Have you ever wanted to know what the other side really wants in a case? They’re sure to posture and ask for one thing, but have you ever wondered what they’re really looking for before everyone gets further entrenched? There is a way to find out.
I learned how you can tell if you and the other side are really that far apart in a dispute with one of the world’s more experienced defendants. We had met before and a lot of money was at stake, and sending a settlement demand to these folks would have been pointless — no matter what I demanded it would be too much. I suspected we privately valued the case the same way, but nobody opens a case with his bottom line position. We’d have to litigate for years to get there.
On a quick call to the other side about something irrelevant, I floated an idea. We had both heard of mediator’s proposals, but I thought we might start this case with something a bit different — blind proposals from the parties rather than to them.
I suggested we find a trusted mediator who wouldn’t have a conflict — in this case James R. Holbrook from Salt Lake City — and confidentially submit to him our actual bottom-line positions. If our final numbers were within some amount of each other (say $500,000), he would reveal our positions and work to settle the case from there. If our positions were more than $500,000 apart, he would keep the numbers confidential, simply tell us that our bottom line positions were more than $500,000 apart, and close the file without further effort.
The whole exercise was inexpensive, no matter the outcome. This time, we weren’t within $500,000. But next time we might be.
I called this approach the “blind bottom line approach” until I learned that John W. Cooley has referred to the technique, which can be used to break impasses even after disputes have been mediated, as “blind bidding enhancement” in The Mediator’s Handbook.
No matter what you call it, blind bidding enhancement can be effective if the parties aren’t, in actuality, very far apart but they are concerned with making a major concession at that point in the dispute. In my case we planned to mediate the difference if the gap wasn’t too significant, but you can do more. You can simply walk away if you aren’t within a predefined amount, but if the mediator tells the parties they are within $x of each other you can:
Come on, Diane, Nancy, Vickie, Chris, Jeffrey and Mariam, Geoff (when you return from summer break) and other mediators out there — make it easy for us. We have seen a short form agreement for binding high-low arbitration elsewhere; if you post a short agreement ready for download and execution that will make blind bidding enhancement easier for us, you might help us resolve our matters even earlier — because the parties just might be closer than they think in the first place.
I do. Always been uneasy about it, though. Too artificial. Think I might stop. Are those who take the high road and don't, disadvantaged from a marketing point of view,...By Geoff Sharp
Carrie Menkel-Meadow talks about the value of mediation including social justice cases. Some of these cases need litigation but in most cases more can be accomplished in mediation.By Carrie J. Menkel-Meadow
Randy Lowry discusses the development of Pepperdine's mediation program and incorporation into the law school. Foundation for law school is to translate theory into practice.By L. Randolph Lowry