The Creative Solution: The Power of Words in Mediation

The Creative Solution Table of Contents

Summary:

Chip Rose’s writing emphasizes the crucial role of word choice in mediation, particularly in resolving divorce cases. He highlights how negative language can severely hinder progress and advocates for mediators to model the use of safe, respectful language. Rose stresses the importance of client awareness regarding the impact of their words and suggests strategies to foster positive communication. His expertise stems from extensive experience and contributions to the field of mediation and collaborative dispute resolution. The text ultimately promotes constructive dialogue as essential for successful conflict resolution.

Listen to the AI Podcast of this Chapter:

Chapter 5: The Power of Words in Mediation

When it comes to communicating, we become multi-media platforms for the delivery of how we feel or what we want to say.  Statements, expressions, body language, looks, tone of voice, timbre, volume, and expressions give rise to the almost infinite number of ways we communicate our stated or unstated, conscious or subconscious intentions to others.  There are thirty muscles in the face and head alone that create a staggering number of possibilities for the expression of thought or feeling.  To the extent that a mediator sees herself or himself as someone who models appropriate behavior and encourages the clients to engage in strategic behaviors with the goal of maximizing their success in the process, clients need to be reminded that words matter and that there is something that they can do about that.  

When we are engaged in a conversation face to face with someone, the length of the listener’s negative reaction to something that was said is a function of the emotional memory or reactionary retention capacity of the listener.  The deeper the wound, the stronger the reaction, the more inclined the listener is likely to hold on to his or her emotional reaction.  In the asynchronous world of current technologies such as email, texting, and twitter, the retention of this type of negative reaction depends on the offended party’s exercise of the delete key–in the absence of which, the communication might exist forever.  Who of us has not had the oh-my-god-what-did-I-just-do experience of hitting the send button without having paused long enough to be sure it is what you meant to send, and did just send, was sent to the only person you intended receive it?  Even then there is difference between receipt by the accidental recipient causing you embarrassment and the emotional reaction of the intended recipient causing you to reflect on the failure to consider the negative consequences of the message.

Except for the highly-evolved among us, few people are so self-disciplined that they always consider the consequences of everything they are about to say before they say it.  This is especially so with the clients who come into our practices.  In those cases, the absence of such self-discipline can create significant road bumps and barriers to reaching any type of resolution, much less a maximally beneficial resolution.  To address this aspect of their relationship communication, it is necessary to employ a number of different intervention strategies.  The most logical first step is to bring to their attention the power of words and their capacities for negative, neutral and positive effect.  Until the clients become mindful of the effect of their words, they are not likely to even think about filtering what they feel moved to say, and by raising the concept preemptively at the outset of the process, one avoids either client feeling criticized by having it brought up after an inappropriate comment has already been made.  The value of their paying attention to their choice of words can also be reinforced by drawing parallels between their experiences in carefully selecting their words in a workplace

negotiation or social setting where emotion did not blind them to the negative consequences of an inappropriate word or comment.  Some clients actually get it when you remind them that the object of their antipathy also happens to be their most important negotiating partner and the key to their best success in the process.  My former colleague used the metaphor of the mediator and the clients all being roped together on the face of El Capitan in Yosemite.  The point being that any one of the three can create disaster and it takes the best efforts of all three to achieve success in the ascent.

In the context of raising client awareness, categories of words can identified the use of which will create a predictable negative reaction in the listener.  Words that accuse, blame, label, assume, and/or criticize—things the parties have no doubt been doing regularly throughout the latter stages of their relationship—are a kind of relationship fast food.  The guilty pleasure in the consumption is not matched by any useful nutritional value whatsoever.  The idea of becoming strategic about one’s choice of words is an outgrowth of the need to individuate the process.  A collaborative dialogue in a mediated negotiation should be seen as a journey of discovery.  From the client’s perspective, one is far better served focusing on what can be learned about one’s negotiating partner than engaging in the illusorily cathartic act of accusing, blaming or labeling that person.  The only path to maximizing success in the process is for each client to respect the process autonomy of the other and to recognize that the truly authentic currency in the negotiation will only be discovered in the thoughts, feelings, and outcome objectives of each party.  Viewed in this context, what each person likes or dislikes about those aspects of the other person becomes largely irrelevant.         

Perhaps the single most important consideration for mediators with regard to the role of words is developing a mental muscle that strategically searches for and employs words that are safe, with safety being defined as how each client experiences them.  This is a challenge for mediators who come from a background in law or who continue to work in the adjudicatory model while including mediation as part of his or her practice.  Safety in communication is simply not a consideration in the world of litigation and the conditioning that comes from working in that milieu is difficult to undo.  The speed with which conversations in mediation flow can result in the use of words that cause the person to whom they are directed to react in ways that are unintended or which could have been avoided.  Given the opportunity the mediator has to model appropriate behavior, developing a safe vocabulary and a strategic awareness of the impact of words should be fundamental building blocks of a skilled mediator.  The use of words that is respectful, inquisitive, curious, and informative and which are free from judgment, criticism, and condescension will shape the environment of the process even when the mediator is the only one doing it.  In relationship negotiation, words really matter.

The Creative Solution Table of Contents

Chip Rose

Chip Rose is highly experienced divorce mediator previously based in Santa Cruz, California and recently moved to Bend, Oregon. Chip founded The Mediation Center in Santa Cruz in 1980 and is certified as a Specialist in Family Law by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization. In a client-centered… MORE