8125

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 8125
• Author: Moore, C. W.
• Title: Editor
• USFW Year: Series
• USFW - Doc Type: 1986
• Copyright Material: YES

52 The Mediation Process
the conflict has a strong likelihood of success. Some mediators
are reluctant to describe the procedures by which they propose
to resolve a dispute. By claiming that they respond differently
to each conflict or by arguing that mediation is an art form
rather than a series of scientific interventions, some mediators
shroud their practice in secrecy and leave the disputants ignorant
of the mediation process. Procedural credibility in this instance
might be enhanced by demystifying the mediation process.
Clouding the mediation process has been sharply criti-
cized by other mediators, and I advocate a candid education of
the parties about general mediation procedures that might be
used in their dispute. Clear procedural descriptions enable the
parties to make informed judgments about the viability of the
process and will demonstrate how the procedure might work
for them. In building procedural credibility, the mediator
should stress that successful resolution rests primarily on the
disputants themselves and that the best possible process will
not guarantee that recalcitrant parties will come to terms.
An example of procedural credibility building occurred
in 1985 when mediators from the Center for Dispute Resolu-
tion were asked to intervene by the Public Utilities Commis-
sion of Colorado in a dispute over the creation of a new rule on
telephone access charges. As the process of negotiated and me-
diated rule making had a very limited history in Colorado and
none of the major parties had ever engaged in such a process,
the mediators initiated an educational session for the dispu-
tants in which case histories and procedures used for regulatory
rule making in other settings were presented. Successful case
studies built procedural credibility and enabled the parties to
visualize how the process might work for them.
Establishing Rapport with the Disputants. Personal, insti-
tutional, and procedural credibility is merely the starting point
for a mediator's entry into a dispute. The greatest factor in the
acceptability of an intervenor is probably the rapport estab-
lished between the mediator and the disputants. Rapport refers
to the ability to communicate freely, the level of comfort of
the parties, the degree of precision in the communication, and