How can you maintain neutrality when mediating a personal conflict?

The first and most important task to resolve any conflict is to define what success looks like. Within that definition the parties have to understand and agree that compromise is required to resolve the matter. Compromise means that no one side will fully achieve their desired outcome. If the parties agree to the general parameters then there is a higher chance of success. Setting expectations up front ensures the parties are ready to work through the problem through a genuine effort to find a solution.

Mediating means that you are not there to pick winners and losers, but to help people resolve a conflict. While giving those involved an honest and objective assessment of the facts is very important, as the parties must be able see beyond their own position and be realistic about the situation; just as important is trying to focus the parties on solutions and move them past blame or accusations that are unproductive to the process. Creative thinking from a mediator can help jump start the process, but mediators are their to help the parties craft their own resolution instead of having one imposed on them.

Maintaining neutrality in personal conflict resolution requires a strong commitment to objectivity. One must eschew personal biases, ensuring that all parties' perspectives are considered with equal weight. To stay objective, it is imperative to focus solely on verifiable facts and the specific issues at hand, avoiding emotional entanglements. Utilising active listening skills and reframing statements in neutral language can help clarify misunderstandings and facilitate a fair dialogue. This methodical approach not only upholds impartiality but also enhances the credibility and effectiveness of the mediation process.

I agree. Objectivity comes from not bringing any pre-conceived notions into the process. First, to maintain neutrality, you need to start from a place of neutrality. Both sides usually have an opportunity to present their position before or at the beginning of a mediation. The mediator should start from a clean slate and review the facts and arguments as presented to understand the issues to be mediated.

Coming in with a blank slate is key. Letting each party explain their side and be inquisitive. Remember that your role is to facilitate a resolution between the parties. The simple fact that this dispute is not about you. lol. Making sure that each sides points/perspectives are Conveying in a constructive manner the other sides perspectives on the issues from an educational manner. Your goal is to help the parties keep out of a Courtroom or other forum where both parties control of the outcome is not in their hands. Ground rules are important and keeping civility helps objectivity. However, the beauty of mediation is that the only rule to follow is the one that brings the parties to a resolution they both can live with.

As lawyers we are almost programmed to jump straight into "solutions mode", but that merely brings our prejudices (and privileges) into play, and just involves us imposing our solutions on others, without giving them the chance to be heard. Listening is harder than speaking!

One thing I have found helpful when listening actively is to lead with empathy in responding, validating their feelings, and making sure that they don’t just hear your words, but feel your humanity.

Listening carefully is fundamental in mediating personal conflicts: Fully concentrating, understanding, and responding thoughtfully to the speaker, ensuring that all parties feel heard and respected. By acknowledging each party's concerns without interruption or judgment, you create an environment conducive to open dialogue and mutual understanding. As former U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson once said, "Listening to people is far more important than talking to them. Listening to them means understanding them." This principle highlights the significance of empathetic listening in resolving disputes effectively and equitably.

Repeating others' responses in your own words, or reflection, demonstrates that you understand the other party's point of view and opens up the channels of communication. Try it. It works.

The mediator needs to be completely focused on understanding the personalities and point of view of the people involved in the conflict and establish their trust. Personal conflicts can arise because of different values and priorities that becomes a part of a personality that can cause people to dislike and disrespect one another. It’s important for the mediator to understand each party before looking for common ground.

Ground rules establish clear expectations for behaviour, promoting a safe and productive environment. Key rules might include allowing each party to speak without interruption, maintaining confidentiality, and focusing on issues rather than personal attacks. These guidelines help manage emotions and prevent the discussion from becoming adversarial. By clearly defining acceptable conduct and procedures, ground rules facilitate a more orderly and fair resolution process, enhancing the likelihood of reaching a mutually acceptable agreement.

I cannot stress enough how important this is. When conflict arises, it is so easy for personal attacks to take center stage. It's important to remember that emotional outbursts will not help resolve the issue. As the mediator, make sure to communicate with the two parties that the goal of the meeting is ultimately a resolution and that any unprofessional behavior in the process of that will not be tolerated.

Controlling bias is crucial in mediating personal conflicts to ensure fairness & impartiality. Recognising & setting aside personal prejudices & preconceived notions, focusing solely on the facts & perspectives of all parties involved. Practising self-awareness and actively seeking to understand each viewpoint without judgment helps mitigate unconscious biases. Christopher Voss, a former FBI hostage negotiator, emphasises this principle: "The beauty of empathy is that it doesn't demand that you agree with the other person's ideas." This highlights the importance of acknowledging and understanding differing perspectives without letting personal biases influence the mediation process.

The key to controlling your own bias is to use impartial language and avoid words or phrases that may imply judgment or favoritism. In my experience, it is best to frame your questions and statements to encourage open dialogue without suggesting solutions or blaming any party.

Encouraging equity in mediating personal conflicts ensures that all parties have an equal opportunity to express their viewpoints and concerns. Actively balancing the dialogue, giving each participant adequate time to speak, and addressing any power imbalances that may exist. By promoting a fair and inclusive environment, mediators can help all individuals feel valued and heard. As renowned civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stated, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." This highlights the importance of equity in conflict resolution, ensuring a just and effective outcome for all involved.

A mediator may be tempted to envision what a good solution would look like before conducting the mediation session with the participants. Such solutions reflect the mediator’s experience and bias. However, as a practical matter, the ultimate resolution depends upon the participants’ backgrounds and goals. Those ingredients may be different than the mediator’s expectations and, thus, the mediator must reflect on and adjust to the particular circumstances unique to each mediation.

Initially, avoid listening to make a judgment call (who's right/wrong) and simply listen to understand. Get each party's perspective on how and why they feel things should have gone differently; including what outcomes would seem reasonable to them. If it is not a legal mediation situation, sometimes letting both sides hear each other out (without interruption), with some patient guidance, they can come to a mutually acceptable resolution without needing an outside judge's decision.