Worldviews.......Do You Have One?

---

by Anne Giacalone DiDomenico July 2001

-Print -Email -Comment -Subscribe  (free)

What is the basis for a mediator's approach to mediation? On what does a mediator base his/her decisions? The role of mediator is often described as a third party neutral position, yet how is neutrality possible when s/he has to sort incoming information through a classifying and categorizing process that reflects his/her personal worldview? Each of us holds a personal worldview, and as mediators we face a bewildering dilemma: our human-ness does not allow us to remain neutral, yet we must find a way to deal with conflict that reflects respect for both the parties and the process.

If we examine real life mediation practices, we find relational complexities that are easily masked by our assumptions about mediator neutrality. It is an occurrence that happens all too often. The mediator is presented with a case and reviews the particulars that appear in the court papers. The facts are presented -- a couple is involved in divorce proceedings, and child custody and visitation are primary issues. The mediator sees this case as one more in a long line of cases where disintegrating family relationships are put to the test, and the services of a neutral third party are required. The divorcing couple is looking for solutions or so the mediator would assume. Their ongoing crisis is filled with hurt, pain, and disappointment at the very least, and at its worst the crisis is filled with anger, hostility, and revenge. Intense emotions often prevent parties from seeing a way out -- from detaching themselves from their personal pain. It is the mediator who is asked to create a setting where these parties might interact at a level that allows the crafting of an agreement acceptable to both sides. In a metaphoric sense, the mediator is under the gun. S/he is expected to deal with the emotional undertow present between the disputants, which affects the very nature of their conflict. How this is done is left to the wit of the mediator and the tools at his/her disposal.

So, what is behind this process? A mediator, just as every other human being, functions from a personal worldview. This point does not, however, imply that the worldview is consciously known. Instead, it implies that a worldview includes a series of taken-for granted assumptions on the part of the mediator that may or may not be shared by the mediating parties according to their cultural background (Winslade & Monk, 1999, pp.58-60). Various factors, including cultural background, impact the nature of the assumptions from which a person functions. Assumptions are not merely opinions. They are deeply rooted in identity (Bohm, 1997). Both assumptions and identity bear strongly on mediator behavior and are directly linked to a mediator's level of self-awareness. It is important for us to recognize that mediators unwittingly scrutinize the narratives of the mediating parties by comparing the narratives with personally held views. Generally speaking, mediators are not aware that this action is taking place since it is a split-second reflex action.

As mediators, we are not granted immunity from the struggles that arise between hidden assumptions and incoming information. Each mediator interacts with others from a personal body of knowledge, a.k.a., a worldview. This personal worldview is connected to unaware but very real and binding assumptions and expectations. Viewing the world through a personal value system is the dynamic state called worldviewing (Docherty, 1998). It is a human activity that is continuous, unconscious, and in a constant state of tenuous evaluation. To illustrate this point, a mediator observes an exchange between parties. The mediator's observation includes each party's tone of voice, the attitudes expressed in body language, and facial and body motions combined with the words. The mediator collects this body of information within a matter of minutes and holds this information up to past experiences that are permeated with emotional tones and stored in his/her memory. The mediator makes decisions based on the contrasts and similarities found between the event that is presently occurring and the body of past experiences existing in the mediator's memory.

The dynamics of worldviewing involve the complex interaction of our assumptions and expectations with our environment. Although we can feel this interaction if we are aware of our moment to moment emotional patterns, its occurrence cannot be seen with our physical eyes. The invisibility of this continual interaction blinds us to the development of our awareness. Invisibility is the biggest reason we have such difficulty comprehending and accepting the intricacies of worldviewing. We do not believe that our emotions color our decisions in meaningful ways. Furthermore, we believe that we can separate our emotions from our decisions and experiences at will. Lack of self-awareness in this area casts shadows on a mediator's ability to grasp the inclusiveness of relational dynamics as they are occurring in the mediation setting between the parties and the mediator.

The complex nature of this problem can be seen in the following real life example. A typical community dispute involving two neighbors needs assistance, and a relatively new member of a volunteer community mediation center is called upon to mediate. The mediator, although mediating for just a year, comes to the table with many years of professional business, education, and military experience. An initial training of thirty hours in basic community mediation has prepared the mediator for this case. Like many other neighborhood conflicts, this case centers on parking rights between condominium owners living next door to each other. The setting for this mediation is a conference room in a municipal court.

