NCJ Number
102929
Journal
Negotiation Journal Volume: 2 Issue: 4 Dated: (October 1986) Pages: 351-356
Date Published
1986
Length
6 pages
Annotation
In an effort to complement Carnevale's mediation model, this article reviews the conceptual meaning of mediation and 'intravention' and discusses theoretical issues relevant to mediation practice.
Abstract
Mediation involves two or more parties having difficulty agreeing without assistance, an outside mediator chosen by the parties to become involved, and no final decisionmaking or sanctioning power for the mediator. 'Intravention' is a form of mediation that approaches but does not assume the full character of arbitration. In 'intravention,' the mediator may be imposed on the parties and may strongly suggest solutions to the conflict. Carnevale's mediation model (1986) predicts four strategies (pressing, inaction, compensating, and integrating) that a mediator will choose in various situations. If mediators perceive there is considerable common ground and do not care about the outcome, the choice is inaction. When there is considerable common ground and the mediator has strong feelings about the outcome, an integrative solution is favored. When there is little chance the parties will reach an agreement on their own and the mediator values outcomes, mediators should raise the benefits and probability of an agreement. If mediators are interested in seeing any kind of settlement, they press the parties to lower their aspirations in the interest of a solution. Due to their expanded base of control, intravenors have more strategic choices than mediators. Mediators can use integration and pressing to push an agreement. Intravenors can use these two strategies and also inaction and compensation. 11 references.