1. A “Mediation Style” Inventory:
What is “Style” and Why Does It Matter?
Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D.
Tiffany Butts, M.A.
46th Annual AFCC Conference
New Orleans, LA
May 30, 2009
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 1

2. Agenda
 Exploring Mediator Style:
 What is style and why is it important?
 Mediation Style Inventory (MSI):
 Identify your mediation style
 Literature Review: Mediator Style
 Academic and practitioner literature review
 Mediation Style Study (Kressel, Butts, Cohen, and Reich, in preparation)
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 2

3. Agenda (cont.)
 MSI Style Reflection Groups:
 Discussion re: how style impacts your mediation practice
 Current Research on Mediator Style:
 Results of national study of mediator style
(Butts, 2009)
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 3

4. What Does “Mediator Style” Mean to You?
 Is “mediator style” a topic of discussion among you and
your colleagues?
 Do you have a sense of what your style is?
 If you do, what is based upon? How do you know?
 Are you conscious of your style during a mediation
session? Refer to it?
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 4

5. Mediator Style Defined
 Mediator style has been defined as:
a) a set of strategies and tactics that characterize how a
mediator will approach a case
b) as the role a mediator perceives him/herself to play
in the mediation of a conflict.
(Kressel et al.,1994; Coltri, 2004)
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 5

6. Why is Style Important?
 Mediator style is believed to influence:
 the process and outcomes of a mediation.
 the disputing parties’ satisfaction with the
session.
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 6

7. The Mediator Style Inventory (MSI)
 The MSI is comprised of twenty statements describing a
mediator’s attitudes, behaviors and goals.
 Think about the approach that you use in the majority of the
cases you mediate.
 Reflect on what you actually do in session; not your
idealized approach.
 Using this scale below, indicate how well each item describes
your approach :
Describes my approach Describes my approach
very poorly very well
1 2 3 4 5
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 7

8. The Mediator Style Inventory (MSI)
 Identifying Your Mediation Style
 Enter the total style score (from p. 1) in the first box on p. 2.
 Divide your total score for each style by 5 and enter the result in
the second box on p. 2.
 Now rank the styles from highest to lowest (1= highest; 4 = lowest)
 Your highest score represents your default style (i.e., your self-
report of the style you use most frequently in your sessions.)
 Your lowest score represents the style you are least likely to use in
session.
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 8

9. Previous Research on Mediation Style
 Empirical research has demonstrated that different mediation styles exist
 Research methods have included:
 Observational studies
 Case studies
 Questionnaires
 Reported results:
 Frequencies of different mediator behaviors
 Circumstances under which various mediator behaviors are used
 How mediator behavior relates to the outcomes of mediation
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 9

10. Previous Research on Mediation Style
 Research gained insights about “bottom up” mediator
behavior, but learned little about the “top down”
thinking behind tactical choice
 “Top down” cognition is central to expert performance
in many domains (i.e., mediator as expert)
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 10

11. Mediators as Domain “Experts”
 Experts:
 get the “big picture” (i.e., top down thinking)
 notice subtle cues and patterns
 rely on implicit cues
 Expert mediators seem to operate like other domain
experts, they
 recognize patterns that novices do not
 develop and argue about top down styles
 Studying “top down” mediator style is likely to be
productive and of use to practitioners.
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 11

12. Mediator Style Study
 In this study 22 mediators were asked to mediate the
“angry roommates conflict.”
 Mediator levels of experience:
 17 experienced mediators
 Nearly half had > 10 years of experience
 Mediated in a wide range of conflict domains
 Various training backgrounds
 5 novice mediators
 Second & third year Rutgers University law students
 Mediation training as part of legal education
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 12

13. Mediator Style Study (cont.)
 The “Angry Roommate Dispute”
 Simulated dispute between two female roommates
at Rutgers University
 Each mediator had 30 minutes to meet with
disputants
 Mediators were told to mediate as they would in
an actual conflict.
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 13

14. Mediator Style Study (cont.)
Analysis
 Three independent observers rated each mediator’s
behavior
 Observers used the Global Evaluation of Mediation Scale
(GEMS)
 Comprised of five stylistic descriptions of mediator behavior
 Observers asked to rated similarity of the mediator’s behavior
to each of five descriptions
 Used 7-point Likert scale
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 14

