Mediation Styles

Directive Mediation - is a subset of evaluative mediation that relies on a person bringing expertise in a particular field to meet with disputants and encourage them to negotiate. This expert also collects alleged facts, evidence and arguments, and gives information, opinion and advice.  The expertise of the directive mediator may be for example in:  farming, building, business economics, child development, or some specialization of “law”.  Directive mediation has also been called “advisory” mediation.

 

Evaluative Mediation - was developed out of court-mandated mediation and is a process that is patterned after the typical settlements held by judges. Focusing on legal rights of the parties instead of “fairness”. An evaluative mediator will likely meet with each party and their attorney in separate meetings. The process of evaluative mediation usually involves point-by-point evaluation in deciding to pursue legal action in a case, and because of this, most evaluative mediators are attorneys.

 

Facilitative Mediation - is widely taught and utilized today. The mediator assists parties by asking questions; at the same time, he or she validates and normalizes points of view of the parties in conflict. In facilitative mediation, the mediator avoids making recommendations or giving his or her advice. The role of the mediator is to facilitate the process. Therefore, the parties are in complete control of the outcome.

 

Transformative Mediation - is similar to facilitative mediation. As with facilitative mediation, parties are in control of the outcome and the mediator is a facilitator to this conclusion. The goals of transformative mediation is not necessarily a decision, but creating a process where both parties may learn, grow, or experience some sort of personal transformation of thought or action as a result of mediation. (Note: Some argue that transformation is a result of mediation not a style.)

RMC uses facilitative and transformative mediation styles