Considered to be part of the
diagnosis, the mediator has to look at the conflict elements that include the
topic, items relating to the relationship the parties have, identify any face-saving
issues, and the procedure in which the mediation will proceed before data
collection will begin (Wilmot & Hocker, p. 290). These starting points and common questions
must be addressed also while collecting data so that the key elements of the
issue are addressed within the mediation plan.
Without such a thorough approach, a mediator’s data collection may guide
him into outcomes that are not in the best interest of the parties and may
result in a break down in the process.
The most common approach to
collecting data includes observation by the mediator. This can include observation of conflict
between parties, observing a public meeting, visit a proposed develop site or
attend a company briefing, allows a mediator to understand first
hand the issues and look upon them impartially. Secondary sources can yield information about
a dispute without direct observation or interviews. They can include financial records, minutes
of meetings, maps, organizational or governmental reports, newspapers or
magazines (Moore, p. 120).
An important aspect of data
collection would include the interviewing of the parties, stakeholders,
witnesses, or other people who offer sources of relevant information (Moore, pp.
120-121). Interviews also permit the
mediator to introduce himself to the parties and start the process of including
these parties in the planning of the mediation.
The mediator can use this time
to exchange information about the mediation process and collect buy-in of the
parties as to the direction or method in which the mediation is to be carried
out. This is being done at an early
stage of the data collection process and sets a tone for future planning and
participation (Moore, p. 146).
Surveyed mediators also believe
that the collection of data is an important element of the facilitative process
of mediation and necessary in order to continue to seek a reasonable outcome
for the parties (Picard, 2002). This can
further present the mediator as an impartial, expert party which would enhance
the trust in the mediator in the proceedings.
References
Moore, C.W., (2003). The
Mediation Process, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Picard, C., (2002). Common Language,
Different Meaning: What Mediators Mean When They
Talk
About Their Work. Negotiation Journal, 18(3), 251.
Retrieved January 20, 2008,
from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document
ID: 338588311).
Wilmot, W.W., Hocker,
J.L., (2007). Interpersonal Conflict, New York, NY: McGraw Hill.