There are various ways through which a mediator can earn the trust of parties to a conflict. Oftentimes, it is essential that the mediator be seen to be neutral during the process of mediation.
5.0 SUMMARY
We have examined the various sources of conflict mediator trust, and in particular focused on the possible ways a mediator could build trust during mediation.
6.0 TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT
Describe how a mediator could build trust between parties to a conflict?
7.0 REFERENCES/FURTHER READINGS
Ho-won Jeong(ed) 1999 Conflict Resolution: Dynamics, Process and Structures Brookfield, VT: Ashgate Pub. Co.
Roger Fisher et.al 1994 Beyond Machiavelli Tools for Coping with Conflict, Cambridge, MA: Havard University Press.
CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Objectives 3.0 Main Body
3.1 Communication-Facilitation Strategies 3.1.1 Procedural Strategies
3.1.2 Directive Strategies 4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
6.0 Tutor Marked Assignment (TMA) 7.0 References/Further Readings
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Mediators have many resources, strategies and techniques available to them in trying to intervene in a conflict situation. Specifically, mediators may use one of the following three strategies in the course of helping to deal with a conflict. They may rely on communication-facilitation strategies, procedural strategies, or directive strategies.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
i. Identity the three main strategies a mediation;
ii. Explain communication – facilitation strategies;
iii. Explain procedural strategies; and iv. Explain the use of directive strategies
3.0 MAIN BODY
3.1 Communication-Facilitation Strategies
This describes mediator behavior at the low end of the intervention spectrum. Here a mediator typically adopts a fairly passive role, channeling information to the parties, facilitating cooperation, but exhibiting little control over the more formal process or substance of mediation. This is a very important role in the context of conflicts, where parties in conflict lack direct channels of communication, have different conceptions of the central issues, and/or do not even have the opportunity to explore any options that might benefit both. In such situations, a mediator who can facilitate dialogue and communication, and just carry out information from one to the other, is a prerequisite for an effective process of peacemaking. Norway's intervention in bringing about the Oslo Accords in 1993 (in which in fact) is a good example of what we mean by communication-facilitation strategies.
3.1.1 Procedural Strategies
Enables a mediator to bring both parties together, in some neutral environment, where they (i.e., the mediator) exert some control over the conflict management process. Here a mediator may exercise control over timing, issues on the agenda, meeting place and arrangements, media publicity, the distribution of information, and the formality or flexibility of the meetings. Procedural strategies give a mediator the opportunity to control aspects of interaction. This is very significant for parties in a conflict that may not have had an opportunity to interact together in any other place besides the battlefield. Procedural strategies help to minimize stress and disruption that arise when two or more conflictual parties who have little history of peacemaking get together to deal with their conflict.
3.1.2 Directive Strategies
Are the most powerful form of intervention. Here a mediator works hard to shape the content and nature of a final outcome. This is done by offering each party in conflict incentives, promises of support, or threats of diplomatic sanctions. When a mediator engages in such behavior, the parties are confronted with new resources or the prospect of losing resources. This may change the value they attach to their conflict and produce behavior that is more consonant with the requirements of conflict resolution.
Directive strategies are crucial in any conflict. They allow a mediator to break through a cycle of violence by changing the factors influencing the parties' decision making. By making financial or diplomatic support contingent on co-operation, people who are otherwise opposed to settlement might be persuaded to agree to one. Directive strategies take the form of promises of rewards or threats of withdrawals, if certain agreements are not made or actions are not taken. In either case they are significant in getting parties in a conflict to change their values and behavior.
4.0 CONCLUSION
After examining these strategies, it is evident that a mediator could either remain distantly passive, exert a little control, or a strong control over the mediation process. The choice of strategy the mediator decides to use may depend on the nature or stage of the conflict.
5.0 SUMMARY
We have examined the three strategies of mediation, namely, communication-facilitation, procedural strategies and directive strategies.
6.0 TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENT
Identify and describe the three main strategies used in the course of settling disputes by mediators?
7.0 REFERENCE/FURTHER READINGS
Sung Hee Kim et.al, 1994 Social Conflict: Escalation, Stalemate and Settlement, 2nd Edition, New York, McGraw Hill College Division,