How does the party experience and interact with the world?
    • Cognition : How the party perceives and interprets information
    • Affectivity : The party’s range, intensity, lability, and appropriateness of emotional response
    • Interpersonal functioning : How the party chooses, initiates, and manages relationships
    • Impulse control : How the party self-regulates behavior in response to needs or desires.
    • Imagine you were him. How would life look like?
    • Summarize his expressions so he recognizes him self in your summary.
    • In your summary you ad hope , opportunities and options :
      • So you would like, wish, hope …
      • So you would like to see that …
      • It is not fair that …
      • You fear that …
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 14. Hans’ staf in Afghanistan ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 15. Empathize with his Mental Status
    • Orientation
    • Attention and Concentration
    • Motivation
    • Speech
    • Thought Quality
    • Thought Content
    • Intelligence
    • Insight
    • Judgment
    • Appearance
    • Mood
    • Insecurity
    • Affective Expression
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 16. Imaging that your party due to stress reacts with an appearance similar to mental disorder
    • The party appears:
    • Dramatic, emotionally labile, or erratic/unpredictable
    • Consider how you would communicate to a party being:
    • Borderline
    • Narcissistic
    • The borderline dislikes to be left alone ; - so never give him the impression that he will end up being alone
    • The narcissistic dislikes to be regarded inferior ; - so never give him the impression that you regard him inferior
    • The party appears:
    • Uncertain, anxious or fearful
    • Consider how you would communicate to a party being:
    • Avoidant
    • Obsessive-Compulsive
    • Be aware:
    • Parties with disorders are very difficult parties in mediation!!!
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 17. Pakistan-Indian Frontier – Rituals to avoid open conflict ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 18. Styles adopted
    • Using the Nordic mediation non-model at war may compare to catholic priests advising on sexual and family issues
    • Watch these hospital beds after ethnic cleansing
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 19. Striking the right balance
    • The more you take over responsibility for solving the matter, the more you will meet impasse
    • The more you focus on results in a particular direction , the more you will meet impasse
    • The more you share legal knowledge , the more you will meet impasse
    • Private meetings (caucus) can lead to impasse and can break impasse
    • The more the parties in joint sessions are able to feel own dynamics and observe the other party’s dynamics , the less you will meet impasse
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 20. Striking the right balance
    • The more you talk or otherwise have the floor , the more you will meet impasse
    • The more you ask linear questions , the more you will meet impasse
    • The more you use free storytelling rather than ask questions , the less you will meet impasse
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 21. Striking the right balance
    • The more you consider emotional data to surface unmet needs and concerns , the less you will meet impasse
    • The more you focus on empowerment and recognition , the less you will meet impasse
    • The more you are aware of the micro dynamics in the mediation room, the less you will meet impasse
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 22. Striking the right balance
    • The more you accept yourself as part of the process (subject – subject) and not just observer (subject – object) to the process, the less you will meet impasse
    • The more you are aware of the impact of your behavior in context of empowerment and recognition , the less you will meet impasse
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 23. Striking the right balance
    • The more you free yourself from own agendas , the less you will meet impasse
    • The more you are able to empathize (not sympathize) with the contrasting facts, feelings and values of the parties in turns, the less you will meet impasse
    • The more you are able to skip hypotheses, the less you will meet impasse
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 24. Afghan palace lacking mediation ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 25. So many beauties of cultural values to draw on inside Afghanistan ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 26. Once Afghanistan was known for the Moguls’ beautiful gardens ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 27. … And for millenniums of skilled pottery ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 28. Striking the right balance
    • The more you realize that no questions are innocent , the less you will meet impasse
    • The more you use circular questions, the less you will meet impasse
    • The parties’ attorneys can break and create impasse
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 29. Striking the right balance
    • The more leaned back the parties’ attorneys are in the first half of the process, the less you will meet impasse
    • The more you manage to strike the right balance of attorneys ’ active involvement , the less you will meet impasse
    • The less you challenge the view of an attorney, the less you will meet impasse
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 30. Afghan Minister of Refugees Dr. (psychiatry) Dadfar (trained in Germany) discussing traumatized parties ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 31. Pick the impasse breaking strategy from each of the different styles and paradigms
    • The ” generic ” style app. 35 years old
    • Other styles seen as reactions to one another – Styles presented below
    • The different styles overcome deadlocks and impasses in different ways
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 32. Characteristics
    • What characterize the difference between the styles of mediation ?
