Gini Nelson’s Engaging Conflicts

“As a young person who kind of grew up as an environmentalist/feminist/hippie I’ve become very bored and un-enthusiastic about the mediation field.” — Breyer Patterson

Engaging Conflicts Today interviews Breyer Patterson who is the lead InstantAssist Administrator, a new business offering of the same company that offers Mediate.com. She has been mediating since 1997, focusing on family, business, landlord-tenant, elder and family matters. Breyer received her masters degree in Conflict Resolution from the University of Oregon in 1999. She is also a mediation trainer with the University of Oregon law school, and a facilitator at Lane Community College.

If you would like a copy of her interview, and are not signed up for the newsletter (which you can do in the sidebar on the right!), email me this week at engagingconflicts@gmail.com with Breyer Patterson in the subject line and I’ll email it to you.

By the way, I offer Breyer’s interview because I’m interested in giving more voice here at Engaging Conflicts to students and practitioners who are “younger” in the field of ADR than I am, and who might not have the “credential” and additional professional license that I have as a practicing attorney. I think it’s harder for most mediators who are not attorneys to make a reasonable living, and I would like this to be more openly discussed– as Breyer says in her interview, “…the field is very difficult to make a living at and I sure wish someone had at least given me a head’s up on that.”

Please write me (EngagingConflicts@gmail.com) if you are interested in sharing your views on this possibly as a Guest Blogger at Engaging Conflicts.

            

Yes, Engaging Conflicts is now featured in Guy Kawasaki’s “All Top” site featuring live feeds from “the best of the best” websites, in the law category. Guy describes the site generally as:

a news aggregation site that provides “all the top” stories for forty of the most popular topics on the Web. The headlines and first paragraph of the five most recent stories from forty to eighty sources for each topic are displayed. Alltop stories are refreshed approximately every ten minutes.

Engaging Conflicts joins these great ADR sites by colleagues and friends of mine: Diane Levin’s Mediation Channel and World Directory of ADR Blogs; Victoria Pynchon’s Settle it Now Negotiation Blog; Geoff Sharp’s mediator blah blah; Stephanie West Allen’s Idealawg;Tammy Lenski’s conflict zen; and Chris Annunziata’s CKA Mediation & Arbitration Blog.

Visit us all at http://law.alltop.com.

            

This is one of Guest Blogger Law Professor John Lande’s posts in his series “Adding Cooperative Practice to the ADR Toolkit”. His Introduction is posted here. [Earlier Parts to the series are posted here: Part One, Part Two, Part Three, Part Four, Part Five]

Part Six: How Practitioners Can Add Cooperative Practice into the Services They Offer. Mediators may also be interested because they may be used in Cooperative cases.

Lawyers who want to do Cooperative Practice may use or adapt DCI’s procedures. For examples of other forms of Cooperative negotiation agreements, see the Boston Law Collaborative and the Mid-Missouri Collaborative and Cooperative Law Association’s website.

Lawyers can start using a Cooperative process an ad hoc basis, which may be particularly appropriate when the lawyers in a case have previously worked well together and trust each other. If appropriate, the lawyers might convene a four-way meeting with the parties early in the case to jointly identify issues, exchange information, and plan how to handle the case in the future. At that point, they might sign a Cooperative participation agreement if they think it would be helpful.

Lawyers may also organize practice groups to promote Cooperative Practice. Such groups can help develop practice norms and procedures and help lawyers develop reputations for cooperation.

I have been giving talks to encourage lawyers to incorporate Cooperative Practice into the “portfolio” of services that they offer. I recently gave a talk in Seattle and a CLE conference call in Colorado and Cooperative groups may develop there — in addition to the ones in Wisconsin, Missouri, and Boston.

I would be happy to talk with others interested in developing Cooperative Practice for your cases. Feel free to e-mail me at landej@missouri.edu or call me at 573-882-3914.

You can go to my website to see the other articles I have written on the subject.

This concludes John’s series. Thank you, John, for sharing this with Engaging Conflicts!

            

This concludes Mary Greenwood’s series based on an excerpt from Chapter 9, How To Mediate Like A Pro, published February 2008. Here are the links to Parts One, Two, and Three.

As her bio states:

Mary Greenwood is an attorney, Mediator and Author of award-winning book, How To Negotiate Like A Pro: 41 Rules for Resolving Disputes and her most recent book is How To Mediate Like A Pro:42 Rules for Mediating Disputes.She lives in Miami Beach, Florida. Her website is www.marygreenwood.com and her email address is howtomediate@aol.com

How To Talk Like A Mediator

One of the hardest jobs of a mediator is to give a good response to the parties’ concerns. After mediating thousands of cases, I have heard a lot of questions and concerns from the parties. The mediator has to give a response that informs without alienating one or both parties. Here are some responses that a mediator can make. They are not the only response but what I consider a good response.

