There was a potent silence after the complainant had delivered his opening statement: there were eight people in the room, and every one of us was struggling to maintain our composure. I observed the legal and financial representatives from the bank, even as I felt my own throat tighten with suppressed emotion. Then there was the complainant, Mr. K, who had, with great difficulty, managed to deliver his opening statement, read from a document that shook as he held it, while he seemingly ignored the tears that trickled down his face and jaw. He placed the document gently on the table and continued to stare at it.

After hearing both parties’ perspectives, we broke into two groups for the private caucus sessions. My co-mediator and I had decided ahead of time to see the team from the bank first; as we rearranged the room, he muttered to me under his breath, ”So much for the banker’s comment in our pre-mediation meeting that this was ‘just ‘business, nothing personal’!”

The senior counsel for the bank opened the session with the comment: ‘we really had thought that this was just a ‘try on’: we can see now that that this is a sincere and distressing situation. Certainly we need to act in the best interests of our institution, but…I think we need to re-evaluate our options’. This statement was met with affirmative nods from his associates.

I can’t report that all turned out happy and content: damage had been done on both sides, and losses are an inevitable part of conflict, and of life. What is important to note, in view of my premise, was that the emotional expression of ‘the other side’ had been received as an important piece of information: this was a real human situation, and ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ were more ambiguous positions than had first been claimed.

The supposition that conflict can be managed on purely ‘rational’ grounds belies the very nature of the issue: all disputes are personal, they involve people, and as such, they will always involve emotions.

I work and teach with a paradigm for understanding conflict and resolution that is grounded in the philosophical tradition known as ‘existential phenomenological’.

In this model, we stress that emotions are not the impediments to a resolution, as is often the view, but they are in fact the means by which it is possible to ascertain what will make a more satisfying outcome for all concerned.

It would be impossible to even reference the extensive literature that underpins this approach, so I will leave it to the reader to research it if they are interested; I will, however, provide a brief introduction to this aspect of the theory and practice of understanding and working with emotions in mediation.

When an emotional expression is shared, or demonstrated, it can be understood as the voice of value: what we are emotional about is a value that that is important to us personally that is being threatened, disrespected, or ignored, in the case of a conflict, or, in the case of cooperation, the value implicated is being supported and actualised, and we experience some satisfaction.

In the first case we have a dispute, a contest, or a war; in the second we have affinity, cooperation, and even love.

An example of this might be an angry outburst about how ‘unfair’ a situation is: this is an indication that ‘fairness’ is a value that is not being realised in the current context; additionally, this is a good example of how anger is always in relation to a loss, current, past, or pending. We experience varying levels of anger if our values are not heard, appreciated, or are impeded in their actualisation.

The loss incurred is that our value-laden intentions are denied or blocked: this has an effect on us personally and particularly; we can feel disempowered, out of control, unappreciated and misunderstood, and very alone.

Our values are the bedrock of our ‘world-view’: these are the aspirations and expectations we have for and of ourselves, what we hope and expect from others, what we wish to see realised in the world, and what our perspective is on a cosmological level, that is, that realm beyond our control and comprehension.

Certainly a value like ‘fairness’ will be perceived differently by each person, and with reference to a given situation: what is important in managing a dispute, is to recognise that those involved each hold a subjective view on how fairness should be realised according to their own world-view.

‍

‍

It is paramount that this view is understood by a mediator, so that they do not work against these subjective truths.

This does not mean that the mediator agrees with the party, or suggests that the desired outcome will be achieved: the objective is to understand, as best as one can, the world-view of the person as it is related to the dispute, and to offer this empathic comprehension to the party.

Once the party’s world-view is understood by the mediator, the contender is less inclined to intransigency, because their position has been received without opposition.

The mediator doesn’t have to ‘dig’ for emotions: but they can increase their sensitivity to what is already being expressed, as emotions are always present. It can be particularly effective to set aside one’s own assumptions, and ask directly (for example): ‘what is it about this situation/incident/comment that really makes you angry/sad/happy?’

The retort may be: ‘well wouldn’t you be?’ The response to this has to be a genuine expression of interest as to how the person who is party to the conflict is experiencing their situation.

Once the values are recognised, explored, and considered further, the options for realising these may be reviewed, reconfigured, and renegotiated. Such inquiries, when conducted with an empathetic attitude, very often generate a new perspective for the aggrieved: new understandings provide novel horizons.

Emotions are the ‘royal road’ to the values that comprise our world-view: the extent to which those values are recognised and served, there will be a greater satisfaction in, and commitment to, the conflict resolution.

Karen Weixel-Dixon’s book, Interpersonal Conflict, an existential psychotherapeutic and practical model is published by Routledge.

‍