Comparison of Mediation Models

The first two stages of Folberg & Taylor's and Fisher & Ury's models roughly correspond with each other. In the first stage of Folberg & Taylor's model, the mediator assesses the participants' attitudes about the mediation and their willingness and readiness to proceed (1986, p. 39). The mediator gathers information about the conflict and the participants' expectations regarding possible solutions. Particularly important here is the mediator's ability to determine the communication styles and emotional states of the participants, because the mediator will need to sue this knowledge when mediating the interaction between the participants throughout the process (1986, p. 39). During the second stage of Folberg & Taylor's

. . .
s bring (Lauchli, 2000, p. 1045). The second stage of Fisher & Ury's model requires the mediator to "focus on interests, not positions" (1998, p. 1). Just as the second stage of Folberg & Taylor's model requires that the mediator identify and outline the issues that will be mediated, so too this second stage of Fisher & Ury's model requires that the mediator identify and outline precisely what the participants' interests are in the matter under dispute. This means interviewing the participants about their true interests in the matter, often by reading between the lines of what they actually say. It is the mediator's job in this stage to "get to the heart of the matter" for the participants and to determine whether the matter can be mediated. The third stages of both models are also comparable. Stage three of Folberg & Taylor's model requires that the mediator create options and alternatives (1986, p. 32). The mediator performs this task by helping the participants articulate the options they know they want and by developing new options that may be even more satisfactory (Folberg & Taylor, 1986, p. 51). During this stage the participants may brainstorm possible solutions and participate in trial period of various solutions (Folb
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Folberg Taylor's, Fisher Ury's, Folberg Taylor, Alison Taylor, William Ury, Fisher Ury, Intractable Conflict, folberg taylor's, Lens July, requires mediator, taylor's model, fisher ury's, folberg taylor's model, model requires, folberg taylor, model requires mediator, 1998 1, Resource Consortium, fisher ury's model, ury's model, stage folberg, stage folberg taylor's, Law Review, objective criteria, stage fisher ury's,
Approximate Word count = 1332
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Comparison of Mediation Models