    • Some of them deals very differently with dilemmas in mediation:
      • Neutrality
      • Autonomy
      • Power balance
      • Mediator influence / control
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 33. Mediation ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007 A way to solve insolvable conflicts so all parties feel better
  • 34. Afghan children learning about mediation in open air school ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 35. Ideas behind mediation
    • Looking at conflict as a potentiality
    • Take starting point in experience of the parties
    • Having confidence that the parties have what it takes
    • Create an environment for feeling better -solutions
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 36. So many Perceptions of mediation ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 37. Content
    • Why different styles ? Why different approaches to deadlock and impasse?
    • There is a different paradigm behind each different style and approach
    • The individual styles are connected to a variety in
      • epistemology
      • psychology
      • sociology
      • organizational theory and
      • communication / linguistics
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 38. 6 mainstreams
    • Generic style (1970)
    • Settlement driven style (1980)
    • Cognitive systemic style (1980)
    • Transformative style (1990)
    • Humanistic style (1990)
    • Narrative style (1990)
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 39. Existence’s dimensions
    • In conflict it is habitual only to deal with the physical universe from rational reflections
    • Thus you cut off approximately half of the parties’ dimensions
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 40. More dimensions
    • Existence's (for the time being) perceived dimensions
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007 Physical Rational Emotional Spiritual
  • 41. Teaching Giraffe and how to summarize what you just heard ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 42. The generic style
    • The generic style of mediation is app. 35 years old
    • The style is grounded also in emotional experience in contrast to just cognitive experiences
    • Which school (or schools) of epistemology , ideology and psychology may you connect this style to?
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 43. The generic style
    • Aims towards
      • 1) agreement
      • 2) empowerment and
      • 3) recognition
    • in contrast to a main focus on just one of these components
    • Communication happens part of the process via mediator and not directly between the parties
    • Structured in stages – necessary to finish one before moving to the next
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 44. Generic mediation is not for everyone ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 45. A conversation in 5 stages
    • Stage 1: Free storytelling
    • Stage 2: The parties are defining the issues
    • Stage 3: The parties brainstorm options
    • Stage 4: The parties select and negotiate solutions
    • Stage 5: The parties enter into agreement
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 46. Stage 2: Defining the issues / tasks 1
    • Parties and mediator surface positions, interests, needs and concerns
    • Positions
    • Interests
    • Needs and concerns
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 47. Stage 2: Defining the issues / tasks 2
    • Mediator ask the parties to make out what have surfaced of:
    • Facts
    • Interests
    • Emotions
    • Needs
    • Concerns
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 48. Occasionally you must draw on rehabilitation centers when parties are traumatized ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 49. Are the former inhabitants of this house now your neighbors? ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 50. Will she ever find herself again? ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 51. And even professionals may become frustrated and exhausted ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 52. Stage 2: Defining the issues / tasks 3
    • Example of a definition of issues or tasks:
    • How may we develop a better relation to one another when in the future problems occur with the delays and at the same time reduce the problems as much as possible?
    • How can we be certain that remedy is obtained with greatest possible consideration of one another's interests - with greatest possible consideration of quality – and obtain the optimal communication between us in order to achieve a win-win solution with due consideration of respect and recognition to one another?
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 53. Stage 4: Negotiating options
    • The generated options are now subject to 2 tests:
    • A: Which option may solve the defined issues?
    • B: Which of the options surviving test A are the parties prepared to carry out ?
    • !!!! Why not the reverse order?
