Just to add clarity to what I have previously said about mediator training.
I do believe that the five day program and process of accreditation is a start, an excellent start but in order to support a profession we need more. What I might not have made clear before is that, for me, developing expertise as a mediator is about developing our capacity to work within the frameworks and standards.
And, to be very clear I am not promoting the slavish adherence to a beginners model but a more refined set of skills in how we embrace that model to promote participant self determination.
Anybody can engage in a positional bargain, assisting participants to explore interests and create options is a challenge and my reading of the standards suggests it is what we are called upon to do.
If I am wrong about that then maybe we should be asking there MSB to change the standards.
Original Message:
Sent: 17-06-2022 11:39 AM
From: David Mitchell
Subject: Observing a Mediation, Greg Rooney Mediator. The Tennis Club Lease
Two of my mediator Sifu (defined as" the title for and role of a skilful person or a master" [Wikipedia]) are Greg Rooney and Barbara Wilson. Both are great thinkers, writers, and communicators and are acknowledged experts in their craft (mediation).
It was great to see Sifu Rooney in action. It meant more to me than reading about flow. Admittedly I got hooked on the step by step promises of Greg. On the second viewing I 'got' the flow concept. I also appreciated the push/shove to get a deal done… opening offers of $10,000 vs $700,000 with two lawyers, one QC, a dentist and two about to ex-partners is not going to get anywhere with a invisible mediator. Eclectism in a mediator is required, not a slavish adherence to a basic/beginners facilitation model.
I agree with Peter Mathie that the current teaching model is woefully inadequate
Thank you, Greg, for this posting and for your explanatory reply to Peter Mathie. Your pauses for explanation were an excellent teaching tool and has some similarities to Barbara Wilson's Mediator Expertise Live Interview (MELI) where an expert mediator is interviewed by a peer and questioned by a small group of mediators wanting to increase their own skills, expertise and competence. Barbara's premise which matches that of Peter Mathie and myself, is that basic training to achieve NMAS or similar certification, is totally inadequate:
"Trained mediators subsequently claiming expertise ay not distinguish clearly - if at all - between their experience as a mediator and their achievements in their discipline of origin (typically law, psychology, mental health, social science and so forth). As a result, their mediation skills may be viewed simply as adjuncts to their primary professions. It is therefore probable that at least some practitioners promoting themselves as expert mediators do not actually possess mediator expertise".
(Ref: Barbara Wilson 2012. Mediator Expertise Live Interviews
SSRN Electronic Journal · November 2012 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2179587)
Ongoing training is required for mediators to maintain expertise AND competence. Supervision, peer supervision, online sharing of tacit and implicit knowledge via Communities of Practice/Interest are more productive than a sleep session/power nap at a compulsory CPD.
Mediation is a professionally lonely existence.
Reading mediation books and articles can never be enough.
Self reporting by mediators is notoriously skewed/biased/inaccurate.
Comparing oneself with live recordings of current expert mediators conducting a mediation (Greg Rooney's video) or live interviewing such an expert about his/her on- the- spot thinking/reacting/interacting (Wilson's MELI) are excellent examples of the future for training competent mediators.
David Mitchell
------------------------------
David Mitchell
Director
Mitchell Mediate
Clarence Park SA
418898039
Original Message:
Sent: 16-06-2022 09:35 PM
From: Greg Rooney
Subject: Observing a Mediation, Greg Rooney Mediator. The Tennis Club Lease
Thanks Peter for your comments and reflections.
You have to take the parties as you find them not where you would like them to be. You start at that point and work forward step-by-step. It's all about the flow and the dance.
Most of the work was done in the two intake sessions where I found each sides story. I kept referring back to their stories as we progressed through each joint session. The intake session is the best place to explore.
The problem was that both parties were stuck in positions far apart. They knew it and were looking for something they could both live with. So the mediation was about keeping the flow going as you will see from a lot of my pre-emptive interventions.
Putting aside the fact that both sides were playing games and that there was a lot of consensual deception they both had an interest in getting a result. I created the options by asking them both to make concessions. I just had to hold them in the room and work with the assistance of their lawyers. The solution emerged out of all this interaction.
This mediation will never be repeated as no two are the same. It is therefore unrealistic to say there is a common standard or benchmark of how mediators should behave in all cases.
My definition of mediation is:
"A process of a mediator creating a venue where parties get close to each other in order to move an issue forward"
This contains the three basic elements of mediation.
- The venue forces parties to actually do something. To turn up, to be present and to actually deal with an issue.
- It's built on human interaction. This brings in the huge complexity of human relationships.
- It recognizes the fundamental law of flow that guides all human activity. When the flow stops you die. It is about necessary endings and new beginnings.
The good side of standards is that they provide guidance for practitioners in working with complex human interactions. It is a problem if they turn into dogma.
------------------------------
Greg Rooney
Mediator
Mediator
Bridgewater SA
61405612789
Original Message:
Sent: 16-06-2022 07:05 PM
From: Peter Mathie
Subject: Observing a Mediation, Greg Rooney Mediator. The Tennis Club Lease
Thanks for sharing this Greg. It seems to me, a good starting point for a debate about how we define mediation and the range of practice that fits within the boundaries of our profession. I have been repeating an explanation for a fair while that mediation experiences sit on a continuum that stretches between the Sunday lunch table and the High Court's bar table.
I understand that what you have presented in the video is a series of snapshots taken throughout a much longer engagement so, I am sure that there was a lot that happened and isn't represented through the presentation. What I see in what you are offering though is a model of mediation that is quite different to the one we teach through Resolution Institute as well as how I interpret the NMAS standards.
The standards and the model we teach speak about exploration of interests and the creation of options where the model you are demonstrating here seems to go straight into negotiation of the outcome.
------------------------------
Peter Mathie
Principal
Perth Mediation Centre
BASSENDEAN WA
419183283
Original Message:
Sent: 12-06-2022 09:55 PM
From: Greg Rooney
Subject: Observing a Mediation, Greg Rooney Mediator. The Tennis Club Lease
Observing a Mediation, Greg Rooney Mediator. The Tennis Club Lease
This YouTube video is a recreation of a mediation I conducted with actors playing the part of the parties and their lawyers.
It represents what happened on the day.
It is an opportunity to observe a mediation based on real events and to critique my performance as a mediator in the context of mediator practice, theory and ethics.
It is offered as an open source resource to the broader mediation profession
This is the YouTube Link:
https://lnkd.in/dS7rK_c3
------------------------------
Greg Rooney
Mediator
Mediator
Bridgewater SA
61405612789
------------------------------