Mediation resolves disputes by facilitating agreement between the parties. The mediator does not decide the outcome, but helps the parties develop a solution that is mutually acceptable. This “self-determination” is the fundamental difference between mediation and litigation and arbitration, in which a judge, jury or arbitrator determines the outcome.

Zikman Collaborative Strategies facilitates agreements by helping the parties and their representatives:

• Examine the facts, issues, and interests involved;
• Identify and evaluate possible solutions to the dispute; and
• Negotiate a resolution that is acceptable to all parties

A variety of mediation tools and techniques are used, depending upon the circumstances of the participants and the dispute. Some mediations involve face-to-face conferences, some are conducted exclusively by telephone or online, and others involve a combination of communication channels.

Mediation offers many potential benefits and advantages over other dispute resolution processes, including:

• Mediation is typically much faster and less expensive than litigation.
• The time, location and other logistics can be arranged for the participants' convenience.
• Communications and resolutions are ordinarily private and confidential.
• Mediation helps the participants communicate their viewpoints and understand each others' perspectives.
• Mediation can address important concerns of the parties that may be disregarded as being “irrelevant” in litigation or arbitration.
• The parties can agree to solutions that are not available remedies in the other processes.
• A mediator can help the participants overcome obstacles to negotiating an agreement directly.
• Parties are usually more satisfied and likely to comply with solutions they have agreed to than those imposed by others.
• Mediation can improve business and personal relationships and prevent future disputes.

Please feel free to consult with us to determine if mediation is appropriate for your particular circumstances.

When consulted or serving as a mediator, Zikman Collaborative Strategies acts as a neutral and does not represent any of the parties as their attorney, or provide legal advice to them. No attorney client-relationship arises between Mr. Zikman and the participants from any consultations or services performed as a mediator. The parties are encouraged to obtain legal advice and representation from independent attorneys. Legal representation is provided only pursuant to a written agreement which expressly creates and defines the attorney-client relationship. Absent such a written agreement, no attorney-client relationship or legal representation arises.

A mediator's familiarity with the subject area of a dispute may be helpful, but his knowledge or expertise in that area is usually not necessary for a successful mediation. Since the parties ultimately decide the resolution of the dispute in mediation, the mediator's skills at helping them to constructively consider the issues and negotiate an agreement are considerably more important. An effective mediator therefore must, however, be able to readily understand the subject of the dispute and the information presented by the participants.

Over the course of more than twenty years practicing law and serving as a facilitator and a mediator, Mr. Zikman has acquired knowledge or expertise in a broad range of subject areas. He has also developed the ability to quickly identify and understand the issues in new as well as familiar fields. Most importantly to his qualifications as a mediator, he has extensively studied, practiced and developed the knowledge and skills to help conflicting parties reach agreements.

While these processes are interrelated and have much common ground, there are differences.

The process of ‘facilitation’ is a collaborative process in which a neutral seeks to assist a group of individuals or other parties to discuss constructively a number of complex, potentially controversial issues. The facilitator typically works with participants before and during these discussions to assure that appropriate persons are at the table, help the parties set and enforce ground rules and agendas, assist parties to communicate effectively, and help the participants keep on track in working toward their goals.

‘Consensus building’ describes a number of collaborative decision-making techniques in which a facilitator or mediator is used to assist diverse or competing interest groups to reach agreement on policy matters, environmental conflicts, or other issues in controversy affecting a large number of people. Consensus building processes are typically used to foster dialogue, clarify areas of agreement and disagreement, improve the information on which a decision may be based, and resolve controversial issues in ways that all interests find acceptable. Consensus building typically involves structured (yet relatively informal), face-to-face interaction among representatives of stakeholder groups with a goal of gaining early participation from affected interests with differing viewpoints, producing sound policies with a wide range of support, and reducing the likelihood of subsequent disagreements or legal challenges.

Please feel free to consult us to determine which process would be most appropriate for your particular circumstances.

People often ask whether these processes take away the traditional role of government and elected officials.

In fact an approach based on collaboration and consensus building can be an extremely effective supplement to the traditional administrative, political and legal tools that are typically used to resolve land use, environmental and other public policy-related disputes. There are a number of solid, strategic reasons to employ more collaborative techniques in public engagement processes:

1. Save time and money
The parties can realize cost savings by reducing the need for dueling expert witnesses and prolonged litigation. Collaboration, more often than not, saves the parties money while producing solutions that are at least as satisfying as those generated through more traditional means. By addressing issues in greater depth, future conflicts may be avoided.

2. Obtain the best available information
Collaborative techniques can address extremely technical matters through a process of joint fact-finding. Its purpose is to develop a shared base of knowledge and to focus discussions on the interpretation of the information available, not to debate the facts themselves. This process ensures that the best available information is taken into account.

3. Increase compliance
Many solutions reached through collaboration include self-enforcing mechanisms to ensure compliance. Increased trust achieved through the search for mutually beneficial outcomes encourages parties to comply with the spirit of the agreement as well as the letter of the law. Collaboration achieves more creative, longer-lasting outcomes that take account of the best available technical information.

4. Improve relationships
Consensus building and other collaborative techniques bring together a wide range of stakeholders. The relationships built as a result of face-to-face communication help build trust, combat stereotypes, and increase understanding.

5. Resolve future problems more easily
When relationships are enhanced, future conflicts are more likely to be contained and managed effectively.

6. Minimize political risks
Collaborative processes reduce the vulnerability of public officials to charges of acting unilaterally or of being out of touch with the public interest. People ask whether elected officials are giving away their legal authority to act if they agree to participate in consensus building efforts. Often, collaborative processes involve informal discussions or processes that parallel formal decision-making. Hence, public officials are not delegating their decision-making authority. Rather, they are participating in focused discussions that can help improve formal decision-making.

7. Increase confidence in government
If the community believes that the issue was handled fairly, the public will have increased confidence that other difficult issues will also be handled well.