The mediator’s planning and preparation
J contacted S requesting that S serve as a mediator in their case and briefly explained the issues in dispute. S agreed but explained to both parties that she was about to settle another mediation case, so she asked whether they prefered to start mediation during that week or upon completions of the first mediation. J and M asked S if it could somehow affect the outcome of their mediation. S assured them that she previously had an experience when she was able to arrange two cases concurrently and besides of that, she felt that she was reconciling parties of the first mediation. Thus, J and M agreed to start mediation that week.
For the pre-mediation stage, S asked the parties to send the Pre-mediation Confidential Communication and the Mediation Planning Documents, indicating BATNA, WATNA and Reservation Price. The parties also were asked to prioritize their issues, so that she would know what was most and least important for them. Also, S requested the parties other necessary information and documents which would be facilitative in understanding concerns and interests of the parties. In addition to that, she asked them to explain how they viewed things, their positions and, in what capacity they served the case. She offered to meet in the Mediation Center in DC, which would be neutral territory for M and J.
S expected that she would encounter cultural differences because one of the parties was from Japan, where the majority of people are collectivists, and the other party was a natural-born US citizen where the majority are individualists. Collectivists tend to place group interests as a high priority. They see themselves as interdependent and closely interconnected to one or more gro...
... middle of paper ...
...in the mediation. Due to that S decided to meet with M and J to give some introduction about mediation process and hear their stories in perspective of each side. If it was necessary she would have moved to individual caucuses until parties would have found their own solution to their own problems.
Behind all the parties’ needs, including economical and psychological needs, S had to consider the latent needs or concerns of the parties. In this case, there could have been additional needs that client did not realize. Here, M may have needed therapists consultation. Therapist could have helped him to handle the distress situation. S wanted to talk with M about this idea. If he would have agreed she would have either invited the therapist to the mediation or would have given him therapists’ email so that he could have contacted him at any time convenient for him.
...during the negotiation. Because they did not explicitly articulate their objectives to each other, the union and management did not reach a settlement that was mutually beneficial. I believe both teams prioritized “winning” over fulfilling their initial objectives. Therefore, I better understood how both teams suffered under pressure during the negotiation because they realized they could no longer rely on a zero-sum strategy. Moreover, I realized how important team cohesiveness is to the bargaining process. Both the union and management lacked basic cohesiveness among their team members and consequently exacerbated the contentious and emotional environment that they created during the negotiation. Nevertheless, under these circumstances I believe the union and management ultimately reached an adequate proposal that satisfied both sides of the bargaining table.
2. - Mediation / Child custody: Devon is upset because her ex-partner has accepted to attend mediation. Devon would have preferred not to, as she is concerned about Michael’s safety.
...ze one party. In addition, Bangladesh can shed light on the value of journalists and activists there who are of paramount importance to multinational companies, thus informing Niko of their culture and how they should treat reporters. Integrating a mediator into the negotiation can be helpful, especially if the mediator is an Indian executive who can serve as a representative for both parties. He/she can inform Bangladesh about how Niko helped India while informing Niko about how Bangladesh responds to business, since India and Bangladesh are neighboring countries and have a good trade relationship.
Levine, S. (1998) Getting to resolution turning conflict into collaboration. San Francisco, CA, Berrett-Koehler, (p.125)
One noticeable cultural difference between the society pictured in this chapter and our American society seems to be a collectivist ideology. In America we value the individual and place emphasis on distinction from the group. This causes a strong sense of competition, and leads people to take actions that would benefit themselves in spite of negative effects that may trickle to other members of the community. The culture pictured in our reading, however, seems to place greater value on family and community goals rather than the needs or wants of specific individuals.
90) describes people in collectivist cultures rely heavily on “in-groups which look after them in exchange for loyalty.” China and Japan are high power distance cultures. They have a hierarchical structure where societal movement is minimal. Hao (2015) describes collectivist cultures to place emphasis on “what is best for the social institutions that [an individual] belongs to over personal ambitions and goals.” Both Chinese and Japanese cultures are motivated and driven by success as seen by evidence on each countries emphasis on the importance of education (Country Comparison. n.d.). Long-term orientation allows both countries to prepare for the future and achieve long-term goals. While practical in their efforts they are “working to serve [future] generations” (Country Comparison. n.d.). Leisure time is not an emphasis in either culture and leads to “self-restraint and the emphasis on hard work and achievement” defining both China and Japan as restrained cultures (Hao,
Ott, Marvin C. "Mediation as a Method of Conflict Resolution: Two Cases." International Organization 26.04 (1972): 595-618. JSTOR. Web. 3 Dec. 2013.
