The Role I Played as a Mediator in a Conflict between Two Neighbors - Essay Example

Analysis and Evaluation Institution Name Date Table of Contents Analysis and Evaluation 1 Introduction 3 The conflict situation 3 Theoretical rationale 5 The keys to transformative mediation 6 The mediation process 8 Assessment of the process used 10 Areas of personal strengths and weaknesses 11 Review of Transcript 12 Conclusion 13 References 14 Appendix: 17 Introduction A conflict is a disagreement where the parties involved feel that their needs, interests and concerns are threatened. It is normal and part of life since people cannot be expected to always agree on everything every time. It is therefore important to understand how to resolve conflicts rather than to avoid them. Conflict resolution involves use of methods that can address the causes and the source of conflicts (Association for Conflict Resolution & Institute for the Study of Conflict Transformation, 2010). Where a conflict is not managed properly, it can result to a permanent harm of the relationship of the people involved. However, when handled in a respectful manner, it offers the parties an opportunity for growth as well as strengthening their relationship (Boulle, Colatrella Jr, & Picchioni, 2008). This essay is a reflection of the role I played as a mediator in a conflict between two neighbors. It summarizes the problem that caused the dispute and the views of each of the parties involved. The essay also gives an outline of the conflict resolution strategy that I applied, theoretical rationale of the applied strategy and the theoretical framework of that particular strategy. The essay also gives a summary of the theoretical overview of the particular conflict situation, together with the mediation skills that I used. Finally, it gives a 5 minute transcript of the entire mediation process and a reflection of my strengths and weaknesses in the mediation process. The conflict situation The conflict is between Phillip and his neighbor Allison. Phillip is a freelance journalist who has been writing short articles with a focus on human interest. Philip has settled in a new accommodation unit after the one he had lived for two months got sold. He has now stayed in the new one for three months and he is very busy after being offered a twelve month contract to complete a book. His routine of work needs minimal distraction since he works during the day in his house. He wakes up at 6.00 am and starts his writing work by 7.00 am. In his previous accommodation, he had a very smart routine of working up to 11.00 am, take a break and then resume at 1.00 pm. This routine worked perfectly for him since there were no disruptions. Now in this new place, there is a really disrupting neighbor who practices violin with hopes of an audition for some symphony orchestra. Sometimes a group of violinists visit her house for practice. Phillip can’t work due to this noise and feels that it is too much. He has tried to seek the intervention of the police but they can not help since the noise does not occur during the legal limit times. The land lord too is unable to help. Philip does not want to move again to avoid disruption and the landlord has also indicated to him that he will lose his bond money if he breaks the lease. On the other hand is Alison, a talented violist who is preparing for a forthcoming audition in six weeks time. If she gains a position in this symphony, she will get the opportunity of travelling and working for the next six months, giving her resume a big boost for future opportunities. Alison is therefore practicing six to eight hours a day, that is, from 8.00 am to 4.00 pm. Alison is also part of a quartet that plays in a very elegant restaurant and this group visits her house for practice once every four weeks. She has lived in this unit for the last twelve months and has never had any issues with the neighbors. She has more twelve months remains on her lease. For the last three months since Phillip joined the unit, there has been trouble every time as he does nothing but to complain about her practicing. Alison has even tried to invite Philip for a drink and has tried to be sociable to him but to no avail. She has concluded that Philip has a major problem with the world and the landlord has also concluded that he is a real problem. Alison is aware of Philip’s complains to the landlord and that he prefers rock music. Sometimes Alison is forced to compete with Philip’s loud rock music that he turns up deliberately to annoy her. The conflict here comes due to disruption of each other’s activities. The two parties are busy and each one is doing it to earn a living. The landlord is unable to help them and the police also can not help Philip. Alison thinks that she is right in her work because she has lived there for the last twelve months and no one has ever complained of her noise. It is just three months ago that Philip joined the unit and has become a hell of a neighbor for her. In between them is the landlord who seems to be siding with Alison and agrees with her that Philip is really a problem. Theoretical rationale Mediation strategy The mediation strategy that bets firs the situation of Philip