Mediation Skills - 7 Elements

The given statement describes "interests". In a dispute, interests refer to the underlying needs, desires, or concerns that motivate a party's demand. It goes beyond the specific positions or solutions proposed and focuses on the underlying reasons behind those demands. Understanding and addressing the interests of all parties involved can help in finding a mutually satisfactory resolution to the dispute.

The parties agree to donate the difference in their claims to charity is least likely to be considered fair procedure because it does not involve any objective or impartial method of decision-making. The decision is based on the parties' agreement, which may not necessarily be fair or unbiased. In contrast, the other options (one party cuts, the other party chooses; drawing lots; letting a neutral party decide) involve more objective and impartial methods of decision-making, which are generally considered fairer.

An acceptable ground rule for inventing options is for parties to focus on shared interests rather than their own positions. This means that instead of being rigid and solely advocating for their own ideas, parties should prioritize finding common ground and identifying solutions that benefit all parties involved. By doing so, parties can foster collaboration and increase the likelihood of reaching a mutually satisfactory agreement.

This example illustrates "Interests" because Mary and Sue have different desires or goals for the orange. Mary is interested in drinking the orange juice, while Sue is interested in using the orange rind for baking. Their conflicting interests create a situation where they need to find a solution that satisfies both of their interests.

An alternative is something that can be considered or chosen as a substitute or option when a settlement cannot be reached. It provides an alternative course of action or solution for a party involved in a situation where an agreement or resolution cannot be achieved. This suggests that an alternative is a fallback or backup plan that can be pursued in the absence of a settlement.

not-available-via-ai

The mediator should avoid asking questions that tend to expose the party's bottom line in the negotiations because this can lead to positional bargaining where parties are focused on their own interests rather than finding a solution based on legitimate criteria. By avoiding this type of questioning, the mediator can encourage the parties to consider the underlying reasons for their proposals, explore fairness, and consider the other party's perspective, which can help in converting the negotiation into one based on legitimate criteria.

Selling price is less likely to be an interest compared to the other three items because goodwill, financial security, and recognition are all factors that individuals or businesses actively seek and value. Goodwill refers to the reputation and positive perception of a company, which can lead to increased customer loyalty and trust. Financial security is a fundamental interest for individuals and businesses, as it ensures stability and the ability to meet financial obligations. Recognition is also highly valued as it signifies acknowledgment and appreciation for one's achievements or contributions. On the other hand, selling price is typically determined by market conditions and negotiation, rather than being a personal interest.

The statement "A party does not need to consider the needs of anyone who is not party to the dispute" is wrong because when inventing options, it is important to consider the needs and interests of all relevant parties, not just those directly involved in the dispute. By considering the needs of others, a party can create options that have a better chance of satisfying all parties involved and creating a lasting agreement.

If parties cannot identify any objective criteria, they can still try to find a fair procedure instead. This means that they can establish a process or method that both parties agree is fair and unbiased to help them reach a resolution. This could involve setting ground rules, establishing a timeline, or using a specific method of decision-making that both parties find acceptable. By focusing on creating a fair procedure, the parties can still work towards resolving their dispute even without objective criteria.

The statement "A party should accept the offer only if the BATNA is better than the offer made" is wrong because in negotiation, a party should accept an offer if it is better than their BATNA, not the other way around. The BATNA is the alternative option a party has if the negotiation fails, and it is used as a benchmark to evaluate the attractiveness of an offer. If the offer is better than the BATNA, it may be considered acceptable and worth accepting.

The given statement describes "Options" because it refers to different ways or choices that can be considered to fulfill or satisfy a particular interest or need. Options provide alternatives or possibilities to address an underlying interest.

The given answer, "You ask John to throw in a new sound system for the price he is asking," is not an alternative if you are looking to buy a car from John because it suggests negotiating for an additional item (sound system) to be included in the purchase. The other options listed are all alternatives to buying a car from John: using public transport, continuing to use your existing car, or considering buying a car won in a lucky draw.