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 54. Generic style
    • This style is a stage model
    • Emotional experiences are regarded important
    • Focus on storytelling, interests, needs and concerns prior to defining the issues
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 55. Generic style
    • Joint sessions preferred over caucus (private sessions)
    • Free storytelling and active listening regarded important
    • The process are facilitative rather than evaluative
    • Intended outcomes are agreement, empowerment and recognition
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 56. Advanced dispute resolution (in problem oriented ADR)
    • Is about:
    • Empathy
    • Reaching agreement, achieve empowerment and recognition
    • Advanced communication
    • Advanced negotiation
    • Structure
    • Assistance from a third party
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 57. Interests and concerns habitually tend to be expressed though positions (in problem oriented ADR)
    • In conflict satisfaction is normally expressed in terms of positions
    • Thus it is difficult for the parties to find common ground
    • However parties contain ability to break down positions into interests, needs and concerns providing much more opportunities to explore common ground
    • Common ground may by the parties be experienced as a key to solving their conflict
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 58. Advanced negotiation – The pyramid (in problem oriented ADR) ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007 Positions Interest Needs/Concerns
  • 59. Positions – Interests - Needs
    • Behind any position the parties will find a particular interest
    • Behind any interest the parties will find particular unmet needs or concerns
    • Any need or concern can be regarded as an interest behind which other needs and concerns are hidden
    • The further the parties explore the depth of the their needs and concerns the more they are likely to explore common ground
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 60. Overlapping pyramids ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007 Positions Interests Needs
  • 61. Do you recognize the situations? ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 62. Everyone Can Win ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 63. Settlement driven style 1
    • This style is a stage model (shaped by lawyers and decision makers) an a mutant of the generic style
    • Emotional experiences are regarded important provided there are space for them
    • When the issues are defined, - focus is on interests, needs and risk assessments
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 64. Settlement driven style 2
    • Private sessions (caucus) are habitual
    • Information gathering rather than free storytelling or active listening
    • Space for both facilitative and evaluative approach
    • Intended outcomes are agreement on transactions or a plans for transactions
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 65. Settlement driven style 3
    • What are the positions?
    • Defining the issues (normally in caucus)?
    • Gathering relevant information (normally in caucus) rather than free storytelling
    • Identification of interests, needs and risks (normally in caucus)
    • Re-defining the issues (normally in caucus)
    • Brainstorming in caucus
    • Bargaining (normally) via mediator
    • Agreement
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 66. Try to imagine what the pictures are trying telling you ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 67. Cognitive style 1
    • Often inspired by a systems approach - the Milan School
    • This style is a cycle model – repeated cycles whenever a problem occurs
    • Defining the issues
    • Information gathering of relevant information rather than free storytelling
    • Normally joint sessions
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 68. Cognitive style 2
    • Defining the issues – mutualizing
    • Gathering relevant information
    • Re-defining the issues
    • Emotional data not regarded as useful data
    • Circular questions, strategizing , hypotheses , neutrality (domain theory)
    • Aims of the process are agreement , empowerment and recognition
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 69. Transformative style 1
    • Statements from the mediator replaced with conversation on how the parties want to go through the process
    • This style is a cycle model – repeated cycles whenever a “situation” occurs
    • Focus on situations (not on problems) of lack or emerging empowerment or recognition
    • Important constantly to focus on how the parties feel to be in the process right now and focusing on whether they feel a need for any changes
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 70. Transformative style 2
    • Joint session the habitual
    • Free storytelling and active listening
    • Reflections and summarizing
    • Go with the flow, – follow the parties around, – not managing the process but encouraging a conversation of what to do now – Go with the flow even if that means summarizing differences and not just common ground
    • Intended outcomes are empowerment and recognition
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 71. Robert Baruch Bush presenting transformative mediation in Copenhagen ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 72. Terminology
    • Empowerment and recognition regarded as a movement from a relative weaker feeling/situation towards a relative stronger feeling/situation
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 73. Empowerment
    • Empowerment is this movement :
    • Unsettled  Calmer
    • Confused  Clearer
    • Fearful  More confident
    • Disorganized  More focused
    • Unsure  More decisive
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 74. Recognition
    • Recognition is this movement :
    • Uncertain about context  Understanding context
    • Self-protective  More attentive to other
    • Defensive  More open
    • Suspicious  More willing to accept other’s good faith
    • Incapable of stepping
    • outside own frame  More able to see other’s perspective
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 75. Encourage the parties to talk about
    • What is the context (How do we want to do this?)
    • Exploring the situation – sharing perspectives (What is this about?)
    • Deliberating (What does this mean?)
    • Exploring possibilities – developing ideas (What is possible?)
    • Decision -making (What do I / we do?)