and Alison is transformative mediation. This is the process I used as the mediator between the two neighbors. Transformative mediation is a new concept in mediation strategies that was first described by Folger and Bush (1994). This process focuses on the concept of empowering the parties involved as much as possible and ensuring recognition by each of the involved parties of the needs of the other party, his or her interests, values and point of view. The two main concepts in this strategy are empowerment and recognition (Butler, 2004). The basis for transformative mediation is that during the mediation process, the relationship of the parties may be transformed. According to Gaynier, (2005) the difference between the transformative mediation and facilitative mediation is that facilitative mediators aimed at transforming the society with pre-peace techniques while the transformative mediators aims at con6tinuing the process by enabling the involved parties determine their own direction in the process. In transformative mediation, the involved parties design both the mediation process and the outcome of the process; then the mediator follows their way (Bercovitch, & Wells, 1993). The transformative mediation process does not seek to settle an immediate problem but rather to enable the parties have a lasting solution through empowerment and recognition guided by the mediator. The idea of Folger and Bush (1994) was to avoid the problem of mediator being the one directing the parties. This often occurs where the problem solving mediation is used. This strategy therefore puts the responsibility onto the disputants for all the outcomes of the mediation process (Wall Jr, Stark, & Standifer, 2001). The keys to transformative mediation 1. Empowerment In transformative mediation, empowerment means increasing the ability of the parties to make informed decisions about their issues of conflict. It is the reinstatement to the individuals of their own sense of value and strength and their own capacity to handle their problem (Haynes, & Fong, 2004). By empowerment, the disputants gain a better understanding of their values, their preferences, goals and options and that this understanding may enable them to make clear and informed decisions (Deutsch, Coleman, & Marcus, 2006). Understanding of the goals means that they will be sure of what they want and why. Resources mean that they will be to know what resources they have and what they need to make an informed decision. In this, they will also understand something of value from other parties and how that can commonly use the resources to achieve their goals (Druckman, & Broome, 1991). Options means that they will be able to understand their range of options and the cost of each, and that it will be clear to them that they are alone to make the choice of the options. Understanding their preferences means that they will be able to determine what they want to do based on their strengths and weaknesses, and checking on the advantages and disadvantages of each option (Bercovitch, & Jackson, 2009). Developing better understanding of these areas strengthens the parties’ ability to resolve disputes in which they are involved. According to Donohue, Allen, & Burrell, (1985) empowerment enables the parties to listen, learn, communicate, analyze issues and evaluate alternatives among others. According to Stitt, (2004), the mediator carries out empowerment by looking for opportunities to increase the disputants understanding of these areas and building skills in them. The mediator ensures that the disputants are able to control the process of discussion and also the subject matters. Here the mediators mostly take the secondary role rather than leading the entire process (Bercovitch, & Zartman, 2008) 2. Recognition Recognition in transformative mediation means taking into consideration the views and considerations of other people. According to Spencer, & Brogan, (2006), recognition also means that the individual is acknowledging and empathizing with the situation of other people. Together with empowerment, the role of recognition in transformative mediation is aimed at extending beyond the conflict at the moment into their future lives. Its long term goal is to enable the parties relate with each other in a selfless manner. After the parties have been empowered, the mediators allow them to determine to what extent they are willing to understand the views of their opponents. Recognition may therefore result to total reconciliation between the parties in dispute (Winter, & Columbia College, 1998). Generally, transformative mediators do not have a lot of involvement in the settlement of the issues. They give the opening statement by stating that the mediation if offering a forum for the disputants to talk about their problem as the mediator holds a third party neutral position. This is important because the nature of the problem is understood from the disputants’ point of views (Boulle, Goldblatt, & Green, 2008). It is therefore the role of the parties to explore the option for dealing with their problem until they reach a mutual understanding. Where they do not reach a mutual understanding, they may also suggest different approaches