The limitations of negative definitions
Mediation is often defined by what the mediator is not allowed to do: not taking sides, not imposing solutions, not steering toward specific outcomes. Far less attention is paid to what the mediator must actively contribute to make the process actually work. In theoretical frameworks, neutrality, impartiality, and party autonomy take center stage. These principles are essential, but they do not fully explain what, in practice, makes interaction truly constructive. An overlooked dimension is the role of benevolence (welwillendheid) as a professional core attitude.
The experience of conflict: alienation and the negative spiral
To understand the value of benevolence, we must look at the nature of conflict itself. Interactional mediation posits that people do not primarily view a conflict as a matter of interests or rights, but as an experience in which the behavior of the other is perceived as repulsive. The impoverishment of the interaction is what affects people most; the conflict alienates them from their own strength and disrupts the connection.
The negative spiral of a conflict has a self-reinforcing dynamic. It brings about an experience of relative weakness, causing people to turn inward. The other is perceived as hostile and untrustworthy. This psychological process lies at the heart of conflict escalation and demonization. Within the interaction, this irrationality can be made negotiable, making conflict transformation possible.
Benevolence as an active stance
When parties seek help to pivot this spiral toward constructive interaction, the mediator focuses primarily on communication. Benevolence in this context is the intentional willingness to support both the process and those involved. As author Nelleke Noordervliet describes it:
“Benevolence curiously observes the actions of the other.”
The mediator is not a director in this process but employs benevolence as a foundational attitude to appeal to the participants’ own strength. The mediator must stand firm to endure the “storm” of emotions; the motto here is: follow the heat.
The lubricant of the small forces
This approach finds a deeper philosophical basis in the work of Friedrich Nietzsche. In Human, All Too Human, he describes benevolence as the “lubricant” of human interaction. A nod, a kind word, or a warm handshake are the soft forces that often achieve more than the “grand” emotions.
Noordervliet notes that concepts such as pity or self-sacrifice often hide a “demonstrativeness of being Right.” These are focused on action and can unintentionally stifle the other. Benevolence, by contrast, is more modest and respects the autonomy and individuality of the other. For the mediator, this means taking a step back from the urge to “save,” moving toward an attitude that simply creates space.
The tension between neutrality and engagement
Without benevolence, neutrality risks devolving into procedural detachment. With benevolence, neutrality gains relational meaning. This does not call for a restraint of influence, but for a reinterpretation of neutrality as the disciplined application of influence without favoring one party.
Benevolence strengthens the ability of parties—despite being absorbed by the conflict—to re-engage in conversation and reflection. It does not focus on substantive results, but on the conditions under which those results can emerge.
Practice: steering for safety
This dynamic becomes clearly visible in the mediation practice surrounding the childcare benefit restoration operation (UHT) in the Netherlands. In this context, parties often enter the process with deep-seated mistrust. Procedural clarity alone does not create movement here. The deciding factor is whether parties experience the interaction as safe and feel they are being taken seriously.
That safety is built through small, consistent interventions: acknowledging emotions, slowing down the conversation, and reframing statements. It is here that Nietzsche’s “small forces” prove their value. They function as interactional guidance that creates the conditions under which parties can truly meet each other again.
Conclusion
Benevolence is not a “soft” addition, but a core competence that bridges the gap between neutrality and relational effectiveness. It makes visible that effective mediation depends not only on method, but on the quality of attention the mediator brings. In an era of increasing polarization, this attitude—quietly yet tangibly—contributes to the quality of interaction in broader society.
Sources:
Continuing a thread that started with my post When families lose a loved one, do they want the cash or the courthouse? and then continued a week or so ago,...
By Geoff SharpMediation Bytes by Karin HobbsShould you mediate by Skype? Perhaps. There are benefits and warnings. When a recent case was scheduled and one client would not be present in person,...
By Karin S. HobbsJAMS ADR Blog by Chris PooleArbitration is by no means a new option for resolving disputes. Yet, parties and their counsel may not be aware of everything that this method...
By Chris Poole