15. Mediator Style Study (cont.)
Analysis
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 15

16. Mediator Style Study (cont.)
Analysis
 Observers also wrote “stylistic narratives”
 Narratives described each mediator’s:
 explicit and implied goals for the mediation
 behavior used to accomplish their goals
 rationale behind their performance
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 16

17. Mediator Style Study (cont.)
Results
 Using the GEMS and the narratives, mediator
behavior was categorized into one of the following
four styles:
 Evaluative Mediators
 Facilitative Mediators
 Latent Cause Mediators
 Transformative Mediators
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 17

18. Mediator Style Study (cont.)
Results
Evaluators (n = 5)
 Critique and evaluate the parties’ positions
 Use pressure tactics to induce agreement
 Focus on issues as presented by the parties (i.e., no
probing of any underlying causes that could be
fueling the conflict)
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 18

19. Mediator Style Study (cont.)
Results
Facilitators (n = 11)
 Avoid critiquing the parties’ positions
 Avoid using pressure tactics to induce agreement
 Focus on issues as presented by the parties (i.e., no
probing of any latent causes that could be fueling
the conflict)
 Attempt to create an atmosphere where each party
feels comfortable
 Encourage the parties to brainstorm possible
AFCC, 5/09 solutions Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 19

20. Mediator Style Study (cont.)
Results
Latent Cause Mediators (n=2)
 Emphasize quality problem–solving rather than
agreement per se
 Actively seek to understand when, why and how the
parties have become polarized
 Propose solutions based on diagnostic understanding
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 20

21. Mediator Style Study (cont.)
Results
Transformative Mediators (n = 4)
 Emphasize dialogue, not agreement
 Actively summarizes each party’s reactions and
perceptions
 Refrain from proposing any solutions to the parties
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 21

22. Mediator Style Study (cont.)
Results
 This study has:
 confirmed the stylistic variation found in the “bottom
up” empirical literature
 identified styles that correspond to those found in the
field studies
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 22

23. Mediator Style Study (cont.)
Empirical and Practitioner Literature
 Evaluative Style  Facilitative Style
 Kolb (1983)  Kolb (1983)
 Brett, Dreighe & Shapiro (1986)
 Riskin (1996)
 Wood (2004)
 Silbey & Merry (1986)
 Baker & Ross (1992)
 Riskin (1996)
Wood (2004)
Transformative Style


 Folger & Bush (1996)
 Latent Cause Style  Wood (2004)
 Kressel et. al (1994)
 Kressel & Gadlin (2006)
 Kressel (2007)
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 23

24. Mediator Style Study (cont.)
 Points to remember:
 Styles identified in this study meant to represent
default or typical mediation style
 A mediator’s style can still be flexible –not
“locked” into using same style for every
mediation
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 24

25. MSI: Group Discussion
 Break into groups based upon your highest
MSI score
 Select a facilitator, time-keeper and scribe
 Wait for further instructions
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 25

26. MSI: Group Discussion
 Discussion Questions:
 Were you surprised by your score on the MSI?
Why or why not?
 How is your style effective in resolving disputes in
your field(s) of practice (e.g. family, divorce,
custody, child – parent mediation? ) What challenges
do you face using your style preference?
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 26

27. MSI: Group Discussion
Discussion Questions (cont.):
 Which behaviors and techniques you favor? Which
do you avoid?
 What do you believe lead to the development of
your mediator style preferences?
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 27

28. Recent Mediation Style Research
 Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
 The ATMS is unique because it attempts to
create a psychometrically valid instrument
to measure mediation style.
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 28

29. Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
 ATMS is comprised of items that describe
mediator behaviors, goals and attitudes
towards mediation practice based on the
styles found in the previous study.
 ATMS items include: Evaluative, Facilitative,
Latent Cause, and Transformative.
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 29

30. Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
Scale Items
 Evaluative Item:
 The mediator may need to move parties off unreasonable or overly rigid positions by asking hard
questions or providing accurate, realistic information.
 Facilitative Item:
 A mediator should try to draw on the parties’ commonalties in order to help them reach
agreement.
 Latent Cause Item:
 Where possible, I will assist solution generation by making the parties aware of hidden feelings or
circumstances that have caused their conflict.
 Transformative Item:
 It is important that a mediator emphasize other outcomes of mediation besides the narrow goal
of reaching settlement.
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 30

31. Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
Participants= 361 professional mediators
 Gender:
 201 women and 156 men
 Age:
 41% between 51 and 60 years old
 Educational Background:
 45% had a Juris Doctor and 25% had Master’s Degrees
 Degrees:
 Law (49%)
 Social and Behavioral Sciences (14%)
 Conflict Resolution (8%)
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 31

32. Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
 Training
 65% (n= 233) were trained in a specific
approach/philosophy of mediation:
 44% (n=102) Facilitative Mediation
 18% (n=42) Facilitative and Transformative Mediation
 15% (n=34) Transformative Mediation
 2% (n=5) Evaluative Mediation
 Experience
 27% = 1 to 5 years experience
 22% = 6 to 10 years experience
 39% = 11 to 20 years experience
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 32

33. Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
 ATMS Highest Style Score
 46% (n=165) Facilitative
 31% (n=133) Transformative
 12% (n=43) Evaluative
 9% (n=34) Latent Cause
 2% (n=6) Two Styles
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 33

34. Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
AFCC participants (n =13)
 ATMS Highest Style Score
 46% (n=6) Transformative
 23% (n=3) Latent Cause
 15% (n=2) Facilitative
 8% (n=1) Evaluative
 8% (n=1) Two Styles
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 34

35. Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
 Correlates of Mediator Style:
 Gender
 Pressure to Reach an Agreement
 Disputing Parties’ Relationship
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 35

36. Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
Style Score and Gender?
 Literature suggests that gender may influence degree of
emphasis on relational issues of conflict (i.e., probing for and/or
attempting to help parties reconcile relational issues.)
 Women=
 more aware of the parties’ relationship and perceive conflict
resolution as only part of the relationship (Kolb and Coolidge, 1991)
 place more emphasis on the interpersonal aspects of
negotiations (Kray and Babcock, 2006)
 tend to use more relational arguments (based on
interpersonal responsibility) when negotiating (Malach-Pines, Gat, and Tal,
1999)
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 36

37. Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
Style Score and Gender?
Prediction: Women will be more likely to use Latent Cause and Transformative
styles while men will use Evaluative and Facilitative styles.
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 37

38. Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
Style Score and Work Environment?
 There is suggestive evidence that mediator style is shaped
in important ways by the social context in which
mediators work (Kolb, 1983; Kressel & Gadlin, in press; Silbey & Merry, 1986)
 Social context creates the cultural framework that makes
up a mediator’s work environment
 A mediator’s work environment influences mediator
thinking and therefore affects mediator behavior (Herman, 2006)
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 38

39. Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
Style Score and Work Environment?
 To assess work environment, the Work Environment Index (WEI) was
created
 The WEI was designed to measure 5 aspects of social context:
 mediator embeddedness
 pressure to reach an agreement
 opportunity to consult with colleagues
 types of issues mediated; and
 the nature of the disputing parties’ relationship with each other
 Preliminary analyses show a relationship between mediator style and:
 pressure to reach an agreement
 the disputing parties’ relationship with each other
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 39

40. Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
Style Score and Work Environment?
Pressure to Reach an Agreement
 A few studies have shown that time pressure influences
mediator behavior (see Carnevale, O’Connor, and McCusker, 1993 for a comprehensive review).
 The main finding has been that when under such pressure
mediators tend to use more pressure tactics to reach an
agreement:
(Carnevale & Conlon, 1988; Kressel & Pruitt, 1989; Ross & Wieland, 1996)
 reminding parties of the costs of non-settlement
 threats of punishment
 reduced benefits
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 40

41. Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
Style Score and Work Environment?
Pressure to Reach an Agreement
 Prediction: In the absence of perceived pressure to reach an agreement
mediators will be more likely to use a facilitative, latent cause, or
transformative mediation style. When present, mediators will be more
likely to use an evaluative mediation style.
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 41

42. Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
Style Score and Work Environment?
Disputing Parties’ Relationship
 Latent Cause Style
 Kressel (2007) cited that an latent cause approach to mediation is
partly a product of regularly mediating disputes wherein the
parties have an on-going relationship.
 Transformative Style
 Transformative mediation has been referred to as “relationship-
centered” mediation.
 Fostering empowerment and recognition, is believed to enable the
parties to approach their current problem, as well as later
problems (suggests on-going relationship).
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 42

43. Approach to Mediation Survey (ATMS)
Style Score and Work Environment?
Disputing Parties’ Relationship
 Prediction: When the majority of the cases mediated involve parties that have a continuing
relationship beyond mediation, mediators will be more likely to use a latent cause or
transformative mediation style.
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 43

44. Relevance to Practitioners
 This research program has:
 Shown more evidence that different styles of
mediation exist
 Developed initial tools for practitioners to
reflect on their style
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 44

45. References
 Baker, C. & Ross, W. H. (1992). Mediation control techniques: A test of Kolb’s
“Orchestrators” vs. “Dealmakers” model. International Journal of Conflict Management,
3, 319-340.
 Brett, J.M., Drieghe, R. & Shapiro, D.L. (1986). Mediator style and mediation
effectiveness. Negotiation Journal, 2, 277-285.
 Carnevale, P. J. & Conlon, D. E. (1988). Time pressure and strategic choice in
mediation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 42, 111-133.
 Carnevale, P. J., O'Connor, K. M. & McCusker, C. (1993). Time pressure in negotiation
and mediation. In Svenson, O. & Maule, A. J. (Eds). Time pressure and stress in human
judgment and decision making. New York, NY: Plenum Press, p. 117 – 127.
 Coltri, L. S. (2004). Conflict diagnosis and alternative dispute resolution. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
 Folger, J. P & Bush, R. A. (1996). Transformative mediation and third-party intervention:
Ten hallmarks of a transformative approach to practice. Mediation Quarterly, 13,
263-278.
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 45

46. References
 Herrman, M. S. (2006). Introduction. In Herrman, M. S. Handbook of Mediation:
Bridging theory, research and practice. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, p. 3 – 18.
 Kray, L. & Babcock, L. (2006). Gender in negotiations: A motivated social cognitive
analysis. In Thompson, L., Negotiation theory and research. Madison, CT, US:
Psychosocial Press, 203-224.
 Kressel, K. & Kolb, D. (1994). The realities of making talk work. In D. Kolb, When talk
works: Profiles of mediators. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, p. 459 – 493.
 Kressel, K. (2006). Mediation revisited. In Deutsch, M., Coleman, P. T. & Marcus, E.
C., The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice. San Francisco: Jossey
Bass, p. 726 – 756.
 Kressel, K. (2007). The strategic style in mediation. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 24,
251-284.
 Kolb, D. (1983). The mediators. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 46

47. References
 Kolb, D. & Coolidge, G.G. (1991). Her place at the table: A consideration of gender
issues in negotiation. In Rubin, J.Z. & Breslin, J.W. Negotiation theory and practice.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Program on Negotiation, p. 261 – 277.
 Malach-Pines, A.,Gat, H., and Tal, Y. (1999). Gender differences in divorce mediation.
Sihot/Dialogue: Israel Journal of Psychotherapy, 13, 231-239.
 Riskin L. L. (1996). Understanding Mediators' Orientations, Strategies, and Techniques:
A Grid for the Perplexed, Harvard Negotiation Law Review, 1, 7-51.
 Ross, W. H. & Wieland, C. (1996). Effects of interpersonal trust and time pressure on
managerial mediation strategy in a simulated organizational dispute. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 81, 228-248.
 Silbey, S.S. & Merry, S.E. (1986). Mediator settlement strategies. Law and Policy, 8,
7-16.
 Wood, J. (2004). Mediator styles: subjective descriptions of mediators. Conflict
Resolution Quarterly, 21, 437-450.
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 47

48. Presenter Contact Information
Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D.
International Center for Cooperation & Conflict Resolution
Teachers College, Columbia University, NYC
ccohen@tc.columbia.edu
Tiffany Butts, M.A.
Department of Psychology
Rutgers University – Newark, NJ
tiffanysamonebutts@hotmail.com
AFCC, 5/09 Claudia E. Cohen, Ph.D. & Tiffany S. Butts, MA 48