Online Co-Mediation Guidance and Checklist

Summary

Video provides practical tips for effective co-mediation, with emphasis on online mediations for the Quarantine Conflict Resolution service. Focus is on peer collaboration between skilled mediators, not formal mentoring.

Action Items

• Identify co-mediator and schedule time to discuss expectations, styles, tech roles, and division of tasks before cases.
• Develop a shared template or checklist for pre-mediation meetings and agreement drafting.
• Configure online platform (e.g., Zoom) settings in advance, including chat, breakout rooms, and screen sharing.
• Plan standard break intervals (e.g., every 45 minutes) and decide how co-mediators will use breaks to coordinate.
• Agree on a debrief process and timing after each mediation; set follow-up debrief meetings when needed.
• Review additional Mediation Works / CoRe videos on mentoring and co-mediation to deepen practice.

Tips for Co-Mediation: Overview

• Co-mediation treated as collaboration between experienced professionals with different strengths, not a hierarchical mentoring model.
• Most mediations in this program will be online, requiring additional planning for tech and process management.
• Parties benefit when co-mediators are explicit about roles, processes, and how they coordinate during the session.

Sharing Expectations

• Co-mediators should explicitly discuss:
  • How much of the process each wants to lead.
  • Segments each feels most competent and comfortable handling.
  • How experience and background (e.g., law vs. business) affect role preferences.
• For Mediate BC associate mediators, clarify what “active participation” in a mediation means for both co-mediators.
• Approaches can range from highly structured role division to more organic “step in / step out” collaboration.

Example Role-Sharing Approaches

Clarifying Mediation Style

• Each mediator should explain:
  • Whether they follow a specific step model or a structured process.
  • How tightly they adhere to agendas vs. working more fluidly and responsively.
  • How they typically move through phases (introduction, issue identification, negotiation, resolution).
• Different styles can complement each other and serve diverse party preferences.
• Co-mediators should decide:
  • What overall process frame they will use together.
  • How they will respond if their instincts diverge during the session.
  • How to communicate in real time when the process deviates from plan.

Division of Tasks in Online Mediations

• Online platforms allow clear, distinct roles that can support learning and efficiency.
• One mediator may:
  • Lead process and party engagement.
  • Watch faces and body language on gallery view.
• The other may:
  • Manage the technology (platform logistics, waiting room, mute, rename, etc.).
  • Explain platform use to parties (e.g., how to use chat or breakout rooms).
  • Handle chat questions, including tech issues from parties.
  • Manage transitions to and from breakout rooms.

Sample Online Role Division

Pre-Mediation Meetings (Individual Sessions)

• Pre-mediation individual meetings with each participant are encouraged as best practice, especially online.
• Co-mediators should create a game plan before any individual meetings:
  • Who takes lead with the first participant; who observes.
  • Who leads subsequent meetings (rotate or co-facilitate).
• Common model:
  • Roster mediator leads first meeting; associate observes.
  • Associate leads second meeting; roster mediator observes and supports.
• In these meetings, cover:
  • Relationship building and rapport with each participant.
  • Understanding the dispute, interests, and goals.
  • Participant views on agenda items and process.
  • Initial sense of party dynamics, escalation level, and communication styles.
• Plan how to:
  • Hand off leadership in real time if a participant is highly escalated.
  • Bring the other mediator back into active facilitation so roles are balanced.

Strategizing for the Joint Session

• After separate pre-mediation sessions, co-mediators should strategize together about the joint session:
  • Anticipated dynamics and who may need more structure or support.
  • How to build and present an agenda based on pre-meeting insights.
  • Which mediator will manage particular participants or issues.
• Revisit style discussions now that both have more information:
  • How to alternate styles effectively during the joint session.
  • When one mediator may step forward or step back.
• Review how handoffs worked in pre-meetings:
  • Was the transition smooth when one mediator took charge?
  • Did explicit handoffs (e.g., “Are you ready to take this?”) feel comfortable?
  • Adjust the plan for the joint session accordingly.

Back Channels Between Co-Mediators

• Online tools introduce new “back-channel” options (e.g., private chat between co-mediators).
• Co-mediators must decide in advance:
  • What types of messages are appropriate (e.g., “caucus?” or “time for break?”).
  • How long messages should be (short prompts vs. long texts that distract).
  • Whether private chat during active discussion is helpful or disruptive for each person.
• Transparency with parties:
  • Parties should know that co-mediators may send brief coordination messages to each other.
  • Private messaging between parties themselves is typically disabled and should be clearly communicated.
• Alternative back-channel methods:
  • Simple visual hand signals (e.g., raised hand) to signal a caucus or break.
  • Brief mediator-only breakout rooms.
  • Phone calls during scheduled breaks for more in-depth strategizing.

