Solution Focused Mediation

Share:

A Complimentary Approach to Mediation

Mediation, simply put, is conflict handled well.  Two or more people, with differing positions, come together with a neutral third party to work toward creating a mutually beneficial outcome.  Any conflict can benefit from the mediation process.  Probably, the most familiar are its uses for resolving personal conflicts among family members, employees, neighbors, landlords and tenants, contract vendors, and business partners, amongst others. However, on a broader scale, you may have heard of the use of mediation internationally in conflicts of war and/or domestically, conflicts over corporate mergers, the outcomes of which resulted in agreements advantageous to all sides.  One corporate dispute deserving of mention is The Humane Society Vs. Sea World.  Their long-standing disagreement was resolved by opportunistically creating a partnership to save marine life for generations, while securing the financial life of Sea World itself.

Solution Focused Mediation (SFM) is the application of Solution Focused Brief Therapy’s (SFBT) theoretical principles and practices to the Mediation process.  SFM does not change the mediation process.  Mediators practicing any modality of mediation may incorporate it incrementally as they discover its mindset-changing power.  SFM shifts the focus of mediation from conflict problem-based to human mindset-based.  It acknowledges that ‘problems’ exist in ‘the mindset’ of those who are experiencing tension in a situation. Although the parties’ lives are connected in some way, their perceptions of the factors producing tension differ.  They, individually, feel the need for something that each believes is being denied or doesn’t currently exist.  The Problem, therefore, is different from each person’s perspective. A Solution-Focused approach enables clients to co-construct an integrated common Desired Outcome in the initial phase of the mediation session, which permeates the process. Hence, it is the achievement of their Desired Outcome that becomes the focus and self-measurement of mediation success and client mutual satisfaction, not problem-solving.

Our excitement in discovering and becoming students of SFBT in 2016, through the Elliott Connie Solution-Focused Brief Therapy Universe, was reinforced as we experimented with solution-focused questioning and observed how it empowers clients to shift their mindsets from problem-victim to solution-opportunist during the opening phase of a mediation session.  We recognized the efficiency of this approach as we found agreements happening more often, and in less time, fitting so perfectly with the goals of mediation. Imagine problem-beleaguered clients becoming hope-oriented human beings, co-constructing their desired future within the beginning phase of a mediation session.  Solution-Focused Mediation invites people into the future through skilled questioning that empowers them to imagine in detail their preferred future reality. The mediator employs a ‘Broaden and Build’ client language-centered questioning pattern that helps clients shift their mindset to an envisioned future state, creating a mental image of hoped-for life conditions that drives mindset shifts and behavioral change. The clients co-create their envisioned preferred state of being. Their mindsets transform from anger, blame, or victimhood to those of collaborative communication and relational cooperation.

Solution-Focused Mediation projects clients into the future, rather than detain them in the past.  We ask them to articulate the hopes that brought them to mediation. “What do you hope will be the outcome from your being here today?” vs. “What brought you here today?” We know that when people begin retelling their problem and the emotional upset surrounding it, they reignite the associated negative feelings.   There is nothing they nor we can do to change those past events. Hence, by focusing clients on telling ‘their problem story’ at the beginning of a mediation session, we are forcing them to relive an unpleasant past.  In essence, we have asked them to remember their own conflict management incompetencies.  Perhaps that is why so many present a name-blame/victim scenario up front.    Research has shown that the brain cannot hold two opposing ideas simultaneously. Therefore, when clients’ initial focus is directed toward articulating their ‘Best Hopes’ moving forward, their minds are shifted toward imagining how they would like things to be. In addition, research has shown that the brain interprets what it thinks as real. So, when clients are guided to systematically ‘Broaden and Build’ their future version of themselves through a questioning pattern aligned with ‘Bloom’s Taxonomy of Thinking¹’, the brain treats the envisioned data as real.  The Mediator’s desired outcome is to have the SF questioning process enable people to approach the remaining phases of the mediation session with a changed mindset from the one with which they entered. When their thinking has shifted away from past problems to a realization of the awesome personal power they have for managing their lives, they envision versionsof ‘the way life ought to be’ and are empowered to co-construct their mediation discussion topics collaboratively.

Now, let’s take a look at how this SF Mediation approach works in practice:

Notice how ‘difference’ and ‘meaning’ questions move an EXTERNAL GOAL toward an INTERNAL NEED.

Scenario: Excerpt from the ‘Best Hopes’ phase of a SF Mediation Custody and Visitation session.

Mediator: What are your ‘Best Hopes’ FROM our work together today?

Mary: I DON’T WANT him to be late picking Mikey up from school.

             Mediator: What would you rather happen, INSTEAD?

(Change from what isn’t wanted to what is wanted.)

