Jan 25, 2018 in Research

A Significant Method of Mediating Conflicts among Multiple Parties


Since time immemorial, disputes occurred among different parties from various settings. People apply several method of resolving their disputes or conflicts. The disputes may appear either formal or informal. However, the method of conflict resolution selected in any kind of conflict resolution process largely affects how fast or slow a solution is obtained. Hence, in most conflict resolution processes, most individuals opt for mediation as a means of reaching a reasonable agreement. Thus, mediation refers to a process of resolving or intervening between two or more conflicting parties. In addition, it involves a third neutral party who takes no sides and only works with the facts presented by the conflicting parties to come to an acceptable conclusion.

The aim of mediation includes bringing peace and understanding between the conflicting parties. Moreover, whatever agreement occurs at the end of the mediation process should suit the interests of either parties in one way or another. At least, each party should feel well accommodated by the final decision (Dyer, 2000).

There exist different types of mediation that occur in the event of a certain conflict. The type of mediation selected by any mediator should occur relevant to the problem at hand. This tends to ease the entire process. One method of conflict resolution includes the facilitative mediation. In this type of mediation, resolutions come mainly from the disputing individuals rather than the mediator. In most cases, the mediator occurred as an uninformed party. This happened to avoid his or her indulgence in deciding a possible solution for the parties. In ancient times, this appeared as the sole method of resolving conflicts and there existed no attorneys. In this process, the mediator interrogates the parties at length. He or she ensures that the full interests of each individual are placed on the table. In addition, the mediation occurs in the presence of all the conflicting parties. Furthermore, the mediator possesses no hand in giving outcomes or judgments during the whole process.

Another method of mediation includes the evaluative mediation

In this type of mediation, settlement of disputes occurs in the presence of a judge or an attorney. The parties meet with the attorneys at different times in the whole process. Here, the role of the mediator who includes the attorney involves giving both informal and formal results of the conflict. In addition, he or she possesses an upper hand in deciding for the parties on the best way of coming to a lucrative conclusion. Moreover, the mediation occurs based on the legal rights of each individual. This method of mediation pays less attention to the interests or desires of the conflicting parties. It only works on legal grounds, different from the facilitative method where the interests of each party get aired out. In addition, in evaluative mediation, the parties meet with the attorney on separate occasions. The attorney involved in any mediation gets chosen with the help of the judge (Hope, 2009).

Another type of mediation includes the transformative mediation. This occurs as the most current type of mediation among the three. It possesses some similar features with the facilitative mediation. In the transformative mediation process, the mediator works on empowering and transforming the individuals in question. Moreover, he or she ensures that the parties understand one another’s interests and well-being in the whole process. Before a conclusion occurs, the mediator ensures that a high level of understanding exists amongst the parties. Furthermore, different from the evaluative mediation, the parties involved in the conflict meet in a joint meeting with the mediator. This allows each party to air out their interests and problems in the presence of all the other members. The mediator also gets the opportunity of working with them in a better way.

All the above-mentioned methods of mediating in conflicts possess different advantages and disadvantages. In transformative and facilitative methods of mediation, the benefit occurs that the conflicting individuals are empowered. Each party end up feeling accommodated in the whole processes. However, this method may take a longer duration in the process of reaching a lucrative agreement. Moreover, since the decisions come entirely from the parties, some of these decisions may appear bias. Thus, the process may not lead to a general solution to the problem.

On the other hand, evaluative mediation helps the parties in getting either a solution or an answer to their problem. In addition, this process involves legal procedures where the legal rights of each party get considered at every point of the process. One disadvantage of this method includes the fact that the mediator makes all the decisions in the whole mediation process and this may lead to a false or incorrect solution to the problem.

In a case, where multiple parties’ conflict happens as in the case of a jointly owned firm, the best method of mediation would be the evaluative way. In this case, an attorney or judge in separate meetings would hear the conflicting parties. The reason why this method occurs as the best one includes the fact that it involves legal procedures. In addition to that, since this case appears immensely complicated and sensitive, a central neutral party is required to oversee the way forward to attaining a solution. An attorney chosen by the judge for this particular case would suggest informal and formal recommendations concerning the outcome of the case (Spence & Brogan, 2007).

A conflict refers to a state of misunderstanding between two or more parties

In conflicts, most people apply measures that suit their individual interests in the process of finding a solution. Therefore, it occurs fundamental to choose a lucrative method of solving the problem. Mediation occurs as the best way to find a solution for two or more conflicting parties. The type of mediation procedures may appear either formal or informal based on the nature of the case. In other cases, as the one mentioned in this essay, both formal and informal procedures may appear.

The reason why the evaluative method of resolving this case occurs crucial includes the fact that the solution does not arise from either parties. In this case, each part requires a hearing of their individual interests. In addition, all the parties faced immense losses with the collapse of the firm. Thus, giving an open room for individual opinions would only drug the case. Hence, cause delays in reaching a solution. This method involves legal processes since the jury is involved in each process. Once the problems encounter a hearing and evaluation by the judge, an appropriate attorney is selected to handle the entire mediation process. He or she either works entirely on finding solutions or answers to the problem. Moreover, this method evades bias since the process puts into consideration the legal rights of each individual.

This method appears as an effective way of solving the company’s problem since it takes the shortest time possible to reach a conclusion. Each member together with their individual attorney meets the mediator in separate meetings. In case of a contradiction, the mediators bring all the members together to weigh out options, still putting into consideration their legal rights.

The method of mediation that gets chosen in any case should suit the problem at hand. The duration taken to reach a conclusion entirely depends on the method of mediation used. Another factor that may largely affect the mediation process includes the effectiveness of the mediator. At times, an uninformed mediator may not possess the ability to help the parties in reaching a conclusion. Moreover, this may lead to a prolonged process of mediation. Thus, most people aspiring to mediate in conflicts should pursue the necessary training in order to sharpen their knowledge in this field (Berger, 2006).

Another reason as to why training appears as a fundamental factor for mediators includes the fact that a mediation process involves strong feelings. As such, a mediator may require the rightful skill on how to handle these feelings in the process of mediation. In addition, further training in the same field occurs crucial since there is no limit to the kinds of conflicts that a mediator may need to deal with at any given time.

In conclusion, mediation refers to a process of intervening between two or more conflicting parties in order to reach a lucrative solution. In mediation, a third neutral party occurs to help in finding a peaceful conclusion to the problem. There exist three main types of mediation used in conflict resolution. Each type of mediation applies the particular type’s conflicts. The three main types of mediation include evaluative mediation, transformative mediation and facilitative mediation. Transformative and evaluative kinds of mediation possess similar characteristics in that both of them involve the conflicting parties in reaching a conclusion. The evaluative method of mediation involves legal actions where the conflicting parties employ an attorney each to help in finding a solution. In addition, the mediator in this case considers the legal rights of each individual and helps them achieve either solutions or answers to their problems (Hope, 2009).

For the case that occurred in the essay, where a conflict occurred among multiple owners of a firm, the best method of mediation would be the evaluative method. This method occurs crucial due to the sensitivity of the case, thus, legal procedures should be implemented in order to avoid cases of bias or prolonged cases.


Related essays