The Recipe for Rapport

This week, the core psychology series is summarizing research on the existence and effect of rapport between individuals. The following information has come from Chapter Two of psychologist Daniel Goleman’s book “Social Intelligence: The New Science of Human Relationships”, published by Random House Digital. In “A Recipe for Rapport”, Goleman outlines current research on rapport that indicates it is associated with feelings of engagement and positivity during an interaction. Understanding the current research could provide mediators with useful insight into effective communication.

Goleman indicates that rapport is correlated with a physiology pattern. Notably, there is a sweat response that can be observed when two individuals are enjoying their interactions or feel understood by each other. While the concept of rapport is correlated with a physiological response, Goleman states that individuals perceived to have a rapport also report or demonstrate creative and efficient decision making, strengthened bonds, and feelings of warmth, friendliness, understanding, and genuineness.

Goleman outlines three key elements of rapport: shared attention, shared positive feelings and coordination of non-verbal behaviours. These elements are related to positivity and engagement in interactions.

Shared Intention

Shared Intention involves individuals being jointly attentive to the same stimuli. Having joint attention can fuel mutual empathy between individuals. For example, a scientific study was conducted where researchers observed participants that witnessed a confederate reinjuring a small cut on their hand. Participants looking at the confederate winced and displayed a pained expression. Participants not looking at the confederate knew the confederate was in pain, but did not display the pained facial expression.

Shared Positive Feelings

Shared positive feelings are facilitated by non-verbal messages during conversation, such as tone of voice or facial expressions. In a study, confederates provided negative feedback to study participants, with different accompanying facial expressions. Participants that were given negative feedback while still receiving warm facial expressions reported higher feelings of overall positivity about the interaction.

Coordination of Non-verbal Behaviours

Coordination between individuals’ non-verbal behaviours can fuel feelings of rapport. One of the most notable examples of this is mimicry. Mimicry refers to instances where individuals mimic each other’s non-verbal behaviours, such as tapping ones foot. Mimicry, when not forced, is correlated with increased positive feelings towards an individual. For example, students whose postures where similar to their teachers in a class room reported feeling more involved in the classroom. Be wary though, people can notice when someone is trying to mimic their behaviours, which can lead to negative impressions. Daniel’s article indicates when individuals lack this coordination, conversations can make participants feel uncomfortable.

Although there would not be much use in trying to coordinate our non-verbal behaviours with participants in mediation, it seems being cognizant of how we focus our attention and of how we express ourselves would be useful. It does seem obvious that trying to stay positive and focused as a mediator would improve the moods and engagement levels of participants, but sometimes it is hard to know if such efforts have any impact. As seen in the studies outlined previously, it seems like putting in an effort to maintain our own positivity and focus in mediation may have a tangible effect on participants in mediation, especially if negativity may persist between the parties themselves.

Who Does CORE Help?

As an LSLAP clinician I have witnessed first hand the toll that a legal issue can take on an individual. Most, if not all of the clients I have dealt with have given detailed accounts of the deleterious effects induced by the stress and agony of navigating the legal system. Thus, my belief in mediation and other dispute resolution procedures outside of the courts has been strongly reinforced.  Recognizing circumstances that lend themselves to successful mediation remain an obstacle to widespread adoption. Therefore, this week’s blog posting will explore what kinds of situations readily lend themselves to mediation and under which circumstances CORE will become involved.

Core’s mandate is to provide low cost mediation services for both the surrounding community, and for the student body here at the University. Several students have come to our office to inquire whether it is a conflict of interest for CORE to mediate between two students attending UBC. Provided we are able to arrange a student mediator who feels comfortable enough to proceed, CORE will move forward with mediation proceedings.

As an overview the following represent popular categories of disputes that CORE handles:

• Neighbour disputes
• Small business and partnership disputes
• Student housing
• Strata disputes
• Construction
• Small Claims cases
• Employer / Employee
• Landlord / Tenant
• Debt
• Contract

This list is not exhaustive and there may be other circumstances that lend themselves to mediation. For instance, when a relationship is ongoing there will be a strong incentive to agree to conditions that maximize the benefit for both parties. Avoiding a protracted legal battle increases the likelihood that parties can work past their issues without causing irrevocable damage.

Another factor that may affect mediation is the content at the heart of the issue. Disputes centering on tangible or monetary considerations are often much easier to mediate. Issues that encompass personal beliefs or values tend to be very polarizing and can lead to both sides becoming entrenched in a given position.

Additionally, people are often discouraged from mediation when they feel as though there is a strong power imbalance. Though this can present a number of difficulties, mediators are trained to meet these challenges with intervention designed to balance the proceedings.