of handling their matter. The role of the mediator here is to enable them to set the goals, the ground rules and the process of negotiation that they would like to follow. He or she will ask questions and make suggestions as a way of empowering and promoting recognition for each other. Transformative mediation is however useful for individuals rather than for organizations or representatives (Deutsch, 1973). The mediation process The mediation process was divided into three parts: the opening, discussion and the conclusion. In the opening session, my role as the mediator was to give the opening statement. In this statement my aim was to bring out the idea of empowerment. This involved stating the importance of each of the parties to understand their values, their goals, their preferences and their options so that as they enter the discussion state, they are well aware of what they need to come up with. I also made sure that I find ways of making all these clear to the disputants and they have skills of tackling the issues focusing on what they want. In the case of Phillip and Allison, Phillip was the first person to speak out his concerns, the goals he want to achieve if given the conducive environment that he wishes for, his preferences of the situation and other options available for doing his work. Alison also stated the same regarding the complains she has received from Phillip. Basically, the issue here was to enable the two parties to coexist. I also made sure that there was peace between them so that they can listen and communicate with each other appropriately (Kaufman, & Duncan, 1992). Having the disputants empowered and aware of what each of them wants, we then proceeded to the second stage of discussion. This stage mostly involved listening to each other’s views and opinions. First, Phillip explained to Alison the nature of his work, why he is doing it in the accommodation unit, and the general reason why he is doing it. In explaining the nature of his work, he also pointed out why he needs a quite working environment. On the other hand, Alison also explained to Phillip whey she does the practice in the accommodation unit and the basic reason as to why she does it. The two had therefore to recognize each other’s situation. However, there was a common reason as to why both of them are doing the work which is to make an income. They should be able to feel each other’s situation by understanding that every one of them must do the work to survive. At this point, I guided them to consider the available options for each of them. Phillip had options such as renting an office in another unit while Alison had an option of practicing out in the fields. However, Phillip’s option was considered to be costly but we also gave it a consideration. They two of them also had a common option of sharing the days in a week where each of them will be having three working days without any disturbance from the other. The other three days, one can continue working but have no right to complain, or can look for somewhere else since those are not his or her days. Sharing hours in a day was also another option where one could take the morning hours and the other one the afternoon hours. At this point, the two parties applied the process of compromising where one has to give or take and reach a consensus (Butler, 2004). The last stage was to conclude the discussion. At this point I was involved in asking them whether each one of them was comfortable with the decision reached. While asking questions, I also made sure that their relationship has improved and that each is at peace with the other. This session also involved apologizing for the inconveniences caused and ensuring that there is a proper agreement. Then I was also involved in counseling the parties on how to live together so that they can have better relationship even in the future. It was however important to put the agreement in writing or in recording so that none of them will break it. The outcome at this point was said to be readiness to accommodate each other’s activities and a better relationship in the neighborhood (Deutsch,1973). Assessment of the process used One characteristic of transformative mediation is that the role of the mediator is described in terms of empowerment and recognition. Basically, the main role is to enable the parties have a clear understanding of their goals and preferences. The main expected outcome is settlement but this is not the main goal of the mediation process (Strasser, & Randolph, 2004). The mediator may even leave the parties at the point where they have understood their situation and let them carry on. In mediating between Phillip and Alison, I assumed a very minimal role that focused on their goals, values, options and their preferences. I did not involve myself into analyzing of the case to hear who the offender is and who is the offended. This is because it could have influenced me into making a partisan decision. The parties involved usually have a better understanding of their problems and is not the role of the mediator to dig into their problems (Thomas, 1992). As the mediator, I completely refused to be judgmental as the parties could have wished (Silbey, & Merry,1986). Considering the interventions that Phillip had sought such as the police and the landlord, he believed that he was right and could have wished that Alison should be stopped from practicing in the unit. However, after the process of making them understand why each is doing the work in that manner, I left them to make a settlement. After they made a settlement of sharing the days in a week, my role at that point was to make sure that every one is comfortable with the outcome. This is because the outcome is reached on their own without the intervention of the mediator. This also helps the parties to leave knowing that they are the ones who can find solution to their problem and not any other person (Riskin, 2003). If as the mediator I could have created an impression that I can offer the solution, they could have not listened to each other and all they could have done is to try to influence me each on his or her side. Future relationship is improved when the two parties live knowing that incase of any misunderstanding, they have the solution. Review of Transcript Our talk started at 1.52 pm where I offered my opening statement on importance of learning to coexist in the neighborhood. Then I asked the two of them each to state his or her problem. At 1.53 pm, Philip said that he is getting disturbed by the noise made by Alison as she practices on her violin. At 1.55, Alison expressed that she had tried to approach Phillip so that they can resolve the issue but Phillip has all along declined. He has just been complaining all the way to the police. At 1.58 I tried to find the reason as to why Philip declined having a discussion with Alison and at 1.59 Phillip said that he was fed up and could not stand holding a discussion with Alison. At 2.00 pm I tried to create recognition that the solution to their problem can be found by the two of them and that each has t understand the other’s problem. At 2.01 pm, Phillip stated that he can not quit his work to allow Alison to continue since it is his source of income. At 2.02, Alison also expressed the same. At 2.03, I explained to them that no one is supposed to quite for the sake of the other and they therefore need to find a solution to the problem that fits both of them. From this point the two agreed to talk and at 2.04 pm Phillip acknowledged that they can discuss what to do. From there they discussed the issues and eventually came up with the solution of sharing the number of days in a week. Areas of personal strengths and weaknesses In the mediation process, I had various strengths and weaknesses which in a way influenced my ability to take them through the process. Strengths One of my strengths in the role I played is that I was able to ask the parties more questions. This enabled me to have adequate information concerning the issues and I was prepared to assist them. I could therefore understand their problem even before they expressed themselves. One of the strength that enabled me to be a transformative mediator was inability to show sympathy for one party. Deep in my heart, I tended to feel as if Philip was more affected and that Alison’s work was not as important as Philip’s. However, during the mediation process, this feeling did not dictate the manner in which I directed them into the outcome. Weaknesses One of my weaknesses that I noted was that my English was not very smooth and the two could sometimes not get my points properly. This could result to some miscommunication in the process. This is not appropriate for a mediator since he or she should be well understood by both parties. At some point the two parties could lose concentration when they fail to understand what I was saying. Another weakness was that I did not fully control the entire process and Alison was more vocal than Phillip. She could therefore speak more and had more control of the process. Conclusion In this case, I believe that I played the role perfectly as a transformative mediator. This is because of the process I used where I did not fall on any one’s side but I played a neutral third party role. The outcome of the mediation process was to see the parties reach a common point where they will coexist and make their relationship better. However, this process was faced with various challenges due to the desire of each of the parties to make me favour their side. However, I was able to overcome this challenge by following the main concepts of transformative mediation which are empowerment and recognition. The disputants were able to come up with an outcome that would work for both of them and each was comfortable with it. References Butler, V. (2004). Mediation: Essentials and Expectations. Pittsburgh: Dorrance Publishing Co., Inc., Bercovitch, J., & Zartman, W. (2008). The SAGE handbook of conflict resolution. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict. American Behavioral Scientist, 17(2), 248. Donohue, W. A., Allen, M., & Burrell, N. (1985). Communication strategies in mediation. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 1985(10), 75-89. Druckman, D., & Broome, B. J. (1991). Value differences and conflict resolution. