From the daily archives:

Monday, April 20, 2009

the gorilla at the mediation tableLast week’s annual spring meeting of the ABA Section on Dispute Resolution was endowed with an optimistic title: “ADR: Building Bridges to a Better Society”. Despite the noble sentiment it carried, something else – unwelcome and ignored – was present.

It was there in the plenary meetings and in the sessions I sat in on. No one explicitly named it, but plainly there it sat: the dividing line that separates one practitioner from the other. It was there when the famous scholar declared that cases involving legal issues are best mediated by attorneys only. It was there in one of the workshops when a facilitative mediator declared an evaluative intervention to be “wrong” and “bad mediation”.  It was there when a law professor dismissed lawyers – the original dispute resolvers – as flunkies and functionaries of a heartless judicial system. It’s the line that runs straight between attorneys who mediate and mediators who don’t practice law. It’s the line that separates facilitative mediators from mediators who evaluate. It’s the line between theory and praxis. We ADR professionals pay lip service to the values of community and collaborative effort; but the reality is otherwise for those willing to look more closely.

Other lines divide us, too, along the borders of gender and race. Women and people of color remain excluded from premier ADR panels. Women, who face gender-specific hurdles when it comes to negotiation anyway, confront particular disadvantages when it comes to the selection of mediators who assist at negotiations. Meanwhile, in the recent issue of the ABA Dispute Resolution magazine, dedicated to diversity, and which arrived the day before I departed for the spring meeting in New York, the concluding page of one article (a critical look at the lack of diversity in ADR’s upper echelons) faced an advertisement for a prestigious training organization with head shots of trainers who were white and male, with only a single woman represented among them. Yet still at the conference I heard an honored guest speaker look back on a moment in history when women faced barriers in ADR as if that time belonged solely to a long-ago past and not to the present.

It seems to me that unless we build and cross bridges within our own community, we can hardly expect to bridge gulfs outside it.

So, in the words of Joan Rivers, and mediators everywhere:

Can we talk?

{ 11 comments }

connecting to ADRSurmounted by an image of a righteous Old Testament god, the frieze above the entrance to the GE Building in New York City bears the words, “Wisdom and Knowledge shall be the stability of thy times“, chiseled into stone. Along with collegiality and connection, these were no doubt the objectives of those who attended last week’s 11th annual spring meeting of the American Bar Association’s Section on Dispute Resolution.

So how did it go?

Meeting long-distance friends and fellow bloggers – some of them for the very first time – was a welcome pleasure.  Waiting for ADR bloggers on the morning of the first day of the program was the personable Jim Melamed, co-founder of Mediate.com, the ADR world’s best known news and information resource. Bearing a tantalizing box of Krispy Kreme donuts was Jeff Thompson, who blogs at Enjoy Mediation and represents the face of the new generation of conflict resolution professionals. Jeff, a NYC police officer working in the Community Affairs Bureau and a Buddhist who has met the Dalai Lama twice, offered us a warm welcome to the city he lives and works in. Keep your eye on him, folks – he is one of tomorrow’s leaders. It’s people like Jeff who will be bringing change and new direction to the practice of mediation.

I got to reconnect with Wellington barrister and commercial mediator Geoff Sharp of Mediator Blah Blah, who was here in the Boston area for a conference about two or so years ago. Warm, wise, and even funnier in person than he is on his blog, Geoff is someone I count myself fortunate to call friend. (Good to see you, Geoff.) And meeting Settle It Now author Vickie Pynchon in person for the first time – after numerous emails, phone calls, and comments back and forth on each other’s blogs – was extraordinary. Perhaps more than anyone I know, she embodies the spirit of the best of the blogosphere – its mutuality, its neighborliness, its collegiality, its open and courageous engagement with ideas, its generosity.  As she writes, reflects and connects with her vast web of online social contacts, so, too, does she in person. Vickie is also the founder of the Professional Women’s Network of Southern California, open to those outside that geographic area.

Other bloggers I met included ADR pioneer Jeff Krivis, and Phyllis Pollack, a high-energy, hard-working Los Angeles attorney and mediator who writes the blog PGP Mediation, which discusses the dynamics at work at the mediation table. In addition to running a busy practice and publishing a blog, Phyllis also finds time to serve as president-elect of the Southern California Mediation Association.

Although I came for the programs, I primarily showed up for the schmoozing.  Besides meeting bloggers, the spring meeting was an extraordinary opportunity to get to know ADR professionals and scholars from all over the globe – to have impromptu discussions and conversations in meeting rooms, hallways, elevators, and over restaurant tables. It’s a reminder that no matter how wonderful social media may be, there is simply no substitute for face-to-face interaction in real time, right in the moment.

Those were among the positives – those things that made attending the event worthwhile. There were also glitches and disappointments, of which I will mention one now. I promised readers that I would be live blogging and Twittering from the event. I am glad that I thought to include the caveat that I would do so in the absence of technical difficulties. As it turned out, reliable wireless internet access was a big problem.  The hotel offered for-fee ethernet access in guest rooms (although those of us who were bunking with spouses or colleagues were charged for access for each laptop plugging in, rather than a single fee for the room) and free wifi in the lobby with only very limited and unreliable wifi in the conference meeting areas. This left disappointed bloggers like me who were planning on blogging live from plenaries and break-out sessions to bring the conversation to our readers unable to attend the event. I can only hope that organizers for next year’s conference will plan better for Web 2.0. This was a missed opportunity to make the most of the internet and bring the ABA Section on Dispute Resolution fully into the 21st century.

I’m already looking ahead to next year…

{ 0 comments }