Last Friday, the Washington Mediation Association (WMA) hosted its first annual Fall “Unconference”. "What is an unconference?" you may ask. That was my question as well, and I – like several other attendees to whom I spoke – was not quite sure whether this would be a productive use of my time.

Instead of following a pre-determined agenda, the idea is that attendees propose sessions at the beginning of the day that they are willing to lead and/or facilitate. Several sessions are scheduled simultaneously, and everyone attends those sessions that interest him or her. The mood in the room quickly shifted from apprehension to anticipation as sessions were proposed and 30+ relative strangers collaborated on creating the day’s agenda.

One of the sessions I chose to attend was led by Carly Thornburg of the Thurston County Dispute Resolution Center, and focused on collaborative games. Traditionally, the vast majority of negotiations are competitive; more often than not, we think of conflict as a zero-sum game, where any incremental “win” on one side is matched by a “loss” on the other, and concessions may be perceived as weakness.  But in some circumstances, it may be possible to reframe this interaction.

A simple but powerful example: arm wrestling. Participants pair up, place their arms in a standard arm wrestling position, and are instructed that each player’s goal is to maximize his or her points. A point is scored whenever the back of the other person’s hand touches the table. If the game is played competitively, neither player will do very well. However, if the two players collaborate and help each other, they can each score many more points by moving their arms without resistance.

Of course, it is not always this easy to collaborate in real-life situations. Collaboration requires being able to see your negotiating partner’s point of view, building mutual understanding, offering concessions, and trusting that your negotiating partner will reciprocate, rather than taking advantage of your concession. Collaboration does not happen quickly or automatically; it requires work and a genuine willingness to find common ground. When it does happen, however, it can be game-changer.

We all make assumptions about the world we live in. Without assumptions, we would be unable to function effectively; we would spend far too much time making even the smallest decisions. But sometimes, our assumptions can lead us astray – or lead us into conflict.

You may have heard of the “Ladder of Inference”, a concept first proposed by organizational psychologist Chris Argyris and used by Peter Senge in The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Here is how it works:

This can result in a destructive loop. Our beliefs and prior experiences greatly influence what facts we select, and often lead us to ignore other facts and data entirely. We then “jump to conclusions”, by missing important facts and substituting belief-driven conclusions for reasoning.

For example, if I am having dinner with a friend and she pulls out her phone, I may 1. focus on that action, 2. believe that she is bored with our conversation, and 3. assume that she is checking her facebook updates. As a result, I may 4. conclude that she does not value our friendship, 5. believe that I am wasting my time with her, and 6. change my own demeanor for the worse. In reality, my friend may have been thoroughly enjoying our conversation, and may have been letting her partner know that she will be home later than expected because she does not want to cut the evening short…

So step off that ladder and take a moment to examine the underlying facts more fully. You may discover very different meanings – and a much broader set of options – than those you saw once you started climbing.

Over the last few decades the field of alternative dispute resolution has grown tremendously.  The recognition that not all cases are well suited for the adversarial process and that there are multiple paths to justice is increasingly shared by attorneys, judges, and the public.  In 2011, the ABA declared the third week of October, “ABA Mediation Week,” in part building on the efforts of many other national, state, and local organizations, including the Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) which have traditionally celebrated conflict resolution during the month of October. The ABA Mediation Week initiative is a celebration of the strides we have made in institutionalizing mediation as one of several appropriate dispute resolution processes.  ABA Mediation Week will be held during the week of October 12-18, 2014 this year. 

The theme for this year’s ABA Mediation Week is “Stories Mediators Tell--From Rookie to Veteran, Exploring the Spectrum of Mediation.”  As lawyers and mediators, we understand both the challenges and rewards of helping parties in conflict reach an agreement by getting past differences in positions, by understanding each other’s perspectives better, and by finding ways to get their important interests met while staying true to their values and belief systems.

(The above is an excerpt from the ABA website.  Find the full entry, including events, press releases, and resources here.)

Yesterday's topic at the King County Bar Association's ADR Section meeting was "How Do Experienced Mediators Stay Engaged and Improve Their Skills?" - a panel presentation (including yours truly) and roundtable discussion. We created a survey prior to the meeting to solicit input, and are excited at the number and variety of responses to date. 

If you are interested, please participate in the survey at https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/R6NB7ZJ. Results will be posted soon, and we hope to find ways to continue what we thought was a very productive conversation.