Mediator Effectiveness AssessmentMediation – a process by which an objective individual (mediator) helps parties to a dispute arrive at a solution that is mutually agreeable to the disputing parties.T

MEDIATOR EFFECTIVENESS

SELF-ASSESSMENT

The purpose of this self-assessment is to help you examine whether you possess the characteristics of effective mediators.

Mediation – a process by which an objective individual (mediator) helps parties to a dispute arrive at a solution that is mutually agreeable to the disputing parties.

Directions

PRINT THIS SELF-ASSESSMENT OUT!
Read the definition of mediation above to make sure that you understand it.
Answer all questions to the best of your ability. There are no right or wrong answers. Don’t try to think of the “correct” or most “desirable” response, but simply respond with your honest reactions.
Respond by putting a check-mark or X in one column per question or statement.
Proceed to the second page where you will find a number of questions that ask you to consider how likely or unlikely you are to behave in a certain way when you are mediating a dispute.
On the third page you are required to rate your level of agreement with a number of statements.
Proceed to the fourth page where you will find the scoring key and interpretation guide.

Questions

Once you have completed and scored the self-assessment, profile yourself (i.e., as High, Moderate to High, Moderate to Low, or Low) on your preference for pressure tactics, preference for alternative tactics, and effective mediator characteristics.
How do you measure up on your preference for pressure versus alternative tactics? That is, are you high on both, low on both, high on only one, etc.? Do you agree with this profile of you? Why or why not?
There are times when the use of pressure tactics might be more effective than relying on alternative tactics. Discuss.
How do you measure up relative to the effective mediator characteristics? Do you agree with this profile of you? Why or why not?
Considering what you have learned about the use of pressure tactics versus alternative tactics, and the characteristics that effective mediators possess, what could you do to develop yourself to become a more effective mediator?

How likely are you to do each of the following when MEDIATING a dispute between two parties?	Very Unlikely	Unlikely	Neither Likely nor Unlikely	Likely	Very Likely
I would tell the parties that they are being unrealistic and ask them to change.
I would put together an agenda to guide the discussion/negotiations.
I would attempt to reduce any feelings of anger or hostility that the parties may feel.
I would express my displeasure if adequate progress is not being made on an agreement.
I would repeatedly emphasize the objectives that the disputing parties are trying to achieve.
I would be very assertive in getting the disputing parties to an agreement.
I would construct possible compromises and present them to the parties for consideration.
I would interview each party individually to find out where they stand.
I would establish a deadline for an agreement and try to keep the parties to it.
I would verbally express my genuine concern for both parties to the dispute.
I would treat both parties equally and avoid taking sides with any one party
I would try to come up with a compromise that would allow both parties to “save face.”
I would stress the costs or disadvantages if the disputing parties fail to come to an agreement.

Rate your level of agreement with each of these statements.	Strongly Agree	Agree	Neither Agree nor Disagree	Disagree	Strongly Disagree
I am good at dealing with complex, unstructured problems.
I frequently find myself resolving disputes between friends, coworkers, etc.
It is important to “put myself in the shoes” of each party to understand their concerns.
It is important to keep after the parties until they come to an agreement.
It is important for the mediator to be completely impartial.
Both parties could trust me to keep information that they shared with me confidential.

MEDIATOR EFFECTIVENESS

SELF-ASSESSMENT – Interpretation Guide

Background

It is important that you, the student, review the discussion of mediation and the role of the mediator in Chapter 7 of Holley, Jennings, & Wolters, 8th edition, before continuing. Both Holley, Jennings, & Wolters and the broader mediation literature identify a number of factors that relate to mediator success. Some of these success factors (e.g., the point in time at which a mediator enters the dispute process, mediator experience in the specific industry of the disputing parties, etc.) are beyond the control or interest of someone seeking to improve their success as a mediator. Fortunately, there are other success factors comprised of skills or approaches, behavioral orientations, and traits that can be developed given some knowledge, self-awareness, and effort.

Preference for pressure tactics versus alternative tactics. A number of tactics that are used by mediators have been identified in the mediation literature. These tactics can be grouped into the two broad categories of pressure tactics and alternative tactics.

Pressure tactics include such tactics as advising parties that their positions are unrealistic, putting pressure on parties to modify their positions, expressing displeasure with a lack of progress, establishing timelines and deadlines, and requiring parties to engage in negotiation until a settlement is reached. Mediators that use pressure tactics tend to be assertive and take a larger and more active role, at least outwardly, in pushing the negotiation process forward.

Alternative tactics include tactics such as helping parties to repackage compromise proposals, reorganizing discussion agendas, facilitating the exploration of new or novel alternatives, using humor or friendliness to diffuse tension, encouraging cooperative behavior, exploring each party’s position and conveying an accurate depiction of that position to the other party, offering face-saving compromises, and emphasizing the costs of continued dispute. Mediators that use alternative tactics are not passive, rather, their efforts to move the negotiation process are realized through the disputing parties taking a more active role in the process.