How the Mediator Can Reframe One Party’s position.

The Mediator can change the tone of what is said to him. One side might be angry, distraught, and accusatory and say things that would solicit a negative response. Here are some examples of toning down the language.

Party: I am mad as hell and won’t take it anymore!

Mediator’s Interpretation: The other side is a little upset.

Party: He is a crook and liar.

Mediator’s Interpretation: The other side does not believe you.

Party: He did not send the item.

Mediator’s Interpretation: The party did not receive the item. Have you sent it yet?

Party: I want to quit this mediation.

Mediator’s Interpretation: The buyer wants me to close the case.

Party: The other party is the biggest jerk I have ever met.

Mediator’s Interpretation: The other party does not like what you have done.

Party: The item was smelly and filthy.

Mediator’s Interpretation: The buyer says the item was not clean and had an odor.

Party: I don’t trust him.

Mediator’s Interpretation: The buyer does not think you will do what you say you will.

Party: The seller ripped me off.

Mediator’s Interpretation: The buyer says he does not like what you did.

Party: He is just stupid.

Mediator’s Interpretation: The other party does not think you understand his position.

Party: Refurbished is supposed to be like new. This was a piece of garbage with scratches and dings.

Mediator’s Interpretation: His idea of refurbished is different from yours. He says there were scratches and dings.

Party: I would not sell my house to him if he was the last person on earth.

Mediator’s Interpretation: He has decided not to sell the house to you.

            

Carolyn Elefant’s was one of the first blogs I read, back in 2002 when she started MyShingle.com. She is offering a free download of a compiled collection of her blog posts called “The Lawyer You Always Wanted to Be: Inspiration for New Grads and Practicing Lawyers.” I think the points are also applicable for mediators and other conflict specialists, as they relate to the dreams and disappointments of establishing a business and being a helping professional.

As she says:

As you probably expect or already realize, practicing law can be stressful. Long hours, nasty supervisors, difficult clients and worries about making the student loan payments can put a damper on even the best of jobs. The day to day stress scarcely leaves time to evaluate where you’re going or how far you’ve come or whether you’re doing what matters to you. This collection of posts is intended to remind, encourage and inspire you to remember what matters and to become the lawyer you always wanted to be.

The article’s format makes clear it’s going to be published as a Change This manifesto (I have posted about other Change This manifestos before, e.g., here, on creativity; here on time management; here, titled Drawings That Will Change Your Life; and here, one of my favorites, on literacy). You have a chance to get Carolyn’s article now, pre-Change This release — just click below to download it. But if you go to her site here to download it by May 15, she’ll put you in a drawing for a copy of her newly published book Solo by Choice: How to Be the Lawyer You Always Wanted to Be.

inspired-solo-”The Lawyer You Always Wanted to Be”.pdf

            

This is one of Guest Blogger Law Professor John Lande’s posts in his series “Adding Cooperative Practice to the ADR Toolkit”. His Introduction is posted here. [Earlier Parts to the series are posted here: Part One, Part Two, Part Three. Part Four]

Part Five: How Cooperative Negotiation Is Different From Litigation In Negotiation.

Since a Cooperative process does not include a disqualification clause as in Collaborative cases, some people wonder if Cooperative process is any different from negotiation in litigated cases.

Although many lawyers negotiate cooperatively at times, a Cooperative process can provide greater predictability and confidence than in litigation. DCI members say that a Cooperative process creates a legal culture where cooperation is the norm. Traditional litigation-oriented practice normally does not involve an explicit process agreement. In litigation, lawyers often are not sure about the other side’s intentions and each side may feel that it needs to take tough positions to protect themselves. This sometimes creates a cycle of adversarial behavior that is hard to break out of.

Although DCI members sometimes use litigation procedures (such as formal discovery or contested hearings) in Cooperative cases, these are used as the last resort and are generally intended to advance the Cooperative process. For example, one lawyer said that a party may need some “reality therapy” of hearing from a judge at a temporary order hearing and then get right back to negotiation for the permanent resolution. When contested hearings are needed, the Cooperative process can improve the quality of litigation. One lawyer said that in trials in a Cooperative cases, the process tends to be more cooperative than in traditional litigation-oriented cases.

For more information about my study of Cooperative Practice in Wisconsin, click here.

The next part describes how practitioners can add Cooperative Practice into the services they offer. Mediators may also be interested because they may be used in Cooperative cases.

John’s series will conclude next week with “How Practitioners Can Add Cooperative Practice Into The Services They Offer”.