             Mary: I want him to pick Mikey up on time. (EXTERNAL GOAL)

             Mediator: What DIFFERENCE will that make when Mikey is picked up on time?

(Presupposes a positive future; not contingent upon Jon; mapped to key client language.)

             Mary: I would know Mikey is safe. (NEED)

             Mediator: What will that MEAN for you to know that Mikey is safe?

                           (Broadens and deepens clients’ self-understanding.)

Mary: I will be able to relax, take a deep breath, and feel more at peace.

(Internal need fulfillment for Mary)

 Mediator: Mary, when you are taking that deep breath and feeling relaxed and at peace, What

            IMPACT will that have on you?

                           (Empowers Mary to state her Desired Outcome.)

             Mary: I will know that I can think clearly and make better decisions.

(Mary’s DESIRED OUTCOME)      

¹ Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analyzing. Evaluating, Creating

The mediator then replicates the ‘Best Hopes’ with Jon.

Mediator: Jon, what are your Best Hopes FROM being here today? 

Jon: I want to have joint custody of my son.

Mediator: What DIFFERENCE would that make for you to have joint custody of Mikey?

Jon: I will feel more at peace, too. I will be able to create more stability in my son’s life now that I

         have regular, steady work hours. I will be fulfilling my duty as his father.

               (DIFFERENCE – identifying some underlying needs)   

       Mediator. So, what meaning does creating stability for your son and fulfilling your duty as his father

                 have for you?

Jon: It means I am keeping my promises to him.  I can earn back his trust and build our father-son

          relationship. 

Mediator: And what meaning will that have for you?

Jon: It will mean I’m a responsible Dad. 

                   (MEANING – Jon’s underlying need.)

Mediator: When you are fulfilling your role of responsible Dad, what IMPACT will that have on

            you?

Jon: I will be proud of myself. I will be at peace knowing my kid has the kind of dad that he

           deserves. I will feel like I am a good dad.     

                           (Jon’s DESIRED OUTCOME)

Constructing the Common Desired Outcome: Now that both parties have articulated their own ‘Best Hopes’, the Mediator can proceed to develop a Common Desired Outcome Statement.

Example: 

Mediator: “So, if at the end of our time together both of you are feeling more at peace and you Mary are

          feeling you are making decisions clearly, and you Jon feel proud of yourself and like you are fulfilling

          your duty as the dad your son deserves, a good dad, will our time together have been productive for

          both of you?”         

                (‘Yes’ response from both clients is required.)

The common statement creates a mindset-transforming bridge that sets the framework for discussing all the items clients proceed to outline in their agenda. Their situation or points of discussion haven’t changed. However, their mutual understanding of their common interests provides a positive platform on which to proceed. ‘Best Hopes’ replaces problem-solving and propels negativity to a positive zone. 

As the mediation process proceeds, Mediators guide clients to bring that common desired future into the presence of their discussion as together they describe the details of the goal of each agenda item.  These details, collectively, will become the final mutually approved agreement.

Without doubt, it doesn’t always go as smoothly as it appears to have with Jon and Mary.  Often, clients aren’t initially ready to express their ‘Best Hopes’ openly.  Mediators are there for the clients and are not at liberty to direct or coerce them into a mode of futuristic thinking. So, we wait and continue to probe toward the underlying meaning this all has for them, using questions that ask for the difference this will make, the meaning it will have, and the impact it will have on their lives. The mediator waits for the clients’ mindset shift — that moment when their brains can verbalize their hopes.  We know they have hope. How? Mediation is voluntary.  People wouldn’t come to mediation if they didn’t have hope for something better than what they are experiencing now.  SF Mediation empowers people to create their better version of themselves, the selves who know how to manage conflict effectively.

As noted above, varying modalities of mediation have emerged over the years. All practice styles experience success, and no modality has yet proven itself to be more effective than the rest.  Hence, our ‘Best Hopes’ are for Solution Focused Mediation to earn recognition as the most effective for quality results, timeliness, and clients’ satisfaction. In addition, we hope that Solution-Focused Mediation will emerge as the go-to mediation approach across practice modalities. It enhances people’s conflict resolution skills and empowers them to implement behavioral changes that improve their lives and relationships.

References

Bannink, Fredrike: Handbook of Solution Focused Conflict Management, 2010

Bloom, Benjamin: Taxonomy of Questioning, 1956

Connie, Elliott, and Froerer, Adam: The Solution Focused Brief Therapy Diamond -A New Approach to SFBT, 2023

Fredrickson, Barbara: Broaden and Build: Theory of Positive Emotions, 2001

The Solution Focused Universe: SFBT and the Solution Focused Universe – Creative Applications from SFU Members, 2025, “SOLUTION FOCUSED WORK AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION”, by Niki Lee Rowe, pages 94-115

Snyder, C. Richard (Rick), Hope Theory, Measures and Applications, 2000