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 76. Assume that the parties occasionally realize that they look like this ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 77. So many agendas to recognize ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 78. Humanistic style 1
    • This style is a stage style (inspired by the generic style)
    • Emotional experiences regarded important
    • Important that the parties identify needs, concerns and interests
    • Important to separate the “stuff” of the parties from the “stuff” of the mediator
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 79. Humanistic style 2
    • Storytelling in private preparatory meetings
    • Parties defining issues in private preparatory meetings
    • Parties defining context in private preparatory meetings
    • In private sessions the parties are prepared to walk the talk in joint sessions – active listening and free storytelling
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 80. Humanistic style 3
    • Reaching understanding of impact on others lives
    • In joint sessions the mediator tends to take a more leaned back role
    • The parties are encouraged to communicate directly with on another
    • Developing transactions
    • Intended outcomes are understanding, learning, taking responsibility, empathy, reduction of fear and anger, improving the level of mood, empowerment and recognition
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 81. Every child across the Globe have feelings , hopes and unmet needs ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 82. Narrative style 1
    • This style is a systemic stage model
    • Feelings and emotions regarded important in the context of interaction
    • Focus is on context and interactions rather than on needs, concerns and interests
    • Active listening and free storytelling
    • Re-constructing listening and circular questions
    • Focus on dominant and alternative discourse
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 83. Narrative style 2
    • Elements and functions of layers and context in stories regarded important
    • Focus on elements in the conflict-saturated story and their functions
    • Deconstructing the conflict-saturated story
    • Changing the epistemology of the individual into a reconstruction of an alternative common story important
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 84. Narrative style 3
    • Questioning ownership to the conflict story
    • De-constructing entitlements to the context and the labeling of describing terminology adopted by the individual party and emerging of a new and common story
    • Intended outcomes are understanding , agreement, empowerment and recognition
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 85. Structure
    • Storytelling
    • Engagement and context
    • Deconstructing the conflict-saturated story
    • Constructing the alternative story
    • Agreement
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 86. The Law and the Variety of Perceptions ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 87. Terminology 1
    • Inside the mediation movement’s terminology certain terms have a very distinct meaning
    • Empathy and assertion not regarded as competitors but rather as complimentary components
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 88. Terminology 2
    • Empathy regarded as the ability for a moment to leave own values, background, experiences and assumptions, - and for a moment to live within the party’s values, background, experiences and assumptions
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 89. Terminology 3
    • Assertion regarded as ability to:
      • Identify own needs
      • Communicating these needs in such a clear way that the other empathizes with them
      • Communicating these needs in such a clean way that the other is not brought into a mode of defense
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 90. Is compromise a solution?
    • In mediation compromise is not regarded as a lasting or sustainable solution
    • Ambition in mediation is to make the parties develop maximal empathy and assertion , making the parties realize what are needed and what they can live without
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 91. Exploring unmet needs and underlying emotions across Afghanistan ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 92. Emotions
    • The affective grounded processes regard the emotional experiences as shortcuts to identification of unmet needs and existing concerns
    • Mediation is not therapy , and the intended outcome is not behavior changing
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 93. Basic emotions
    • My experience has made me identify 4 frequent occurring emotions in the mediation process (any other emotion can be regarded as a medley of these basic emotions) :
    • Delight / absence of delight
    • Pain / anguish
    • Insecurity / fear / anxiety
    • Loss / sorrow / grief
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 94. You can even fear Buddha ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 95. Shortcuts to unmet needs
    • Being in pain you have a need for …?
    • Feeling insecurity you have a need for …?
    • Facing loss or feeling sorrow you have a need for …?
