basic mediation skills training for lawyers€¦ · • adr component: focuses on making adr and...

www.adrcenter.itIstanbul, February 13, 2009

EUROPEAID/123555/D/SER/TR “Better Access to Justice”

1

ISTANBUL 14 & 15 FEBRUARY 2009

KEY TRAINERS

Giuseppe De PaloPresident, ADR Center SpA (Rome, ITALY)

Professor of Alternative Dispute Resolution Law & Practice, Hamline University School of Law (St. Paul, USA)

Manon SchonewilleExecutive director ACB Group,Toolkit Company, M&SD, Making & Saving Deals Training Academy

Lecturer interfaculty semester course business mediation University (NETHERLANDS)

Idil ElverisLecturer Istanbul Bilgi University (Istanbul, TURKEY)

TRAINERS IN THE Break Out Rooms

Asiyan Sulemanoglu - Ferda Paksoy

BASIC MEDIATION SKILLS TRAINING FOR LAWYERS



2

European Commission sponsored project Technical Assistance for Better Access to Justice

Project led by ADR Centre, with consortium of partners including, CEDR (UK), IBF International Consulting (Belgium), Istanbul Bilgi University (Turkey), and Pricewaterhouse Coopers (Turkey).

Overview and purposeStrengthen rule of law in Turkey & guarantee all citizens access to justice in line with EU acquisstandards. The project’s components:• Legal aid: aims at improving access to justice by increasing the utilization of the legal aid system. • ADR component: focuses on making ADR and especially mediation more applicable in the

Justice system, strengthening the functioning of the judiciary, and increasing awareness of the issue of both the legal community and general public .

• IT: training professionals of the Ministry of Justice to use the technical infrastructure.

Responsible Body and BeneficiariesThe Central Finance and Contracts Unit (CFCU) is the Contracting Authority. The Consortium works closely with the beneficiary institutions in Turkey: the Ministry of Justice acts as the leading beneficiary organization, while the Union of Turkish Bars Associations and Ankara Bar Association act as the co-beneficiaries.



3

Program Day 2: • What is a conflict• Psychological concepts• Stages of a mediation process, overview. • Mediator styles• Last stages: Generating options,

brainstorming, negotiating a solution, closure.• Educating others in mediation.• Q&A, questionnaire, certificates



4

International Training Format• (Interactive) Lectures: exercises /demo’s,

involving participants, discussion, Q&A => Flexibility in program.=> Issue Board.

• Separate room: role plays + exercises.• Charts downloadable after training from

website: www.adrcenter.com/international.• Please check website before each training

day + prepare general instructions of role plays on same website!!!!

http://www.adrcenter.com/international�



What is a conflict?

© Toolkit Company

Mediation as an assisted interest based negotiation process to manage conflict



1. Miscommunication2. Lack of respect and recognition3. Conflicting ego’s4. Lack of time and impatience5. Insecurity, too little influence/

(perceived) lack of grip on own situation

• No content component!!

Top 5 of causes for confict

Mediation series 3, court connected mediation, M. Pel



Conflict dimensions

Escalation of conflict

Content

Principles

Relationship



Conflict = chaos

Solution = structuralize, clarity & security:

Manage the process

Structure “thinking”

Manage the communication, break impasse, move from positions to interests



Conflict = chaos Manage process:

- Ground rules: (comply with agreements, let eachother finish, treat with respect, confidentiality)

- Where necessarry to reach solution: manage emotions- Separate relational aspects from content issues

(emphasize business aspects, discuss emotionalissues apart from content, work on relationship)

- Focus on future & interests instead of past & postions.- All participants (equal) influence on the process.

Structure “thinking”: List & order: facts, routes to resolution, alternatives. Analyze interests, develop objective criteria. Prioritize.

Manage communication, break impasseApply mediation techniques and interventions. Check assumptions, perspectives.



Psychological aspects



11

In Unassisted Negotiation

• Strategic

• Cognitive

1. Optimistic overconfidence2. Informational distortion

• Framing3. Reactive devaluation

Primary Barriers to Settlement



12

• Incentive to hide or actively mislead negotiating partner about critical information in order to claim value

• Rational behavior BUT likely to result in informational poverty and unreliability

• “Time of payment vs time of delivery?”

The Strategic Barrier



13

OK, Time Now For a SILENT Game

PLEASE DO NOT SAY IT OUT LOUD!!



14

What Do You See? (Don’t Say It!)



