Friendly Persuasion in Civil Case Mediations

Abstract

Th is study investigates why mediators' assertive strategies-evaluative and directive-did not generate high disputant dissatisfaction when they produced agreements. We thoroughly investigated the transcripts from fi fty cases in which the mediators had used assertive strategies and attained agreement. We found that mediators did not irk disputants because the mediators complemented their strategies with four tactical approaches. First, they established their legitimacy, and when mediating they shifted their strategies (from assertive to neutral or vice versa) round by round. Th ey also used a ratchet approach to nudge disputants toward agreement, and they took steps to reduce the disputants' aspirations.

Peacemaking at the Workplace: A Systematic Review

“…Siding is a high risk for nonprofessional third parties (Yang, Li, Wang, & Hendriks, 2011;Yang et al, 2007) and it is one of the main characteristics of conflict escalation (Jehn et al, 2013;Lee et al, 2014). Staying neutral in the conflict, and not becoming party, is an important quality and according to some authors might even a prerequisite for making peace (Khachaturova & Poimanova, 2015;Wall & Chan-Serafin, 2014). Therefore, we propose to add neutrality as a fifth aspect of peacemaking, which is at another level compared to the other four.…”

The Role of Mediation Strategies in Solving Interpersonal Conflicts

“…Scholars categorize a mediator's behavior into diff erent types of strategies he or she may use with the parties in confl ict (Bercovitch and Houston 1993). Approximately twenty-fi ve have been reported, including evaluative (Della Noce 2009;Riskin 1996;Wall and Chan-Serafi n 2014), pressing (Carnevale and Pruitt 1992;Wall and Chan-Serafi n 2014), neutral (Kydd 2003;Wall and Chan-Serafi n 2014), facilitating (Gabel 2003;Kressel 2007;Riskin 1996), narrative (Hardy 2008), problem solving (Harper 2006), strategic (Kressel 2007), pragmatic (Alberstein 2007), transformative (Bush and Folger 1994;Kressel 2007), deal making and orchestration (Kolb 1983), and trust caucus (Poitras 2013).…”

“…Wall and Chan‐Serafin () categorized a mediator's behavior into pressing, evaluative, and neutral strategies. Kressel () classified a mediator's behavior into facilitating, evaluative, strategic, and transformative strategies.…”

“…We examined in our study three strategies for a mediator's behavior: facilitating, pressing, and neutral. This choice was partly based on the classifications of conflict mediation strategies offered by Wall and Chan‐Serafin () and Kressel (). We narrowed the focus of our investigation to their taxonomy for two reasons.…”

The Role of References in Custody Mediation

“…Dispute mediation differs in approaches mediators use to manage conflict (e.g., narrative mediation (Bush & Folger, 2005) and transformative mediation (Winslade & Monk, 2008)) and issues that are the focus of mediation (e.g., divorce mediation (e.g., Olekalns et al, 2010), workplace conflict (e.g., Hoskins & Stoltz, 2003), civil court cases (e.g, Wall & Chan-Serafin, 2014), conflict between neighbors (e.g., Stokoe & Sikveland, 2016), to name a few). Research on mediation demonstrates that mediators use a variety of techniques 1 to manage interaction in the course of the session and help disputants deal with their conflict.…”