Introduction
Mediation refers to a process that involves intervention in a bid to create a solution to an existing dispute. The process requires the response of a third party whose aim is to facilitate communication among the disputing parties to promote effectiveness in the decision-making process. Considering that the mediation process involves parties facing disputes, it is necessary that the mediators have the relevant knowledge concerning how to ensure that the disputing parties resolve the dispute conclusively. In that case, the mediators are required to be credible to make sure that the disputing parties are in a position to make effective decisions that are not biased. The sensitivity of the mediation process needs the mediators to be unbiased to focus on enhancing the process without favoring any party. The mediators should concentrate on improving their credibility and trustworthiness, which are aspects that make them fair.
The involvement of a third party in the process of resolving dispute requires a professional mediator with the ability to detach from the parties involved in the conflict but be in a position to central the process. Being central in the mediation process ensures that the mediator remains unbiased, which is a fundamental and significant requirement of the process. The mediator should have the ability to be neutral in the process to ensure that the disputing parties are in a position to make effective decisions without interference. Capitalizing on the aspect of neutrality of the mediator helps in enhancing fairness within the process, which is an aspect that helps in dealing with the dispute conclusively. Considering that the parties involved in a discussion may have significant differences that may interfere with the process of finding a solution to the conflict, a neutral mediator facilitates proper communication that helps towards solving the conflict.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Theory
Considering that mediation is a process that involves interventions to find a solution to disputes within different parties, it is necessary for the mediators to capitalize on the evaluation of basic negotiation principles. The negotiation principles play a vital role in guiding the mediators on various aspects regarding the process to benefit effectiveness and ensure that they remain unbiased. The first basic principle that is significant in the process is Impartiality and neutrality. According to Allen (2018), impartiality and neutrality of the mediators during the mediation process helps in promoting unbiasedness to capitalize on effective decision making within the conflicting parties. The impartiality and neutrality principle mandates the mediators not to engage in providing judgment, advice, or solution to the issues discussed by the opposing parties to capitalize on fairness. In that case, the mediators should ensure that his/her behavior portrays impartiality by providing that they do not show sympathy to a specific party involved in the dispute.
The second important principle capitalizing on enhancing the mediation process to ensure that the mediators remain unbiased is Confidentiality. According to Roberts (2016), the mediation process should capitalize on confidentiality to ensure that the parties involved are in a position to present their issues effectively. In that case, the mediators should focus on ensuring that the discussions taking place during the mediation process remain confidential in a bid to provide the conflicting parties with the opportunity to resolve the disputes. Confidentiality is a crucial aspect that ensures that the mediators remain unbiased throughout the process, which is an aspect that helps in obtaining solutions for the difference. The principle focuses on providing that the mediator is impartial to undertake the process effectively and ensure that the parties reach an agreement based on their concerns.
The third mediation principle that is relevant in ensuring that the mediators remain unbiased is Integrity and fairness. According to Boca, Garro, Giammusso, & Abbate (2018), focusing on integrity and justice helps in promoting ethical procedures and ensures that the mediator does not take sides during the process. Maintaining ethical considerations during the mediation process capitalizes on providing that the method is effective and efficient and that the conflicting parties are in a position to overcome their issues with obtaining on finding a solution to the disputes. Allen (2018) argues that engaging in the mediation process without obtaining integrity and fairness results in the development of other conflicts thus making it difficult to find solutions to the disputes. Additionally, lack of integrity and fairness among the mediators may result in a legal issue whereby the disputing parties may seek legal measures against the mediator.
Lastly, willingness and equality of parties is an important principle that is crucial during the mediation process. To ensure that the mediation process is adequate and the mediators can engage in the process, the parties involved in a dispute should be willing to mediate in a bid to find a solution. The mediator should be prepared to reconcile the parties without favoring any party and should be focused towards remaining unbiased to enhance the process. Additionally, the mediator should capitalize on improving equality to the parties to provide equal opportunities during the process of resolving the disputes. According to Roberts (2016), biased mediators do not provide equal opportunities to the disputing parties to offer their will regarding the process thus failing in the entire process.
