Skip to main content
Log in

Common Language, Different Meaning: What Mediators Mean When They Talk About Their Work

  • Published:
Negotiation Journal

Abstract

Mediators, for the most part, describe their work as “facilitation” but what they actually mean varies considerably. Based on an exploratory study with nearly 90 mediators in Canada (all of whom are also mediation trainers), the author describes the great diversity among mediators' understanding of commonly-used terms like facilitation, transformative, settlement, and humanistic. She also reports on how such factors as context, gender, and number of years mediating affect mediator perceptions of what they do. In addition, the author shows how perceptions affect the overall philosophy and goal of the mediation practitioner. One implication of this research is that we can no longer presume to know what people mean by “mediation,” nor can we assume mediators are like-minded in how they understand their work. Thus, practitioners, scholars and policymakers are encouraged to be purposefully clear when describing and writing about the practice of mediation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Bourdieu, P. 1990. In other words: Essays towards a reflexive sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burr, V. 1995. An introduction to social constructionism. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bush, R.A.B., and J.P. Folger. 1994. The promise of mediation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewhurst, M. and V. Wall. 1994. Gender and the mediation of conflict: Communication differences. In Conflict and gender, edited by A. Taylor and J. Beinstein-Miller. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gergen, K. and K. Davis. 1985. The social construction of the person. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. 1993. New rules of sociological method. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. and A. Strauss. 1967. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies of qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gourley, C. B. 1994. Mediator differences in perception of abuse: A gender problem? In Conflict and gender, edited by A. Taylor and J. Beinstein-Miller. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. 1989. A taxonomy of effective mediator strategies and tactics for non-labor-management mediation. In Managing conflict: An interdisciplinary approach, edited by M. A. Rahim. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keashly, L. 1994. What does psychological research tell us? In Conflict and gender, edited by A. Taylor and J. Beinstein-Miller. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, D. M. 1981. Roles mediators play: State and federal practice. Industrial Relations 20(1): 1-17

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1983a. The mediators. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1983b. Strategy and the tactics of mediation. Human Relations 36(3): 247-268

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1985. To be a mediator: Expressive tactics in mediation. Journal of Social Issues 41(2): 11-26

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1994a. Negotiation theory: Through the looking glass of gender. Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, ed. 1994b. When talk works: Profiles of mediators. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kressel, K. 1972. Labor mediation: An exploratory survey. New York: Association of Labor Mediation Agencies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruk, E. 1998. Family mediation in Canada: The state of the art. Interaction, 10.

  • Littlejohn, S., J. Shailor, and B. Pearce, 1994. The deep structure of reality in mediation. In New directions in mediation: Communication research and perspectives, edited by J. Folger and T. Jones. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Love, L. and J. Stulberg. 1996. Practice guidelines for co-mediation: Making certain that two heads are better than one. Mediation Quarterly 13:179-189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mcfarlane, J. 1999. Dispute resolution: Readings and case studies. Toronto: Emond Montgomery.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menkel-Meadow, C. 1995. The many ways of mediation: The transformations of traditions, ideologies, paradigms, and practices. Negotiation Journal 11(3): 217-242

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. and M. Huberman. 1994. Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavalko, R. M. 1971. Sociology of occupations and professions. Itasca, Ill.: F.E. Peacock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Picard, C. 2000. The many meanings of mediation: A sociological study of mediation in Canada. Doctoral dissertation, Carleton University, Ottawa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riskin, L. 1994. Mediator orientations: Strategies and techniques. Alternatives 12(9).

  • —. 1996. Understanding mediator orientations, strategies and techniques: A grid for the perplexed. Harvard Negotiation Law Review 1(1996): 7-51.

  • Ruble, T. and J. Schneer. 1994. Gender differences in conflict-handling styles: Less than meets the eye? In Conflict and gender, edited by A. Taylor and J. Beinstein-Miller. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwerin, E. W. 1995. Mediation, citizen empowerment and transformational politics. Westport, Conn.: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shonholtz, R. 1984. Neighbourhood justice systems: Work, structure and guiding principles. Mediation Quarterly 5 (1984): 3-30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silbey, S. and S.E. Merry. 1986. Mediator settlement strategies. Law and Policy 8(1).

  • Tracy, K. and A. Spradlin. 1994. Talking like a mediator: Conversational moves of experienced divorce mediators. In New directions in mediation: Communication research and perspectives, edited by J. Folger and T. Jones. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wahrhaftig, P. 1982. An overview of community-oriented citizen dispute resolution programs in the United States. In The politics of informal justice, vol. 1: The American experience, edited by R. Abel. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, C. 1994a. Gender differences in negotiating behavior and outcomes: Fact or artifact? In Conflict and gender, edited by A. Taylor and J. Beinstein-Miller. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1994b. Gender versus power as a predictor of negotiation behavior and outcomes. Negotiation Journal 10(2): 117-127

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. 1962. (translated by H. P. Secher), Concepts in sociology. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weingarten, H. R. and E. Douvan. 1985. Male and female visions of mediation. Negotiation Journal 1(4): 349-358

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

About this article

Cite this article

Picard, C. Common Language, Different Meaning: What Mediators Mean When They Talk About Their Work. Negotiation Journal 18, 251–269 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016386510529

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016386510529

Keywords

Navigation