THE MODELS OF MEDIATION

So I've been thinking a bit about the three models of mediation and what mediation will look like as it continues to develop. I have an admittedly limited knowledge of the three models, but for the sake of discussion, I'd like to elaborate on my understanding of the three models because it will shed some light on my defense of one model over the others, or at least may expose the pros and cons of each model.

To the best of my knowledge, there are three main models of mediation: Evaluative, Facilitative and Transformative. Here is what I understand the three models to mean in the most basic of terms without my own opinions thrown in:

Evaluative mediation follows a set process, sets guidelines for participants' behavior in mediation and helps the participants evaluate potential solutions.

Facilitative mediation follows a set process, may or may not set guidelines and does not evaluate potential solutions.

Transformative mediation has a loose structure and does not necessarily follow a process. It sets no guidelines for participants' behavior and does not evaluate potential solutions.

Because my own exposure to each model may be limited, I can't properly explain the advantages and disadvantages of each model, but here is my understanding of the arguments for and against each model:

Evaluative mediation may rely on expertise or experience of the mediators, expertise that the participants may not have, to guide the participants towards useful solutions. Because this model sets guidelines on behavior, it encourages the participants to be respectful of each other and the process. On the other hand, it may be presumptuous of the mediators to assume that their own advice is going to be useful, and by offering their own opinions, it limits the creativity of the participants. Further, by setting guidelines on participants' behavior, it fails to honor the participants' usual style of communication as useful to the resolution of the conflict and may cause participants to shut down, or cause them to prevent from expressing themselves.

Facilitative mediation is about opening up dialogue between the participants and lets them talk about how they have been effected by the conflict before examining solutions. Participants can come up with their own solutions, supposedly increasing the likelihood that they will stick to their agreements. Facilitative mediation may still be constraining to participants because it relegates their solutions to the appropriate step in the process. Participants that come to the table focused mainly on solutions may be frustrated by a process that asks them to explore the entire history of the conflict.

Transformative mediation honors the participants by letting them guide the process. In the transformative model, the participants themselves have the most control over when solutions are examined and how they are evaluated. Transformative mediation may prevent some conflicts from being resolved because it does not explore the entire history of the conflict unless the participants reveal that information unprompted.


Again, I may be completely off base, but this is my understanding of the three models. I'd love to hear from other mediators that may know more about the differences.