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 96. Coping with fear in Afghanistan ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 97. The styles of mediation 1
    • In the generic style emotional experiences are regarded useful data
    • In the settlement driven style emotional experiences are regarded useful data given that there are room for them. However risk assessment has a higher priority
    • In the cognitive (often systemic ) style decision making is regarded important
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 98. The styles of mediation 2
    • In the transformative style interaction/relation is emphasized rather than transactions
    • In the humanistic style direct dialog and preparing the parties for this direct dialog is the important topic
    • In the narrative style context and deconstruction of the conflict-saturated story it is regarded important
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 99. Affective or cognitive grounded mediation 1
    • The affective grounded mediations believes that emotional experiences are important because:
    • They are shortcuts to unmet needs and concerns
    • Ventilation of emotions often reduces the obstacles for the outlook to common sense
    • Improving / affirming self-worth - empowerment
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 100. Affective or cognitive grounded mediation 2
    • Cognitive mediation having concerns that emotional data will keep the parties stock into their past
    • Some parties feel uncomfortable using feeling mode or words
    • Some parties haven’t got the ability to put words on their emotions
    • Some parties emphasizing efficiency prefer cognitive mediation, because the style focus on decision making
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 101. From these Afghan wells drank also Greek Emperor Alexander ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 102. Process oriented or settlement driven styles of mediation
    • The process oriented style emphasize autonomy of the parties, the parties’ are controlling the process and the direction of the process
    • In the process oriented style the parties are encouraged to deal with the underlying conflict environment too
    • The settlement driven style emphasize achieving an agreement never the less this requires a certain amount of push from the mediator
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 103. Information gathering or free storytelling
    • It is habitual for us to get information by asking questions
    • However the most efficient way to get information to the table is asking as few questions as possible
    • Use active or effective listening instead of questions – thus you don’t limit the options of information into certain tracks or scopes
    • If you have to ask questions then weigh every word
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 104. Understanding the Context ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 105. Questions may be dangerous
    • Questions may lead
    • Questions may lead to confrontation
    • Questions may influence
    • Questions may make the party stick to his understanding or freeze him/her
    • Questions may make the mediator stick to his/hers prejudices
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 106. And the whip of the Dragon’s tail parted the rocky mountains ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 107. … Just one lash - And earth parted ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 108. Intentions behind questions
    • Examining intention
    • Correcting intention
    • Exploring intention
    • Facilitating intention
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 109. Effects of questions
    • Make the party stick to his understanding or freeze him/her
    • Make the mediator stick to his/hers prejudices – stimulating confrontations
    • Liberating/stimulating
    • Stimulating accept or creativity
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 110. Active listening when you are the third party
    • Main focus is on making the party talk – not to talk about a given issue
    • Stimulate to reflection
    • Summarizing followed by a break ( pause) is a sophisticated way (and strategy) of getting information to the table
    • Restating followed by a break ( pause) is a sophisticated way (and strategy) of getting information to the table
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 111. Active listening when being the mediator
    • Summarizing, reflecting and restating followed by a break is a way of getting information to the table and providing space for the party to talk about any issue being on his/her mind
    • Surfacing feelings - emotions
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 112. Questions when you are the mediator
    • If you feel that you cannot do without questioning then let the questions be open -ended and circular (there are only few excuses for not being empathic )
    • So what you are saying is …?
    • Please tell me whatever is on your mind?
    • Can you tell more?
    • Help us out here to understand (or clarify for us)!
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 113. Circular questions (requires practice and knowledge) 1
    • Consequence : How doe’s the problem influence the surroundings and reverse?
    • Re-framing : Is it possible to view the problem from an other's angel (probably positive intention)?
    • Advantages and disadvantages : Advantages and disadvantages by not solving the problem
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 114. Circular questions (requires practice and knowledge) 2
    • Miracles : Given that the problem is solved, how will you know that the problem is solved?
    • Proportions : What may do the problem heavier? How come that it is not heavier at this point??
    • Exception : When was this problem not a problem?
    • Perspectives : How would you like to look back on the problem solved? What would you advice if asked for advice in a similar situation ?
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 115. Logistic
    • Too many mediators and sponsors are focusing on the macro dynamics: Legislation, sponsoring, neutrality, impartiality, certifying etc.
    • The experienced mediator is aware that the personality/performance of the mediator and the micro -dynamics are the important components
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 116. Examples of positive and negative micro dynamics
    • Check-Outs
    • Circular Questions
    • Clarifying the Denial of Recognition
    • Confrontation
    • Directives to Elaborate
    • Evaluation
    • Interpretations
    • Key-Word Encouragers
    • Meta Conversation
    • Minimal Encouragers
    • Mutualizing
    • Normalizing
    • Open-Ended Questions
    • Paraphrases
    • Paraphrasing a Request for Recognition
    • Parroting
    • Process Observations
    • Prompting Questions
    • Reassurance
    • Reflecting Content
    • Reflecting Feelings
    • Reflective Questions
    • Reframing
    • Request to Elaborate
    • Separating Double Massages
    • Suggestions
    • Summaries
    • Tracking Questions
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 117. Mediation is founded on
    • Empathy
    • Understanding
    • Change
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 118. Please empathize; – Advise is simply not useful ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 119. But be aware of personality!
    • Empathy
    • Anxiety
    • Aggression/stubbornness
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007
  • 120. Thanks for your attention
    • Yours truly
    • Hans Boserup
    ©hansboserup@gmail.dk www.mediator.dk 2007