Narrative of the Historical Case/Cases
Mediations have been undertaken over the years focusing on different situations with the sole intention being towards finding a practical solution to critical challenges. An example of a case that sought to show mediation was the 2000 Camp David Summit in which the then United States President Bill Clinton sought to act as a mediate between Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Barak, and Palestinian Authority chairman, Yasser Arafat. The main focus of the mediation was to ensure that President Clinton would be able to broker an agreement between the two leaders, which would see an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. From this case, it becomes clear that the role that President Clinton played in the mediation expected him to remain unbiased considering that he was supposed to serve as a neutral ground for both parties involved in the negotiation.
The case of President Clinton supports the position that indeed mediators should remain unbiased in the positions that they take, as this would allow them to find common ground between the parties involved. Although the summit ended without the parties having reached an agreement, the issue in question did not reflect on whether the mediator was biased or unbiased. Instead, it sought to reflect on the fact that the parties involved in the negotiation failed to find common ground that would allow them to reach an agreement on the issue at hand. From that view, this summit would serve as one of the critical factors to consider in trying to define the importance of a mediator having to maintain his or her impartiality when dealing with a negotiation. The outcome is that this would serve as one of the ways through which to guarantee success.
Analysis
From the onset of this report, what is clear is that it seeks to highlight the importance of having to ensure that mediators maintain impartiality in their approaches to dealing with negotiations. One of the critical ideas concepts that can be needed from the discussion is on the fact that mediators have a crucial role in maintaining impartiality and neutrality in their engagement with the parties involved in the negotiation. The case of the 2000 Camp David Summit supports this position considering that it reflects on a standard on how mediators ought to view the consultation. On his part, President Clinton believed that although it was essential for him to help both parties reach an agreement, it was not within his mandate to show any form of bias towards any of the parties involved.
Allen (2018) builds on the position of mediators as being defined by the need for them to change how they engage in negotiations with the sole expectation being towards improving the perception of both parties. President Clinton was able to show the value of having to maintain efficiency as a mediator by working hard to ensure that the other parties involved in the negotiation build on their discussions. Another critical aspect that can be supported from the 2000 Camp David Summit is on the need for mediators to always work hard to ensure that they remain neutral in every approach that they take as part of a negotiation. That can be justified from the fact that President Clinton sought to invite both leaders, who are from the Middle East, to the United States as a way of ensuring that the grounds for negotiation would remain neutral.
For negotiations to be justified, the parties involved must feel comfortable, as well as, must have the expected urge that would allow them to define the most relevant factors that would enable them to achieve set out goals. That means that the mediator ought to focus on finding a venue that does not act as some form of bias towards one of the parties involved in the negotiation. Lastly, the mediator is also expected to maintain the highest standards in confidentiality, which would serve as one of the ways through which to ensure that the negotiating parties keep the expected trust and confidence. In the case of President Clinton, confidentiality can be seen from the fact that although the negotiation failed to achieve set goals, information on the failure has never been shared with the public, which boosted the confidence levels for the other leaders.
Conclusion
Meditation refers to a process that involves intervention in a bid to create a solution to an existing dispute. The mediators should focus on enhancing their credibility and trustworthiness, which are aspects that make them unbiased. The involvement of a third party in the process of resolving dispute requires a professional mediator with the ability to detach from the parties involved in the argument but be in a position to central the process. The negotiation principles play a vital role in guiding the mediators on various aspects regarding the process to capitalize on effectiveness and ensure that they remain unbiased. The case of President Clinton supports the position that indeed mediators should stay unbiased in the areas that they take, as this would allow them to find common ground between the parties involved. For negotiations to be justified, the parties involved must feel comfortable, as well as, must have the expected urge that would allow them to define the most relevant factors that would enable them to achieve set out goals.
References
Allen, T. (2018). The extremities of mediation and the importance of process. Journal of Medical Law and Ethics , 6 (1), 55-73.
Boca, S., Garro, M., Giammusso, I., & Abbate, C. S. (2018). The effect of perspective taking on the mediation process. Psychology research and behavior management , 11 , 411.
Roberts, M. (2016). Mediation in family disputes: principles of practice . Routledge.