15

SILENT Game

How Certain Are You About What You Saw?

(Just Give Me A Percentage!)



16

How Certain Are You About What You Saw?(Just Give Me A Percentage!)



17

So, How Certain Are You About What You Saw?

Good Then, By Showing of Fingers, How Many Legs Does That “Thing”

Have?



18

Cognitive Barriers

• Human beings are “hard wired” to distort information in the process of assimilating it

• It is “natural” for negotiators to act “irrationally” … while thinking that they ARE in fact perfectly rational, or more rational than the other side

• “Aren’t just nuts those who saw [2 or 4] legs”!?



19

Do You Also See the Motor Vehicle?



20

1. Optimistic Overconfidence• People often are overconfident in their

predictions concerning the outcome of future events. People believe that the chances of good things happening to them are better than they are in reality, and that the chances of bad things happening to them are worse than they are in reality.– The “150% rule” – Who is more likely to go to heaven?



21

US News Survey

Respondents asked who was likely to go to heaven?

Bill Clinton

Michael Jordan

Mother Teresa

Themselves

52%

62%

79%

87% !!!



22

• Help the parties de-bias themselves– Explain biases first, then ask privately to list their

weakness and enumerate reasons why a prediction can be wrong (but NOTE: litigators will often have thought of arguments and counter arguments. Ask then to list reasons a disagreeable adjudicator would give)

• Facilitate de-biasing of the opponent– In joint session, ask each party to present his/her case

(despite anticipation, listening to other’s case makes it appear stronger than one initially thought)

• Directly question litigation evaluation– In private session, challenge the party’s evaluation

(but NOTE: high risks of evaluative mediation)

Optimistic Overconfidence Mediation Intervention



23

• Risk Aversion:People are risk avoiding in the face of gains=> do less to get potential gain

• Loss Aversion:People are risk seeking in the face of losses=> do more to avoid potential loss

2. Informational Distortion



24

• When you are leaving this room for a break, imagine that each of the two doors has a stack of envelopes on a table. All of the envelopes at Door 1 contain €200 bills, and everyone going out Door 1 receives one envelope. There are four envelopes for each of you at Door 2. Three of these envelopes are empty. However, one out of four envelopes at Door 2 contains € 1.000. Which door do you choose to go through?

• The economically rational choice?Door 2 (value is € 250 – 1 in 4 chance of € 1.000)

And You?



25

Risk Aversion

• In face of sure gain (going out the door), the majority favors the guaranteed € 200, rather than the economically sound “risk” of gaining € 250

And You?



26

• When you leave this room for a break, imagine that next to each of the two doors there is a staff member giving out envelopes. All of the envelopes at Door 1 contain € 200 invoices, and everyone coming in at Door 1 receives one. There are four envelopes for each of you at Door 2, and you must pick one. Three of these envelopes are empty. However, one out of four envelopes at Door 2 contains an invoice for € 1.000. Which door do you choose to go through?

• What is the economically rational choice?Door 2 (the sure € 200, because the Door 1 one-in-four chance of paying € 1.000 “costs” € 250)

And You?



27

Loss Aversion

• In face of sure loss (coming in the door), the majority favors the 1 in 4 chance of losing € 1.000 (“economic” value of € 250), rather than the “rational” choice to control your losses by paying € 200.

And You?



28

• Loss aversion is stronger than risk aversion: taking expected judgment (and especially “best case scenario” inflated by Optimistic Overconfidence) as reference point, litigants can look at settlement as a loss, not as a gain.

Litigation continues …

The Consequence for Settlement?



29

• Many equivalent deals are accepted or rejected depending on the framing of the offer, not the value of the offer

– Guess who ends up settling for less in a patent dispute, the patent holder or the one having (allegedly) infringed it?

– Lessons from a “chain-smoker”

Framing



DEMONSTRATION`

Several mediator styles:- Facilitative- Evaluative

(- Transformative, narrative, etc.)

THE IMMOVABLE MULEEXERCISE ROLE PLAY

• Go to Break-Out Room. Groups of 4.• 2 consecutive mediators, each 20 minutes +

10 minutes debrief in group• Debrief plenary

32

• Debrief

Exercise role play the immovable mule

www.adrcenter.it

Çözüm üretme

• Beyin fırtınası• Objektif kriterler

33

www.adrcenter.it

Beyin fırtınası kuralları

• Dikkatinizi çözülecek soruna verin, tartışmanın yan konulara ve ilgisiz konulara kaymasını engelleyin.