If you suspect that you have a conflict in your life that could be solved with mediation, we encourage you to drop by our office in Allard Hall on UBC campus! Or email the clinic at coreclinic@hotmail.com.  

CoRe Speaker Series – Recap of “Exemplary Leadership: How Dispute Resolution Professionals Can Change Cultures” with Professor Michelle LeBaron

Professor LeBaron hosted an interactive talk on October 25 as part of the three-part CoRe Fall Speaker Series that called participants to critically think about their role as leaders when engaging in dispute resolution. Drawing on a wide variety of quotes, metaphors, and even poetry, Professor LeBaron creatively presented the critical message that dispute resolution professionals have a profound leadership power.

The underlying theme of her discussion called mediators to constantly be aware of the fact that humans are naturally partial, and mediators natural partiality is a fundamental aspect of their role as leaders. She wisely observed, “Even though we say we’re neutral, the micro-communications that we are a part of still come through and have an effect on the participants and the outcome.” The “micro-communications” she referred to could even be as minute as a slight difference in body language the mediator directs towards the participants or even the way in which the mediator amplifies certain things and mutes others during the course of the mediation. She encouraged mediators not to try and suppress this natural partiality, but rather to manage it in a way that welcomes the different and guides the participants through the mediation.

To illustrate this concept further, Professor LeBaron creatively looked to the four natural elements as metaphors for four dimensions of leadership mediators can exercise. She first looked to earth – a solid, grounding element representing commitment to clients. Mediators have the ability to use their leadership to ground people; they can guide people who are at their most vulnerable through established processes, and use their expertise to find constructive remains in the midst of conflict. Professor LeBaron called on participants in the session to come up with their own metaphors for how they help people to find their solid ground – as shaman, as conductor, as stuntman were only a few creative ideas that were posed.

Professor LeBaron next turned to the element of air, which she equated with beauty and collaboration. The ability of mediators to appreciate the strengths and resilience of the parties and to weave them into the mediation allows for small moments of beauty to be realized in the midst of difficult conflicts. Mediators can also control the sensory parts of the mediation to provide small moments of beauty, even as through small touches like the aesthetics of the room. Connections occur between parties during these moments of beauty.

The third element Professor LeBaron looked to was water, which served as a metaphor for cultural fluency. She provided participants with a vivid image of water weaving around the various “rocks” or barriers parties face in recognizing and coping with cultural difference. She pointed out that mediators must take a tailored approach by asking questions and by recognizing alternative logic systems, values, and social stigmas. Mediators must tread carefully around these issues since each person has their own uniqueness, and be able to be comfortable with ambiguity.

Finally, Professor LeBaron discussed the element of fire, which represented creativity. When parties are in the midst of difficult conflict, they do not naturally act in creative ways and therefore need the leadership of mediators to foster creativity and collaboration. Professor LeBaron told a captivating story at this point about the deepening colours and richness of clay pots when subjected to fires. She encouraged mediators themselves to “stand in the fire”, and take innovative risks to find creative solutions. She also asked participants to articulate where their wellspring of creativity comes from, and reflect on how it could be applied to their work.

Professor Lebaron guided participants at this Speaker Series session through a rich exploration of their leadership capacity in dispute resolution. She thoroughly impressed upon everyone the importance of this leadership capacity, the natural partial nature of it, and four core elements of its expression.

The next two Speaker Series Events take place this month. On November 15, from 4:30=6:00 PM, is John Wade’s “How to be an Effective Hard Bargainer – 10 Lessons”, and on November 30, 4:30-6:30 PM Lee Turnbull will be giving an Ethics Workshop. Both events are at the KPMG offices downtown at 777 Dunsmuir Street and cost $20 for non-CoRe members. RSVP to coreclinic1@gmail.com to reserve a seat!

The Psychology Behind Mediation

Welcome to the bi-weekly Core Psychology series! Throughout the year, I’ll be presenting psychological research and relating it to aspects of the mediation process. The aim will be to isolate and examine some of the psychological processes that occur during mediation that either promote or undermine effective communication and achieving a settlement agreement.

In subsequent posts this series will analyze specific acts that may occur during mediation, but first I will highlight outcome interdependence and metacognition, two concepts that will be frequently mentioned throughout the year.

Outcome Interdependence

The purpose of mediation is to facilitate voluntary signing of a settlement agreement. This may be impacted by outcome interdependence, which is the compatibility or incompatibility between the parties’ interests and goals. ¹ It is possible that parties willing to undergo mediation possess a heightened level of compatibility, demonstrated by their willingness to try different forms of alternative dispute resolution; however, on the whole it seems parties engaged in negotiation are typically self-serving and fail to detect win-win solutions, opting instead for suboptimal solutions. ² We’ll look to the mediation process itself, and the perspectives and actions of the parties to determine what may promote interdependent or self serving behaviours.


