Mediation has been taught and practiced in a variety of styles. Every mediation style comes with its own set of pros and cons – and it’s useful to understand the uniqueness of all styles.
Dorman Mediation primarily uses a facilitative approach to mediation, but recognizes that one must have several choices available to them according to their unique circumstances.
With facilitative mediation, a mediator avoids giving his or her advice or making recommendations, making the role of a mediator as a person who facilitates a resolution. Thereby, a mediator permits both parties to be in full control of the results.
Like facilitative mediation, transformative mediation is built in such a way that both parties are in control of their outcome and a mediator includes a facilitator to the conclusion. The objective of transformative mediation is not necessarily a decision, yet instead creating a process where the parties may grow, learn, and change – therefore experiencing personal transformation of actions or thoughts due to undergoing this type of mediation.
The mediator who practices this type of mediation assists both parties in conflict and arrives at a solution by showing them the weaknesses within their case and assessing what a jury or judge would likely determine if the case were brought to litigation.
This type of mediation includes a subset of evaluative mediation, which relies on an individual bringing experience in a certain industry to meet with the clients. The goal is to encourage open communication. Also, the professional gathers alleged facts, arguments, and evidence. The mediator offers advice, opinion, and information. The experience of the directive mediator might be in the following areas: building, farming, child development, business economics, or some type of specialization law.
For more information on the different styles of mediation, contact Michael C. Craven at (312) 621-5234.