Knowledge about measures that are effective to resolve disputes has expanded exponentially in recent years. Generally, the longer a dispute is left unresolved, the more intractable it becomes. When people are brought together in an environment that fosters respect and encourages mutual understanding, the likelihood of resolving their dispute increases dramatically. For these reasons, many courts, public organizations and private entities have established dispute resolution systems that include mediation as one, early stage within a larger system.
When the decision to mediate is made privately, disputants or their lawyers, a mediation service or the mediator will, individually or collectively, make and implement decisions to schedule the mediation meetings. When mediation is court-connected or sanctioned by legislation, an administrator who follows pre-determined procedures attends to the administrative details of scheduling the mediation. This chapter approaches administrative details from these two perspectives. Two checklists are provided: Date and Duration; and Location. The chapter concludes with two Tips that emphasize the importance of the manner in which convening decisions are made and a practical Tip for telephone meetings.
The pre-determined and usually mandatory procedural nature of court-connected or publicly sanctioned mediations limit choices, such as where and when to mediate. At the same time, when mediation is mandatory, commencing an action or instigating a formal complaint process may be the only way to bring a reluctant participant to the mediation table. Alternatively, disputants may hope to avoid the public nature of litigation. They may prefer to have control over when mediation occurs, how it is conducted and who mediates. In these situations, they may make a strategic choice to mediate their dispute prior to commencing an action or to initiating a publicly sanctioned process.