How much must we keep from the past?
As we approach the first quarter of the new century, we sometimes find people engaging in behaviours that no longer reflect the present. Whilst one may naturally resist change momentarily in building up the future, we may not ignore the factual present. To still question the advent of online dispute resolution, and most importantly, the validity of online Mediation is one of those behaviours that no longer reflects the circumstances of the present.
Make no mistake: online Mediation is here to stay. And develop even more.
Like everything in life, online Mediation has its good, and it has its bad. The possible lack of “human connection” that in-person Mediation allows for, is counterbalanced by the convenience of not having to travel for a meeting, for example. And we could go on, with many valid points to each side.
The point of the matter is that the fast-paced and more convenient life style we have embraced has brought about the absolute (and obvious) need for faster and more convenient (dispute resolution) processes. It has, hence, unfurled the efficiency of online Mediation, as such.
Of course, personal meetings will continue to happen indefinitely, or so I hope. The so called “human connection” is a necessity for our well-being, and part of our biology. But despite the cons, to resist, or to even question the validity of online Mediation, is to hold on to already succumbed recalcitrant behaviours.
One must always learn from the past. We should preserve its memories and venerate its significant events and people. Yet part of that learning encompasses evolving and embracing new realities, so that we can adapt and continue with the main objective of building a better world.
Send a commentThe oblivious obviousness of simplicity...
One morning this week, as I started my day reading the news, as usual, I cringed at yet another hint that we might indeed be losing our grip on that promising future I have always envisioned. And this time revelation came in the way of incompetent (to say the least!) lawyers filing a motion for their client, a very famous public figure. The document followed no standard of judicial procedure, nor contained certain basics (again, to say the least) expected from such a legal instrument. According to former Federal Prosecutor Glenn Kirschner it “[read] more like a fundraising email than a legal brief”. ...
So many times have we witnessed parties ignoring one of the most powerful skills available to them in negotiation. To our (and their) benefit, we, Mediators, do not, and are therefore able to intervene and utilise of such skill to help them get closer to a resolution. The challenge lies, however, in the instances when parties reach the mediation table already too blinded by their own biases, and hence unable to exercise the many effective options available...
Many don’t seem to realise the importance of training and experience in the art of meditation and dispute resolution. It is many times frustrating for parties to believe that all has been done towards reaching an agreement, and the perception is that a Mediator (or a Negotiation Consultant) will do very little to help them advance and break impasse...
One rarely forgets their first few clients. One of mine, I remember, was a businessman who walked into my office bringing with him a dispute involving a contracted sale of one his products. Having been a businessman for a long time, one could say he also had some experience with the legal system – he was begrudgingly accustomed to the adversarial way of resolving his business’ disputes through litigation...