Before we go any further, it's time to explain the concept of interests, which was mentioned earlier in the Mediation section. The best way to illustrate this point is to tell you the story of the Lemon sisters, three sisters who were fighting over a lemon. Each sister had the same position: "I want the lemon. The lemon belongs to me."
The sisters didn't understand each other's perspectives. Instead, each sister blamed the other two for their problems. None of the sisters possessed enough conscious conflict ownership to be able to look at the dispute through a lens that allowed her to see the interplay between their individual thoughts, feelings, and actions.
The sisters did try to negotiate. However, their efforts were unsuccessful. Each one allowed emotional triggers from the past to block her ability to share stories in a way that made them easy to hear. The sisters did not listen to one another with curiosity and compassion. Their dysfunctional communication patterns didn't foster mutual understanding or act as a bridge to finding solutions.
The sisters considered hiring an impartial facilitator who could take them through some activities and help them create a strategic plan for the lemon's future. However, the sisters were already angry at one another, and they didn't want to work together
Arbitration was suggested. They did seek out a lemon arbitrator who would make a decision based on the law and the lemon industry standards. However, each sister was concerned that she might lose and would have to walk out of the hearing with her tail between her legs (metaphorically, of course). So, no arbitrator was hired.
Each sister consulted a lawyer, separately, and discussed the possibility of litigation. The lawyers explained that if they took their dispute to court, each of them would then have to attempt to prove that she was the one who had a legal right to the lemon. The sisters learned that they would have to bring in expensive lemon DNA experts, witnesses, and documents. All of this evidence would be offered as proof of the lemon's legal ownership and, ultimately, a judge would determine the lemon's legitimate owner. Someone would be the clear winner, and someone else would be the clear loser. Ultimately, though, even the winner would lose as the relationship with her sisters would have significantly deteriorated as a result of the adversarial nature of the litigation processes.
Ultimately, the sisters knew they couldn't spend their time or money on court procedures. Their Aunt Tilly, the family matriarch, told them that they should just cut the lemon in thirds. This way, each of them would get a fraction of what she wanted without further damaging their relationship. Tilly told them that she was so sick of hearing about the lemon that she would kill all of them if they didn't stop fighting (and the sisters feared that Tilly just might do it).
So, out of fear, the sisters were ready to cut the lemon in thirds, when they happened to meet a mediator. As the story goes (and remember, I am a mediator and this is a mediator's story), the sisters then began a collaborative dialogue with their skilled mediator (that's all mediation is—collaborative dialogue, an assisted conversation). Through the mediator's thought-provoking questions and their ensuing conversation, the sisters were able to put their positions ("I want the lemon") aside and focused instead on uncovering their interests. That's when it became apparent that Zelda, the eldest sister, wanted the lemon so that she could grate the rind, get the zest, and make a lemon cake. Mabel, the middle sister, wanted the lemon juice so that she could make lemonade, and Phoebe, the youngest sister, wanted the lemon seeds so that she could plant them and grow more lemons. Their interests are the rind, the juice, and the seeds. Their possibilities for ongoing lemon projects are enormous.
Make a note
In the real world, it's often not easy to uncover interests. However, when people in conflict sit together and converse, the possibility greatly increases. Sorting out interests is the first step to coming up with creative win-win resolutions.
If you are able to focus on interests, not positions, you may never need a mediator. Instead, you can use interest-based negotiation, a concept that comes out of the Program on Negotiation at Harvard. Interest-based negotiators focus on relationship building, mutual benefit, and working together to solve the problem versus trying to annihilate the person on the other side.
Make a note
A conflict coach works one on one with clients who are experiencing a conflict with another person. Typically, the coach and the client will talk about the client's conflict, consider options to manage the conflict, and design an approach to handle the conflict. Conflict coaching can be useful in a variety of situations, including workplace conflicts, divorce, community disputes, family disagreements, or business conflicts. The conflict coach serves as a confidential listener and sounding board who helps the client see the situation from a different perspective, consider other options, create a plan of action to deal with the conflict, and rehearse the conversation that will ultimately take place with the person on the other side.