The impact of these different tactics on mediation success has also been examined. There seems to be a crude endorsement of alternative tactics as the most effective means to forging successful dispute settlements. But this endorsement of alternative tactics is by no means universal. There is broad agreement that the use of pressure tactics increases the chances of successful settlement when the disputing parties are under significant constraints relating to time or other scarce resources.

Characteristics of successful mediators. Another approach in the mediation literature has been to look at the cognitive, behavioral, and personality characteristics of successful mediators. The traits of successful mediators that have been identified include mediator impartiality, mediator sincerity, empathy, the ability to deal with complex, unstructured problems, a tolerance for ambiguity, experience in resolving conflicts, non-judgmentalism, and the ability to keep confidences.

Preference for Pressure Tactics

Part of the self-assessment measures your preference for pressure tactics. In the table below, find the numerical score that corresponds to the column that you checked for each question. Enter that number to the left of the table for each question. For example, if you checked the “Neither Likely nor Unlikely” column for question #1, you would enter a score of 3 next to Q1.

QUESTION SCORE	Very Unlikely	Unlikely	Neither Likely nor Unlikely	Likely	Very Likely
Q1:
Q4:
Q6:
Q9:

	Strongly Agree	Agree	Neither Agree nor Disagree	Disagree	Strongly Disagree
Q17:

TOTAL: (Add all scores)

TOTAL SCORE	INTERPRETATION
20 OR ABOVE	HIGH PREFERENCE FOR PRESSURE TACTICS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you exhibit a strong preference for pressure tactics.
18 TO 19	MODERATE TO HIGH PREFERENCE FOR PRESSURE TACTICS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you exhibit a moderate to strong preference for pressure tactics. The higher your score is, the more strongly you prefer pressure tactics.
16 TO 17	MODERATE TO LOW PREFERENCE FOR PRESSURE TACTICS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the second quartile (i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This indicates that you exhibit a moderate to weak preference for pressure tactics. The lower your score is, the more weakly you prefer pressure tactics.
15 OR BELOW	LOW PREFERENCE FOR PRESSURE TACTICS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you exhibit only a weak preference for pressure tactics.

Preference for Alternative Tactics

This part of the self-assessment measures your preference for alternative tactics. In the table below, find the numerical score that corresponds to the column that you checked for each question. Enter that number to the left of the table for each question. For example, if you checked the “Likely” column for question #2, you would enter a score of 4 next to Q2.

QUESTION SCORE	Very Unlikely	Unlikely	Neither Likely nor Unlikely	Likely	Very Likely
Q2:
Q3:
Q5:
Q7:
Q8:
Q12:
Q13:

TOTAL: (Add all scores)

TOTAL SCORE	INTERPRETATION
29 OR ABOVE	HIGH PREFERENCE FOR ALTERNATIVE TACTICS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you exhibit a strong preference for alternative tactics.
27 TO 28	MODERATE TO HIGH PREFERENCE FOR ALTERNATIVE TACTICS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you exhibit a moderate to strong preference for alternative tactics. The higher your score is, the more strongly you prefer alternative tactics.
25 TO 26	MODERATE TO LOW PREFERENCE FOR ALTERNATIVE TACTICS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the second quartile (i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This indicates that you exhibit a moderate to weak preference for alternative tactics. The lower your score is, the more weakly you prefer alternative tactics.
24 OR BELOW	LOW PREFERENCE FOR ALTERNATIVE TACTICS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you exhibit only a weak preference for alternative tactics.

Effective Mediator Characteristics

This part of the self-assessment measures the degree to which you exhibit characteristics associated with effective mediators. In the table below, find the numerical score that corresponds to the column that you checked for each question. Enter that number to the left of the table for each question. For example, if you checked the “Unlikely” column for question #10, you would enter a score of 2 next to Q10.

	Very Unlikely	Unlikely	Neither Likely nor Unlikely	Likely	Very Likely
Q10:
Q11:

	Strongly Agree	Agree	Neither Agree nor Disagree	Disagree	Strongly Disagree
Q14:
Q15:
Q16:
Q18:
Q19:

TOTAL: (Add all scores)

TOTAL SCORE	INTERPRETATION
29 OR ABOVE	HIGH ON EFFECTIVE MEDIATOR CHARACTERISTICS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you strongly exhibit characteristics possessed by effective mediators.
27 TO 28	MODERATE TO HIGH ON EFFECTIVE MEDIATOR CHARACTERISTICS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to strongly exhibit characteristics possessed by effective mediators. The higher your score is, the more strongly you exhibit characteristics possessed by effective mediators.
25 TO 26	MODERATE TO LOW ON EFFECTIVE MEDIATOR CHARACTERISTICS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the second quartile (i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to weakly exhibit characteristics possessed by effective mediators. The lower your score is, the more weakly you exhibit characteristics possessed by effective mediators.
24 OR BELOW	LOW ON EFFECTIVE MEDIATOR CHARACTERISTICS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you only weakly exhibit characteristics possessed by effective mediators.