The 2nd Chair: A Mediation Model Maximizing Service, Mentorship, and Ownership
|
February 2003 |

The four of us have been together almost a year now, and things are beginning to develop. This piece concerns one such development that my colleagues and I have dubbed, “The 2nd Chair”. It is something I consider exciting and the kind of development that has the potential to address one of our field’s most pressing issues: How to become an established practitioner.
What is “The 2nd Chair”? I believe it is analogous to the 2nd chair attorney in a trial. Just as the 2nd chair attorney assists the lead attorney at trial, the 2nd chair mediator assists the lead mediator during the mediation. This is different from co-mediation because the second chair is not participating in the same fashion as the lead mediator. In fact, when our firm uses this model, the 2nd chair sits opposite the lead mediator or off the table, depending upon various factors such as how many people are present, the size and shape of the table, etc. The 2nd chair’s job is to observe the mediation and provide the lead mediator with feedback during breaks or at other suitable points of the mediation.
We have found providing feedback to the lead mediator throughout the mediation to be of great value. First, it maximizes the lead mediator’s ability to consider what is happening and how the mediation is unfolding. As much as we may pride ourselves on picking up most or all of what goes on during a mediation, we cannot keep track of everything. The 2nd chair raises the level of service being provided to participants by creating opportunities for the lead mediator to pick up overlooked issues or further pursue threads of discussion that were, in the 2nd chair’s opinion, not fully developed. This is particularly helpful in complex or multi-party mediations.
In addition, the 2nd chair maximizes the advantage of having two practitioners in the room while minimizing the difficulty of those practitioners having to monitor each other, which often happens in the co-mediation model. Certainly those of us who have worked in the co-mediation model have experienced our “soul mate” co-mediator or worked with a particular partner enough times to develop a synchronicity. However, I do not believe this eliminates or even significantly diminishes the reality that, with two active mediators, a portion of each mediator’s attention must be continuously directed toward the other mediator. The 2nd chair model allows that portion of attention to be focused back on the participants.
Perhaps the most exciting aspect of a 2nd chair model is the opportunity it creates for unestablished practitioners to experience the live mediation environment, gain credibility, and, most importantly, be of service to the participants--all without having the responsibility of managing the mediation. This model has the potential to address the enormous need in our field of identifying a viable avenue from academic preparation to practice. Of course, the cynic in me says, “Who is going to pay for it?” While my cynical side raises a valid question, the question is in no way insurmountable.
Based on my knowledge of the field here in California, I would say that mediators who have a viable practice charge anywhere from $200 - $600/hour. There are even those of us who charge half and full day rates equivalent to $750 - $1500/hour. In utilizing a 2nd chair approach, my suggestion to the $200/hour mediators would be to charge more per hour. How much more? I will leave that up to those mediators and the markets they serve. My sense is that the amount of increase in hourly rate would be heavily based upon the reality that a 2nd chair mediator is likely to be unestablished and, due to the nature of the model, not responsible for managing the process. In my mind, this would render a reasonable fee increase that is proportional to the increase in service.
As for mediators who charge anywhere from $500 - $600/hour and up, I would encourage those mediators to consider absorbing the cost of adding a 2nd chair instead of passing it on to the participants. Certainly in situations where extra cost is of no consequence to the participants, by all means, charge more for a 2nd chair. Again, however, my sense is that the actual cost of a 2nd chair mediator would likely be minimal, especially in comparison to an hourly rate of $500/hour and above. Undoubtedly there are other costs such as insurance and office space, among others, which come into play and are reason for careful scrutiny. Nevertheless, professionals in other fields have dealt with the same economic realities and found ways to make “2nd chair like” positions work, which brings me to my final point.
Ultimately, the economics of the 2nd chair model is not the true concern. In my opinion, the true concern lies in many practitioners’ level of commitment to our field and willingness to take ownership of its future. It takes a high level of commitment to take ownership of something, especially if it is a field so young and undefined as ours. It also takes the ability to put that commitment ahead of your ego, accepting less when you could take more; taking on extra responsibility and doing so because you want to bring others along and have a hand in their future. I believe here is where the true struggle lies over the 2nd chair model and whether it will be utilized.
I will conclude by saying that the members of my firm and I believe the 2nd chair model can enhance the level of service provided to participants while allowing us to simultaneously take ownership of our field’s future by mentoring others along the path to being established practitioners. We are excited about developing this model, and we hope many of you will follow suit.
Biography
Comments
| Free subscription to comments on this article | Add Brief Comment |
| Brian , Merritt Island FL | 04/14/03 | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Dr. Chuck Martinetz, Pocono Pines Pa | 04/03/03 | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||