• Çözüm üretme aşamasında önemli olan yaratıcı olmaktır. Saçma gibi görünse bile önerilen çözümleri yargılamayın.

• Herkesin bu çabaya katılmasını sağlayın. • Teşvik edici olun, olumlu bir atmosfer yaratın. • Tek bir fikir üzerinde uzun süre takılıp kalmayın. • Tarafları birbirlerinin ihtiyaçlarını karşılamaya yönelik

çözümler üretmeye teşvik edin.• Üretilen çözümleri iyileştiren veya geliştiren başka fikirler

üretin.

34

www.adrcenter.it

Çözüm üretme

• Beyin fırtınası çalışması:

Türkiye’de diğer insanları (örn. potansiyel müvekkiller ve diğer adli makamlar) arabuluculuğun iyi bir yöntem olduğuna nasıl ikna ederiz? Arabuluculuk pazarı nasıl oluşturulabilir?

35

www.adrcenter.it

Çözüm üretme

• Beyin fırtınası: 10 kişilik gruplar• 6 kişi beyin fırtınası yöntemi ile fikir üretir • 1 kişi = iletişim uzmanı

(kim en çok ve en az konuştu, kim kiminle daha çok konuştu)

• 1 kişi = söz kesme dedektifi(kim en çok söz kesti, kimin sözünü kesti, kimler aynı anda konuştu)

• 1 kişi = rol uzmanı(grup içinde kimler ne tür roller üstlendi, lider olarak ortaya çıkanlar, kim işin bitirilmesine odaklandı, kim sürece ve ilişkilere odaklandı)

• 1 kişi üretilen tüm fikirleri takip eder ve not alır 36

www.adrcenter.it

Değerlendirme

Süreci değerlendirme• Uzmanlar lütfen gözlemlerinizi bizimle

paylaşın: 10 grup için toplam 10 gözlemci sonuç bildirecek

37

www.adrcenter.it

Arabulucu için öneriler• Nasihat vermekten kaçının• Bir konu seçin• Ne tür değişiklikler görmek istersiniz?• Seçenekleri ortaya çıkartın• Seçenekleri birleştirin• Çözümün nasıl uygulanacağını konuşun• Sonuçlardan bahsedin• Eğer taraflar takılmışsa: soru sormaya devam edin, daha

kolay başka bir konuya geçin, anlaşma olmadığı durumda gerçekleşmesi olası sonuçları taraflara hatırlatın, benzer durumda başkalarının neler yaptığına dair örnekler verebilirsiniz, caucus.

www.adrcenter.it

Sorular

• Problem çözücü sorular sorun, isteklerinizi soruya çevirip sorun– Neden? (sizi etkileyen şeyler nedir? Problem nedir?

Neden bunu istiyorsunuz?)– Neden olmasın? (e.g. bu yaklaşımın ne sakıncası

var? neden böyle yapmıyoruz?)– ….yapsa(k) nasıl olur? – Tavsiye sorun– Adil (bu öneriyi adil yapan nedir?)– Açık uçlu sorular sorun (öyle mi? yerine nasıl, neden,

kim vs gibi sözcükleriyle sorun)

www.adrcenter.it

Örnek

• A tarafı: 5 haftalık rapor kuralını kaldıralım• B tarafı: Hayır rapor kuralı olduğu gibi kalacak• Bu durumda ihtiyaçları anlamak için neler

sorabiliriz?– Raporu kaldırmak size ne sağlayacak?

• A: Zamanımızı daha etkili kullanabiliriz• Geribildirim için daha etkili bir yöntem kullanabiliriz• B: Zamanı verimli kullanmak• Herkesin birbiriyle iletişim içinde olduğundan emin olmak

www.adrcenter.it

Objektif kriterler• Neden önemli?

- ürettiğiniz seçeneklere meşruiyet kazandırır - müzakere gücü kazandırır

• Objektif kriter net ve anlaşılır olmalıdır. Ve gerçekten tafarların kişisel niyetleri ötesinde objektif olduğu konusunda hem fikir olunan kriterler olmalıdır. Keyfi olmamalıdır.