Mr. James has arrived for his assessment at the Gadsden County Human Services office. His demeanor is somewhat different from the last meeting. He is more reserved today and seems to be open to effective communication. The case manager, Tameka Footman enters the room and greets Mr. James. Mrs. Footman asks Mr. James, how he’s feeling about the session today. Mr. James responds and says that he’s feeling good about it. Mrs. Footman reviews the events that took place last session and asked if there were any questions from the previous meeting. Mr. James says that he doesn’t have any questions are is eager to get started.
This source further substantiates the sensibilities behind a collaborative law process, building upon court mediation and taking it a step further. It provides a “real-world” example which can be evaluated and used to support a conceptualized structure for a neutral legal firm to function within.
Poitras, J. (2007). The Paradox of Accepting One's Share of Responsibility in Mediation. Negotiation Journal, 23(3), 267-282. Retrieved January 23, 2012, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 1313496891).
The 6th Mediation Descartes claim that he has proven that bodies do exist and that he is intimately connected to his body. While we may have our own opinion about Descartes arguments we must ask ourselves do his argument hold up to a closer scrutiny. Descartes mentions about the distinction between mind and body, so we can better understand how he goes on and proves that the body exist. What is one conclusion Descartes must come up with is the existent of God and how that connects to the existent of the body. Most of Descartes belief have to be doubted before he begins diving into his own existing, then he can answer the question of why bodies do exist. Without existence mind and body would not be defined in how Descartes defines it. According to (Descartes) three rule of why his body is his and only his "I could never be separated from it, as I could from other bodies; I felt all my apatites and emotions in it and on account of it; and I was aware of pain and pleasurable tickling in parts of this body but not in any other body" (pg. 29).
Those in collectivist cultures value their group membership, respect group processes and decisions, and expect other in-group members to look after or protect them in case of needs or crisis. For them, keeping good and harmonious relationships inside their in-group is a priority; and avoiding loss of face is important. Their identity is based on the strong and cohesive in-groups to which they belong. In collectivist cultures, cooperation is high within in-groups, but is unlikely when the other person belongs to an out-group. As a comparison, people in individualist cultures are good at forming new in-groups and getting along with those from out-groups.
Individualism and collectivism are essential terms that researchers use to help one understand culture differences and the impact they have on group behavior. It is important that one obtain the knowledge of both attributes because it can help individuals understand and recognize the different attitudes and behavior of other cultures. Although each attribute has its own advantages and disadvantages, they do share some similarities; and are believed to be the opposite of each other. However, for one to understand the full concept of individualism; one must first have an understanding of collectivism.
Although functions of mediators and arbitrators have several characteristics in common, there are significant instrumental differences that make them distinct from one another. Firstly, whereas the arbitration process is similar to litigation in its adversarial nature, in which parties have the objective to win the dispute, the fundamental goal of mediation is to bring the disputants to settlement through compromise and cooperation without finding a guilty party. In arbitration, parties compete against each other in “win-lose” situation. During mediation, parties work on mutually acceptable conditions with the assistance of a facilitator. In this process, mediators do not have power to make decisions, they work to reconcile the competing needs and interests of involved parties. The mediator’s tasks are to assist disputants to identify, understand, and articulate their needs and interests to each other (Christopher W. Moore,
Mediation is a form of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Mediation is a process which it assists disputed parties to arrive to a mutually agreed resolution without going to court. As the out of court problem solving approach, mediation is a more convenient way for parties which trying to avoid the hassle and loving some flexibility from the more rigid court procedure. Mediation can be said as an informal process of which parties during this process is encouraged to work together among the disputed parties in good faith in order to solve their problems and disputes at a lower financial cost and it consume lesser time as opposed to the court procedure. Mediation recently has become more common as one of dispute resolution process especially for disputes which have relations to divorce matter, child custody or even for child visitation especially for its privacy and confidentiality.