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 35(4), 571. Deutsch, M., Coleman, P., & Marcus, E., (2006). The handbook of conflict resolution: theory and practice. New York:John Wiley and Sons. Bercovitch, J., & Jackson, R. (2009). Conflict resolution in the twenty-first century: principles, methods, and approaches. Michigan: University of Michigan Press. Gaynier, L. P. (2005). Transformative mediation: In search of a theory of practice. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 22(3), 397-408. Kaufman, S., & Duncan, G. T. (1992). A formal framework for mediator mechanisms and motivations. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 36(4), 688. Riskin, L. (2003). Decision-making in mediation: The new old grid and the new new grid system. Notre Dame Law Review, 79(1). Haynes, J., & Fong, L. (2004). Mediation: positive conflict management. New York: SUNY Press. Stitt, A. (2004). Mediation: a practical guide. London: Cavendish Publishing Ltd. Thomas, K. W. (1992). Conflict and conflict management: Reflections and update. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(3), 265-274. Strasser, F. & Randolph, P. (2004). Mediation: a psychological insight into conflict resolution. London: Continuum International Publishing Group. Boulle, L., Goldblatt, V., & Green, P. (2008).Mediation: Principles, Process, Practice. New Zealand: LexisNexis NZ Limited. Riskin, L. (2003). Decision-making in mediation: The new old grid and the new new grid system. Notre Dame Law Review, 79(1). Folger, J. & Bush, R. (1994). The promise of mediation: the transformative approach to conflict. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Association for Conflict Resolution & Institute for the Study of Conflict Transformation, (2010). Transformative mediation: a sourcebook: resources for conflict intervention practitioners and programs. California: Association for conflict Resolution. Bercovitch, J., & Wells, R. (1993). Evaluating Mediation Strategies. Peace & Change, 18(1), 3- 25. Boulle, L., Colatrella Jr, M. T., & Picchioni, A. P. (2008). Mediation: Skills and techniques. Laurence Boulle, 9. Silbey, S. S., & Merry, S. E. (1986). Mediator settlement strategies. Law & Policy, 8(1), 7-32. Wall Jr, J. A., Stark, J. B., & Standifer, R. L. (2001). Mediation: A current review and theory development. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 45(3), 370-391. Winter, A. & Columbia College (Columbia, S.C.). (1998).Transformative mediation: utilizing transformative learning concepts to provide theoretical support. Columbia : Columbia College. Spencer, D. & Brogan, M. (2006). Mediation law and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Appendix: Transcript The transcript below was the talk that we held the three of us trying to find a solution for the problem. Time Speaker 1.52 pm I (mediator): when living in the neighborhood, it is very important to understand each other and to learn to coexist. It is very true that conflicts do occur since people have different interests but it is important for one to learn to cope with the interests of each other. So, Philip, what is your issue in this case? 1.53 pm Phillip: The issue is that am getting disturbed by the noise made by Alison in the unit as she practices with her violin. 1.54 pm I (mediator): Alison, Philip you have heard what Phillip has said regarding your violin practice. What is your say? 1.55 pm Alison: My issue is that Phillip has not approached me to talk about the issue; I have made attempts even to invite him for a drink so that we can talk but he has declined. He has complained all the way to the police but I also have to practice my violin since I have been doing it for long since before he joined the unit. 1.56 pm I (mediator): what did you Alison want to discuss with Philip? 1.57 pm Alison: How we can solve the issues ourselves without involving the police or the landlord. 1.58 pm I (mediator): Why did you Phillip decline? 1.59 pm Phillip: I was so fed up such that I could not listen to her. 2.00 pm I (mediator): It is very important for you to understand that the solution to this problem can be found in both of you. Not unless you discuss your concerns and possible solutions, nobody can help you. Let us listen to each other and I wish Philip could start by expressing his concerns including what he this we should do to solve the issue, then Alison will speak. 2:01 pm Phillip: my issue is that I can’t continue working under such noise that is made by Alison. I need to work to make income for my survival and I think she should give me space. 2.02 pm Alison: there is nothing I can do about Phillip’s complains because I also need to work to earn an income. Secondly, I have been doing this for the last one year without any complain from other neighbors. 2.03 pm I: according to what each of you has said, nobody can quit for the sake of the other. Both of you must work and therefore the aim of this discussion is to find ways of how you can both work without inconveniencing each other. 2.04 pm Phillip: its true I understand that each one must work and we therefore have to agree on how to do it without oppressing each other 2.05 pm I: let each one of you suggest what you can do considering the needs and preferences of the other. Read More