There are no unusual markings to this case until the parties arrive. It then becomes apparent to the mediator that the disputing parties are markedly different in their cultural heritage. The disputing parties are also of opposite genders. From the start, the mediator's observation of the cultural and gender differences activates personal hidden assumptions that lay under the surface but remain potent. As the mediation proceeds, the disputing parties become entrenched in the uniquely diverse expression of their rights. This triggers a number of the mediator's hidden assumptions including those assumptions related to power, authority, and protection. The mediator's value system underscores the activity of this scene, and it is reflected in the mediator's decision to use coercive tactics to reach an agreement. It is important to note here that the mediator is a committed and dedicated individual who believes in the mediation process and the concept of neutrality. A deep desire to serve others and the community motivates this individual to act in the role of mediator. As disconcerting as it may be, it is these same well-meaning intentions that prevent the mediator from identifying the underlying reasons for his/her decisions, which ultimately compromise the concept of neutrality.

A mediator's lack of both self-awareness and an understanding of worldviews can turn a "routine" mediation into a frustrating situation for all concerned. In this example, the mediator is ill equipped to deal with the issues of cultural diversity, and unwittingly proceeds to add insult to injury in attempting to bring the parties to resolution. Underlying issues of identity, equity, empowerment, and self-determination for the parties are neither acknowledged nor addressed in any way. Thus, important contributing elements to the conflict are left unspoken. Issues of neutrality, impartiality, power, and authority are at question for the mediator who remains unaware of how and why the process has been compromised.

The outcome to this case does not tell the whole story. What is visible is that an agreement is reached. What is not visible is the price paid for the agreement. The participants lost the opportunity to release painful feelings and to gain a more positive perspective of the situation. The process, too, has lost something, for the participants have reached an agreement that is half-hearted. It is an agreement that is imposed upon the disputing parties' unresolved feelings. The agreement lacks full commitment. In this case the mediator has used position, influence, and coercion in the belief that to reach agreement is the ultimate goal of mediation. This belief is superimposed over the concepts of integrity, dignity, and respect in the name of mediation. Well-intentioned decisions have gone awry due to the mediator's lack of understanding how a worldview deceptively alters the decision-making process. Transformational possibilities fade as narratives take a back seat to the interest based rationale of reaching settlement.

Mediators need methods for developing heightened self-awareness. In recent field research with community and family mediators, I tested a process that can bring hidden beliefs and assumptions to the surface. My findings indicate that through metaphoric analysis of the elicited responses a mediator can learn a great deal about his/ her worldview. Techniques for self-awareness and self-analysis can be taught as part of a basic mediation training program. Once learned and practiced, this information becomes a decidedly useful tool to the mediator. It can improve a mediator's ability to acknowledge and alter basic assumptions that fuel discriminatory perceptions about disputing parties during mediation. With an enhanced understanding of how worldviews and worldviewing work and how they influence behavior, mediators may find themselves changing the very nature of their approach to the dynamics of the mediation setting. It is a mediator's willingness to engage in developing effective self-reflective techniques that will ultimately change the face of mediation.

Biography

---

Anne DiDomenico is founder and owner of Emerge Consulting LLC, a company committed to raising self-awareness and addressing inner conflict as the key to addressing all conflict.  Anne holds a Master’s in Conflict Resolution, a Bachelor’s in Education and certifications in Diversity Training.  She served as researcher with the National Association for Community Mediation (NAFCM), international information conference coordinator with the Network of Communities for Peacemaking and Conflict Resolution (NCPCR) and advisor to the NJ Cumberland County Human Relations Commission. 

Email Author
Additional articles by Anne Giacalone DiDomenico

Comments

---

Free subscription to comments on this article

Add Brief Comment

Anne DiDomenico,   38.000000 NJ	anne@emergeconsultingllc.com      03/04/09
Response to John UK
This response has been very long in coming.....but none-the less.....here it is.... Thank you, John, for your long and thought-filled comment. Let me first say that it would be most helpful to correct a mis-perceived implication about beliefs being ‘wrong’, and that is......beliefs are not wrong (from my perspective). They simply are what they are...beliefs. We all live by them.....whatever they may be for each of us. There is no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ in this. In terms of self-awareness, if we are aware of an emotional reaction to an event, this becomes the perfect clue for locating a belief that is now coloring our perception. If we choose to take notice, we can be very aware in that moment of what is going on IN us. A person at a higher level of self-awareness is even more engaged in this awareness process. John, you are correct in saying: “One would like to achieve a state of mind where one’s thinking, conscious or otherwise, is an absolute blank canvas. However we can never achieve this.” My experience is that my mind is always at ‘work’ with a constant flow of thoughts. I have simply learned how to work with this flow in terms of awareness. Others have learned this to their advantage as well. With this said, if one holds a belief that self-awareness is not possible, this discussion becomes null and void. What fuels this discussion for me is my belief that we are more than well equipped to be highly self-aware individuals capable of full presence in all interactions while extending compassion and even love in the moment to all those present. Success in any mediation setting is not ultimately found on any signed agreement. True success occurs in the opening of hearts among participants.....and mediator. All play key roles. How far can we raise our own level of self-awareness? The answer depends on what you believe. Whatever your belief, would you agree at the very least that mediation is really about bringing people together in an atmosphere of mutual respect and acknowledgement? And to go one step further......that mediation can be, if we so choose, about transforming tension, stress and angst into acceptance, allowance and possibility. Add New Comment