Separate Meetings (Caucuses) with Parties

• Co-mediators should not split up and meet separately with different parties (e.g., one mediator with each side).
  • Risks include:
    • Undermining neutrality (each party perceives “their” mediator).
    • Inconsistent information and understanding between mediators.
• Both co-mediators should be present in all separate meetings with parties.
• Timing considerations:
  • Newer mediators may move to caucus too quickly when tension rises.
  • More experienced mediator can help delay caucus to gather more information at the table.
• Separate meetings are valuable for:
  • Strategic planning between co-mediators: “Where do we go next?” “Who should we see next?”
  • Getting both mediators’ perspectives on next steps and sequencing.
• Use high transparency with parties:
  • Explain when mediators step aside to confer and normalize it as common practice.
  • Clarify that mediator-only conversations are about planning how to be most helpful to everyone.

Meetings Between Co-Mediators Online

• Online co-mediation changes how mediators meet with each other during and between sessions:
  • They are rarely physically together and must plan coordination explicitly.
• Online work is cognitively and visually demanding; fatigue sets in faster than in-person.
• Normalize frequent, planned breaks:
  • Example: “We will take short breaks approximately every 45 minutes.”
  • Breaks give parties rest and allow mediators to coordinate.
• During breaks, mediators can:
  • Use phone calls to get off screen while still debriefing briefly.
  • Use private chats or mediator-only breakout rooms if staying within the platform.
• Platform-specific practices (e.g., Zoom):
  • Avoid remaining in the main room while parties leave, then starting an in-depth mediator discussion there.
  • Use a separate breakout room for mediator-only conversations to avoid accidentally pulling parties into private discussions.
  • Keep control of re-admitting parties while ensuring mediator conversations remain private and contained.

Capturing the Resolution

• Co-mediators should decide:
  • Whether they will prepare a written settlement agreement, memorandum of understanding, or mediator notes.
  • Who will draft, and when (during the session vs. after).
• This is a strong opportunity to leverage complementary skills:
  • A mediator with legal or drafting expertise might lead agreement writing.
  • Another mediator might focus on party engagement and clarity.
• Online drafting options:
  • Use platform whiteboards or share a word-processing document on screen.
  • One mediator types; the other leads the discussion, monitors reactions, and tests wording with parties.
• Benefits of real-time shared drafting:
  • Parties see their own language reflected and can correct misunderstandings quickly.
  • Co-mediators can divide attention: one on language accuracy, one on relational dynamics.
• Alternatives:
  • When emotions are high, avoid drafting live in front of parties to reduce risk of escalation.
  • Draft offline together (shared document) after the session, then return the draft to parties for review.
• Track agreement terms throughout the session:
  • One or both co-mediators can keep running notes of emerging terms.
  • Later compare notes when formalizing the document to ensure completeness and accuracy.
• Be transparent with parties if one mediator is typing during discussions:
  • Explain that they are tracking potential points of agreement, not disengaged.

Debriefing Between Co-Mediators

• Debrief is not a formal mentoring evaluation but a reflective peer conversation.
• Consider timing:
  • Brief debrief immediately after the mediation to capture fresh impressions.
  • More in-depth debrief later, after each has processed the experience.
• Roster mediator (or lead) can start by asking:
  • “What would you like to talk about?”
  • “What do you want to get out of this debrief?”
• Debrief topics can include:
  • Process: what worked well, what felt awkward, what surprised either mediator.
  • Styles and roles: how handoffs felt, whether task division made sense.
  • Interaction with parties: analyzing dynamics, turning points, escalations, and de-escalations.
  • Specific feedback: constructive comments if invited, offered respectfully.
• Technology considerations:
  • Online tech challenges may be an easy scapegoat when things felt uncomfortable.
  • Acknowledge tech impacts without attributing all difficulties solely to online format.
  • Recognize that online is the current working reality and focus on adapting effectively.

Additional Resources Mentioned

• Prior Mediation Works / CoRe content on mentoring and co-mediation:
  • 2017 mentoring series featuring experienced mediators and mentors:
    • Julie Doan, Richard Singer, Gordon White, Sharon Sutherland, Wendy (co-presenter).
  • 2018 CoRe speaker series session on “Mentoring Effectively” featuring:
    • Joyce Bradley and Ashley Syer.
• These resources offer:
  • Further perspectives on mentoring, co-mediation, and developing mediator skills.
  • Examples and stories that can inform current co-mediation practice.

Decisions

• For the Quarantine Conflict Resolution service, pre-mediation individual meetings are encouraged as the default model.
• Co-mediators are expected to:
  • Discuss expectations, styles, task division, and online process management in advance.
  • Treat co-mediation as a collaborative, peer process, not a hierarchical mentoring relationship.
• Parties will generally not have private chat capabilities with each other; mediator back-channel use will be limited and transparent.
• Co-mediators should not split and caucus separately with different parties; both mediators attend all party meetings.

Open Questions

• How will “active participation” be assessed consistently across mediations for associates seeking roster status?
• What additional supports or tools might be useful for mediators who are not comfortable with technology but are co-mediating online?
• How will feedback and learning from these online co-mediations be collected and shared to refine future practice?