Metacognition


The mediator’s effectiveness in their role will be a frequent topic in the series. If you saw the first blog submission of the year, you’ll remember the common mistakes committed by professional negotiators as outlined by Professor Wade (failure to listen effectively, being unclear in their own interests, bringing the wrong people to negotiation and staying on difficult questions for too long). The ability to avoid these common mistakes will depend on the mediator’s own metacognition. 


Metacognition is defined as “knowledge about how the mind thinks and the ability to control and reflect on one’s own thought processes.” ³ With such knowledge, negotiators can develop strategies for altering their thought processes, biases and perspectives to avoid making the same mistakes over and over again. For example, instead of setting time limits for discussing certain “difficult” questions, understanding why we tend to ineffectively persist may naturally lead us to change our behaviours as we realize our motivations do not coincide with the outcome of our actions.


The majority of the sources will be from the PsycInfo database. If you are a student or staff member at the University of British Columbia, you can take a look at: http://resources.library.ubc.ca/159/


Thank you for reading, and I hope you're looking forward to reading our next post!


Full citations:

¹ Halevy, N., Chou, E. Y., & Murnighan, J. K. (2011, September 12). Mind Games: The Mental Representation of Conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/a0025389

² Trotschel, R., Loschelder, D. D., Huffmeier, J., & Schwartz, K. (2011). Perspective Taking as a Means to Overcome Motivational Barriers in Negotiation When Putting Oneself Into the Opponent’s Shoes Helps to Walk Toward Agreements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(4), 771-790.

³ Boyd, D., Bee, H., & Johnson P. (2009). Lifespan Development (3^rd ed.). Toronto, Ontario: Pearson Education Canada.

Negotiation Tactics from Down Under

With the new school year under way at the University of British-Columbia, CORE is up and running again! We have a fresh set of student bloggers who will be bringing you weekly updates with stimulating thoughts on the world of alternative dispute resolution.

Recently the Faculty of Law was privileged to host a full day seminar on the art of negotiation run by Professor John Wage. Professor Wade has authored over 100 articles and books and has taught over 300 mediation and negotiation courses around the world. Currently, Professor Wade is the director of the dispute Resolution Centre within bond University's Faculty of Law.

The session was designed to provide an introductory lecture for students to learn the nuances of negotiation. Professor Wade described positional bargaining (primarily quantifiable solutions) and interests based (underlying goals behind the mediation) as the archetypical approaches to negotiation, but stressed that both types should be used in concert to facilitate a successful resolution. Students were also introduced to BATNA (best alternative to negotiated agreement), WATNA (worst alternative to negotiated agreement) and the MLATNA (most likely alternative to negotiated agreement) in order to accurately frame the issue at hand.

In addition to lecturing on the theory behind successful negotiations, Professor Wade also presented some of the common mistakes committed by professional negotiators. Here are some of the most interesting:

1. Seeing the Elephant in the room: 

Failing to listen effectively 

Professor Wade stressed that one of the most common mistakes committed by lawyers when negotiating is a failure to listen. It is important to understand what the objectives of a client are in negotiation and to allow them to participate in the process. Often the greatest progress is made when the parties are able to speak candidly with one another.

2. Know what you want: 

Being Unclear in client’s interests and BATNA

This stems from the previous mistake, as a failure to accurately frame the heart of the issue will lead to ineffective negotiation. It is important that negotiators clearly state their position and disclose helpful information to the other party, particularly information that strengthens your position.

3. Know who to invite to the party:

Bringing the wrong people to the negotiation

People can generally be grouped into different conflict management styles based on their inherent temperament. Having too many people in the room with similar characteristics can lead to undesirable difficulties, avoidance of issues, inequitable solutions.  Therefore, given the circumstances of the situation, it is important to have a number of people or an individual at the negotiating table that is capable of shifting between mindsets (compromising, obliging, integrating, avoiding, or dominant).

4. Playing in the Mud: 

Staying on difficult questions for too long, instead of moving on to other questions

When a difficult issue presents itself it may be necessary to, “park it” and move onto another area of disagreement. Rarely in the course of negotiation will it be useful to continue on an issue that becomes seemingly intractable. Moving to another issue may help to mitigate some of the difficulties and challenges presented by the previous dilemma. It is important to emphasize areas of agreement to instill positive sentiment and to make parties feel closer to a solution.


If you have additional questions for Professor Wade feel free to contact him through Dispute Resolution Centre at Bond University drc@bond.edu.au. Keep your eyes out for future blog posts!