• Bazı örnekler:• Pazar değeri;• adil ve mantıklı olması;• emsal teşkil etmiş geçmiş olaylar, hukuki standartlar;• uzman görüşü (ortak kabul edilen uzman);• yenisinin alınma masrafı;• verimlilik; • etkililik;• ahlaki değerler;• gelenekler;• karşılıklılık;

41

www.adrcenter.it

Anlaşmaya geçiş

• Bir önceki aşamada üretilen çözümleri netleştirin ve özetleyin

• Gerekirse istenilmeyen veya net olmayan noktaları taraflarla tekrar değerlendirin

• Spesifik yönleri ele alın• Anlaşmayı yazın ve imzalatın

www.adrcenter.it

Anlaşmayı sonlandırma ve kapanış

• Bir anlaşma şu özellikleri taşımalı:Spesifik: net, anlaşılır, kim neyi ne zaman yapacak

ve nasıl yapacak açıkça belirtmeli Ölçülebilir: Taraflar arasında bir anlaşma olduğu

ve tarafların nasıl bilgilendirileceği kolayca anlaşılabilir olmalı

Yapılabilir: Uygulanabilir olmalıGerçekçi: Tarafların uyacağı bir anlaşma olmalı

(compliance)Zaman sınırlaması: Tarafların açık analayabileceği

bir zaman sınırlaması olmalı

www.adrcenter.it

SMART or not?

“Arabanın mülkiyetinin devrine mümkün olan en kısa süre içinde başlanacaktır”.Kim yapacak? Devir derken ne kastediliyor?Hukuki-idari işlemlerin tamamlanması mı yoksa fiilen teslim mi? Taraflardan biri diğerinin dediğini yaptığını nasıl bilecek?Gerçekçi mi? Taraflar bunlardan herhangi birini herhangi bir teminat olmaksızın yapar mı?

www.adrcenter.it

SMART or not?

• 2 Mart 2009 günü İdil, vergi dairesinden aracın herhangi bir borcu olmadığında dair bir belge alarak Aşiyan’a verecek. Bu tarihten 3 iş günü sonra, Aşiyan ve İdil hukuki işlemin yapılması için notere gidecekler. En geç 8 Mart 2009 tarihinde, İdil Aşiyan’ı arayarak aracın fillen teslimi için belirli bir saat konusunda anlaşacak. Aracın devri herhalukarda 10 Mart 2009’dan sonra olmayacaktır. Devir sırasında, Aşiyan İdil’e toplam meblağ olan 17500 YTL’yi nakden ödeyecektir. İdil de aracı aksesuarlarıyla birlikte Aşiyan’a teslim edecektir.



Knowledge about the legal system

23.1

54.3

16.3

56.6

30.5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Filing a case requires paying court dues.

One cannot file a claim without a lawyer inTurkey.

In Turkey when the criminal defendant asks forit, he gets appointed a lawyer free of charge.

Hearings cannot be watched except by partiesor their relatives.

In Turkey some courts have juries.

Answering wrong %



How satisfied were you with the outcome?

%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Victim Plaintiff Criminal defendant Defendant

SatisfiedNeither satisfied nor unsatisfiedNot satisfied


EUROPEAID/123555/D/SER/TR “Better Access to Justice”Attitudes towards courts

38,3

36,1

36,0

20,0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

My rights will beprotected at court

even if I do not havea lawyer.

Courts hold hearingsat hours convenientfor working citizens.

Citizens are treatedrespectfully and well

at court.

Courts completecases fast enough.

"I agree" and "I agree fully" %



43,9

41,5

41,1

40,9

40,0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

I would be scared of not understanding anythinghad I ever went to court.

Courts do their job well.

I believe everyone who goes to court will betreated fairly.

Courts protect everyone equally.

Court decisions are fair.




49,2

49,2

47,7

46,9

46,2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Courts listen to persons who provide statementsand witnesses carefully and provide them the

opportunity to express themselves.

Courts are on nobody's side: they treat male,female, criminal defendant, victim, plaintiff,

defendant objectively.

I believe courts can protect people's rights.

Thanks to courts, our society is safer.

I avoid taking disputes to courts.




Stress other advantages

• In addition to research findings, clients are concerned about costs. Remember uncertainty is a business cost!

• Maintainance of relationships. How much does the client value this?

• People do not like to be told what to do. Explain how the client develops his-her own solution, more democratic and participatory. No imposition from top! Thus, compliance is stronger when there is ownership.



52

Q?&A+ Questionnaire



53



CERTIFICATES

Teşekkürler!

54

basic mediation skills training for lawyers€¦ · • adr component: focuses on making adr and...

Documents