Working With Conflict Module Three

"SHUTTLE" MEDIATION

Mediation in this context refers to attempts by third parties to assist opponents in working on
their shared conflict.

Mediation as an approach:
Emphasis on "win-win" approach with no losers.
Parties need to resolve their conflict directly to the satisfaction of both (all) sides.
It is not a matter of objective truth but shared perception and experience.
In mediation, we choose to move toward the conflict in order to become attached to both
(all) sides.
Mediation includes a concern for suffering and a desire to bring a human face into the
middle of the conflict.

Mediation as a process:
Work with both / all sides; all must agree to engage in mediation.
If necessary, meet with individuals or sides separately, until they are willing to meet
together. [Shuttle Mediation]

Steps in the face-to-face mediation process include:

1. Introductions
2. Each side telling their story and how they view the conflict.
3. Expressing and clarifying feelings, and describing experiences behind positions.
4. Identifying issues and agreeing which are most important or relevant to each side.
5. Identifying areas of agreement as well as disagreement.
6. Generating and examining alternatives / options for settlement.
7. Formalizing and writing an agreement, including a review process.

Shuttle Mediation generally occurs before stage 1, when the mediator(s) explain the process,
and the parties may need to tell their stories to an impartial mediator in order to feel confident
of their ability to face their opponent. This gives them a chance to practice, to get the order of
events straight, and to work off some of the immediate emotion. It also contributes to a
feeling of having been heard (by somebody, even if the opponent turns out to be an
unresponsive listener) and may therefore enable them to listen to the other side’s story when
they do meet.

The need for shuttle mediation may also arise during the mediation process:
when obstacles are encountered,
when there are internal disputes on one side,
when the whole process seems in danger of breaking down, or
when one side begins to doubt the process or feel at a disadvantage.
The mediator can then meet with either (or preferably both) of the sides separately, in what is
sometimes called a caucus.
Long-Term Shuttle Mediation

When there is a major block in communication, the mediator may need to have much advance
contact with the separate sides. This is true in very polarised political conflicts. There is often
a complete lack of trust and parties are therefore unwilling to have any contact with the other
side(s).

Much of what we describe as political mediation occurs before negotiations are possible, or
when they break down. It often involves going through many of the steps in the mediation
process, with one side at a time, until opponents are willing to meet directly. A third party
may take individual politicians through this mediation process separately, allowing them to try
it out in safety and confidentiality, before attempting it with the opponent. In this type of
situation, the process of "shuttling" between the sides may need to go on for a very long time
before they will be willing to meet directly. The steps to be taken by the mediator(s) in this
extended process of "shuttle" mediation could include:

1. Establishing credibility through reputation, experience, concern.

2. Demonstrating a balanced approach and a willingness to listen on all sides.

3. Analysing / mapping the conflict and identifying possible entry points.

4. Building relationships of trust with key people on each side, including excluded and
marginalised groups as well as major parties.

5. Interpreting fears, hopes and intentions of each side to all the others.

6. Clarifying misunderstandings of statements and positions on each side.

7. Maintaining a level of confidentiality according to the wishes of individuals on each side.

8. Carrying specific messages between sides, when they request it.

9. Testing possibilities: collecting and distributing ideas around a broken circle of participants
who are not willing to meet directly.

10. Helping each side to assess responses or to predict reactions from other sides.

11. Representing the views of an opponent well enough for an individual to "practice"
negotiating through the mediator.

12. Encouraging direct contacts and arranging for these to happen.

13. Getting out of the way and allowing the sides to negotiate directly.

14. Being willing to be the "scapegoat" if negotiations break down.

15. Allowing the sides to claim any credit for successful negotiations.

© Sue and Steve Williams, Responding to Conflict 1995