John ,    UK	09/03/03
Question; does the following statement from the article (given that it is true, and given also that I am correct in my understanding that the statement’s implication is that our beliefs are wrong) also apply to those people who can be said to have achieved a relatively higher level of self awareness? “We do not believe that our emotions colour our decisions in meaningful ways. Furthermore, we believe that we can separate our emotions from our decisions and experiences at will.” If that quoted statement does apply to those people who are at a relatively higher level of self awareness then surely that means that there is no such thing as true and complete self awareness. In essence therefore the best we can hope to achieve is an awareness of those items which we are not self aware about - which surely by definition is impossible. One would like to achieve a state of mind where one’s thinking, conscious or otherwise, is an absolute blank canvas. However we can never achieve this. This would only have been possible if we had been deprived of all stimuli since birth. In other words we had never received any information or experience which had led us to develop any opinions. This is not desirable anyway because it would disable us from empathising with other peoples’ concerns/situations. Leaving the impossible to one side… the reality is that we all have a complex history of events and thoughts (and bear in mind that there is no such thing as unprovoked thought). If we are therefore going to use the talent of ‘objectivity’ alongside other mainly learnt skills to provide the product/service of effective mediation then an acceptance of certain partial failure, and sometimes complete failure has to be achieved. In order for all parties involved in that mediation to accept the same resolution, then they are likely to have to accept from the outset that complete success, according to their own individual definitions, is very unlikely. So having said above that I believe there is some doubt as to whether or not genuine self awareness is actually achievable, what actually needs to be attempted is even more difficult… inflict self awareness on those parties who are in need of mediation… at a point in their lives when they are charged with emotion!! Just as it is better to enable third world countries to be self sufficient rather than just giving them finite food rations, is it not also better to facilitate the self mediation of opposing parties rather than mediating for them. Add New Comment

Karam	uclawyer@aol.com      09/01/03
I would like to see a sample of the tools the author speaks of to gauge how effective they are. I don't think I'm playing devil's advocate when I suggest that perhaps we are creatures designed to analyze the behavior of others and then to judge those persons according to that behavior. I suppose I take the view that what this article proposes is based on too narrow a field worthy of self-recalibration. A simple reminder that mediators should be neutral, as is their job description, would suffice instead of what I feel is an overly simplistic attempt at revolutionizing how we look at mediation when the article merely musters up reaffirmation of what mediators should have been doing in the first place. Add New Comment

Mary Bast,   Gainesville FL	marybast@earthlink.net      03/15/02
Perspective on nine worldviews
This is a fascinating article. Anyone who is interested in uncovering their own unconscious biases resulting from a worldview will benefit from learning the Enneagram system. It's not a new age phenomenon but a well-researched and common sense system of nine worldviews that inform beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors. Lots of information available on-line at sites like breakoutofthebox.com/enneagram.htm and enneagramcentral.com. Add New Comment

Bruce Cropper,   Auckland Ne	mediate@ihug.co.nz      04/03/01
I enjoyed this (to me) clearly written article on a subject which, although fundamental to the practice of mediation, has been little touched upon (in my experience so far). NLP (NLPTA "school" in my case) training to master practitioner level included study of "metaprograms", filters/sorts, Myers-Briggs and Spiral Dynamics, and this combibnation provided a lot of insight into my and others' processes and filters. My learning (derived from Korzybski's statement that "the map is not the territory")was that we can never experience a "reality" external to ourselves directly, and our great folly is to believe that we can and do. However, my "pre-supposition" is that a greater level of self awareness will result in a lesser degree of distortion. Add New Comment

See All 10 Comments

The views expressed by authors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Resourceful Internet Solutions, Inc., Mediate.com or of reviewing editors.