Art of Mediation

¶ … Art of Mediation: The Impasse When it comes to the art of mediation, avoiding an impasse is essential at all costs -- but often unavoidable. For issues as sensitive and as emotionally charged as whether or not to use stem cells for a research project, a professional mediator can bring a lot to the table: not just in the arena of resolving the conflict, but helping the separate parties to better see one another's point-of-view. "Mediation serves a valuable purpose regardless of the outcome. Everyone learns more about the case.

Even though mediation is not an opportunity for free discovery side, through the process of risk analysis directed by the mediator, everyone invariably gains insights into their own and their adversary's case" (Johnsen, 2013). Thus, even when the mediation hits a brick wall, even just a temporary one, all sides have already gained a valuable amount of insight. Even so, everyone involved wants results.

In such as case as delicate as the one described, the art of mediation is absolutely necessary, and must bend and adapt with flexibility in order for all parties to be satisfied. With this particular case, preparation and information can be seen as valuable tools for this issue. Because there are such religious and ethical issues at stake, the mediator really needs to be well-acquainted with what they are, so that the mediator can best draft the most meaningful settlement proposals.

Preparation means that the mediator will know enough about the goals and needs of all involved so that such an impasse could be avoided or circumvented. "While informational impasse can be avoided by preparing adequately, and having the mediator facilitate the exchange of information prior to the mediation, it is part of the commercial mediator's role to help the parties stay on a settlement track and continue preparing for a return to mediation" (Berman, 2014).

Thus, in this case, the mediator can work wonders by helping the separate parties to better figure out the facts they need to know about one another's viewpoint, or what elements need to be better discovered. A fixed-pie concept of mediation has been largely criticized as being too archaic and too ego-centric to actually provide a resolution which satisfies all involved (Steinel et al., 2000). Instead, more simplistic and more conducive tools can be used to improve mediation and to overcome the impasse.

For instance, simply striking a deadline so that all involved have to abide by it can provide the two parties in this case with a greater level of incentive in overcoming the impasse. For the two parties involved in this highly emotional situation, establishing a more useful precedent can also be effective: in this case the precedent might involve the ethical behavior in research in general, and might seek to inspire all involved to negotiate for more livable terms.

Finally, in such a case the mediator can just push for improved communication for all around: this can be done by setting ground rules and by leading via example. There should never be a public war of words.