CONCLUSION
The empirical and practitioner literatures of more than two decades make clear that mediation is an important and useful instrument for managing many forms of social and interpersonal conflict.
Mediation is of documented value for conflicts occupying a broad middle range of difficulty, but for highly polarized disputes as well it can bring distinctive benefits even if settlement is not reached. They include reducing tension, clarifying issues, and humanizing the adversary. Research and practice have also identified the structured, if never precisely predictable, stages that constitute the mediation process and the skills, attitudes, and behaviors characterizing the mediator’s art. Certain of these skills and attributes (such as the ability to establish rapport with angry parties, gather information through sustained questioning, listen actively and empathetically to contending points of view, suspend judgment, and foster norms of collaboration) would seem of such demonstrable value that training in mediation can well be justified as part of the learning experience of the well-educated person.My review also suggests some intriguing ironies. Thus, even though mediation is an empirically validated process, getting disputants to use it often amounts to a hard sell, requiring the persuasive powers of a court or application of other powerful social and cultural pressures. A second irony: most of our knowledge about mediation comes from the formal arena of legally definable conflicts; about use of mediation in the informal and ubiquitous conflicts of everyday life we know a good deal less. Here too, there is evidence that the process is underused. It also appears to be the case that for all its established value, those who assume the mediation role enter a world of significant ambiguity and stress, where the potential for burnout seems high.
A final irony, or perhaps merely the inevitable result of a field still in its relative infancy, is that the successful mediation process is still something of a mystery, as is illustrated by argument over such things as the meaning and importance of mediator neutrality, the appropriateness of highly assertive mediator tactics, and the relative merits of problem-solving versus relational approaches to the mediation role.This blend of positive findings, intriguing ironies, and demonstrable role stresses and ambiguities amounts to a rich opportunity for researchers and practitioners, especially those of the reflective variety, who can approach the conundrums and debates of the field in the same tolerant, focused, and inquisitive manner that characterizes the constructive mediation process itself. My broad overview also suggests a seminal role for the friends and supporters of mediation. By familiarizing themselves with mediation and encouraging its use, managers, parents, and leaders (of a community, an institution, a group) can transform mediation from a frequently untapped resource to a familiar and common instrument for resolving the disputes of everyday life.
Note
1. The research findings and evidence about mediation mentioned in this chapter are presented in greater detail in Carnevale and Pruitt (1992), in Kressel and Pruitt (1985, 1989), and in Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 2004, 1-2.
More on the topic CONCLUSION:
- Conclusion
- Conclusion: are there any markets out there?
- Conclusion
- Conclusion
- Conclusion: the difficult design of tort law
- AVOIDING COUNTEREXAMPLES
- Hare C., Neo D. (eds.). Trade Finance: Technology, Innovation and Documentary Credit. Oxford University Press,2021. — 417 p., 2021
- BRIEF CONTENTS
- Fligstein Neil. The Banks Did It: An Anatomy of the Financial Crisis. Harvard University Press,2021. — 334 p., 2021
- SNAP 2011