1. Phase: The first talk
The initial discussion is not the contact of the future client, but the first joint discussion of the conflict parties, with the mediator.
Clarify the corner points
In the first interview, the nature and principles of mediation are presented, the mediator introduces himself and explains something of his approach. Even if the principles of mediation are generally binding - the principles are, so to speak, the professional rules of the mediators - the emphasis in the process is weighted differently.
Differences in the mediators
For example, judges are also trained as mediators who, as so-called judges of justice, conduct a procedure. This newly installed procedure before an actual court hearing should help to relieve the actual courts.
However, due to their professional backgrounds, these goods managers are focusing more on the decision. This is also an overriding goal. As a rule, however, the mediators will hardly make their own proposals for solutions.
The rules of the game of communication
In the initial discussion, the framework is staked out. The mediator gives an assessment of how many joint meetings he has estimated. Rules on the type of communication can be set up.
However, the mediator should make sure that the framework is not too narrow. It must also be possible in a mediation that the parties can make themselves air without violating everything which goes.
2. Live theme collection
The second phase seamlessly follows the first one, usually even in the same session. This depends on how quickly the "opponents" can agree on the scope of the procedure. In the topic collection, all problems are put on the table and visualized.
The subject is formulated in a factual manner
The conflicts are named among others. The theme collection is not limited. It does not have to be limited to the actual field. There is also no evaluation. Everything is written down which burns under the nails. Only the following should be considered when presenting the topics:
- The topics should be presented neutral without evaluation.
- The topic should be named for both positions regardless of the standpoints (which is already a rating!).
- The topic should be presented.
- Moral values as a topic are absolutely taboo.
Example of factual topic finding
An example to better illustrate what has just been written: A is the opinion of the apple tree of B that protrudes into its garden, hinders the light conditions so immensely that only a complete precipitation helps. B looks a bit different. He finds A exaggerated beyond measure.
- Position A: The apple tree must go!
- Viewpoint B: The apple tree has to stay!
- The topic of both: What happens to the apple tree?
More should not stand at this point!
After the topic the clarification of interests comes. Only when this has been completed can one go over to finding a solution.
3. Phase: Clarify the interests
Clarification of interests - This sounds easier than it is. But most of the time, the (hidden) interest is not in getting law in the true sense. This is the responsibility of the courts. A professional rating by the mediator is not done anyway. The following problem arises.
The "brawlers" come to the meeting with clear fronts for each other. Each party has its point of view, your understanding of law or morality. There you sit now and should talk about your topic. Best still one after another and with as neutral, unimpeachable words.
Behind the stands are the interests
What does that mean in your topic? What has been said in this first phase of the conversation has been the viewpoints. The points of view are only the tip of the iceberg.
The interests are slumbering among the standpoints. And here the real important task of the mediator begins. This is, so to speak, the heart of mediation. The mediator tries to get to the interests of the parties through his questioning technique. This has two effects:
- The interest is what really matters to people, what it takes to fight, to negotiate. The interest in the soil can be completely different from the point of view at the summit.
- If someone talks about his interest, then he is also understood by his counterpart. Points of view can be very abstract. When someone talks about his or her interest, emotions come into play, and the emotional level opens the way to understanding.
The mediator must find the hidden interests
To stay with the apple tree theme. The mediator is now trying to get behind the interests hidden by the viewpoints.
- A has the view that the apple tree must be gone. Why?
- Answer: The garden is very shady. A therefore has the hope to achieve a higher quality of life through the missing apple tree.
- Why does he want to achieve this?
- Answer: That means the quality is not sufficient. Where is the deficit?
By questions to the goal
So the mediator tries by his questions to get the median to reach his real needs. A higher quality of life? Of course, this interest is also understood by neighbor B.
Who does not have that wish? From the abstract point of view that disturbs the tree, the elicitation of interests creates a common level through the mediator.
More knowledge - PDF download, eCourses or personal advice
Offline download: Download this text as PDF - Read usage rights, Because we do not automatically submit the title of this text for privacy reasons: When buying in "interests" the title register if support is needed. After buying text exclusively Download at this URL (please save).
Your eCourse on Demand: Choose your personal eCourse on this or another desired topic, As a PDF download. Up to 30 lessons with each 4 learning task + final lesson. Please enter the title under "interests". Alternatively, we are happy to put together your course for you or offer you a personal regular eMailCourse including supervision and certificate - all further information!
Consultant packages: You want to increase your reach or address applicants as an employer? For these and other topics we offer special Consultant packages (overview) - For example, a personal phone call (price is per hour).