Attorneys receive lots of training and spend countless hours practicing to prepare winning appellate briefs, arguments, and summary judgment motions. With that said, it’s important to also focus on mediation brief. Unfortunately, mediation briefs are either overlooked, prepared at the last minute, or both. However, mediation briefs have much more of an influence on the mediation process than you might think.
Last weekend was Father’s Day and I took note of two stories that seemed useful in mediation. The first, was on CBS Sunday Morning where the editorial piece reflected upon how student athletes, from Little League through College, end each game, however hard fought, with a handshake and a “high five”.
In almost every ADR session, the neutral informs the disputants that the session is confidential, and they can speak frankly. While this is usually true, there are important limitations that ADR consumers may not be aware of. Before you disclose the next sensitive trade secret or embarrassing personal fact, read this article.
Frames are the stories we tell ourselves and others about the origin and nature of the conflict. Frames impair our ability to settle because they blur details and often cause us to ignore viable solutions that don’t fit our preconceptions. Reframing challenges the usefulness of our filters, and forces us to look at our conflict differently. Reframing is an absolutely vital skill for anyone trying to resolve a dispute– or for that matter, win an argument.
The opening statement is the very beginning of the mediation session. More than a personal introduction, it is an opportunity to create conditions for success. It is an ideal time for neutrals to size up disputants and vice versa. This piece explores the best way to build an opening statement, and the science behind each component. The piece will be useful to the beginner and the seasoned neutral alike.
Hybrid ADR methods share techniques from more than one conflict resolution process. Two of the most popular hybrids are med-arb and arb-med. These methods combine the flexibility of mediation with the certainty of arbitration. Despite their advantages, both processes have been criticized. This article considers all sides of the question, and helps readers mitigate the processes’ alleged weaknesses.