Bill Bradfield reminds us to find the team of professional advisors we can rely on, because no one does it alone.  (I’ve Got Your Six!)  Not even solopreuners.  We’ve got to find people to collaborate with to do whatever it is we do.

I love the irony that it is the experience of competition in the marketplace – provocatively imagined as combat in this article – that awakens the need to find our collaborative team. Why is that? Read the rest of this entry »

A lot of folks don’t know that there is more than one form of mediation.  That includes a lot of lawyers.

To be clear, there’s mediation and then there’s mediation. They are as different as night and day.  Wished we used different words for them, but we don’t.  But there is a clear distinction. Here it is: Read the rest of this entry »

The traditional way lawyers choose mediators is understandable.  You choose someone with a bunch of experience in the subject matter. No one can fault you later for choosing someone who has “seen it all before.”  Even if you don’t reach agreement. You’re safe.

There are limitations with that approach.  Here’s what I mean. Read the rest of this entry »

I’ve been thinking about condominiums.  Or more precisely, about the people in condominiums.

What is a condominium anyway?  Or more precisely, who is a condominium?  What is this human system, this group of people? Read the rest of this entry »

We all know that people have different ways of looking at the world. But especially when we are in conflict with another person, it’s hard to remember that they might actually think differently.

Read the rest of this entry »

“Soft.”  Warm & Fuzzy.  Nice.  Even “nicey-nice.”  Respectful. Gushy & Squishy.

Isn’t this how many of us in dispute resolution and mediation describe our work?  Isn’t it how many skeptics describe it?

Yet is this real?  Is this the way it is? Language forms our thinking, and this language is amorphous, disassociative, ephemeral.  Is this how we view our work?  How others see it?  How our clients see it?

What if we used different language? Read the rest of this entry »

Here’s a great post from Daniella Schilling on how — and why — to consult with an attorney in mediation.  Her practice and context is divorce, but her good advice applies to any mediation.

[Here’s a revision of a pre-hack blogpost. And now it has a pic! JB.]

As a mediator, there’s a lot of powerful symbolism in just holding the Beer Summit.  It shows that talking about our differences has value.

The press was not allowed in for more than a few seconds to take some pics and see that it was actually happening.  But even that little bit allowed us to see that there’s more to be learned there.  Take a look: Read the rest of this entry »

For those who thought that conflict resolution was for a few iconoclastic individuals, take note.

Economic turmoil, technological advances are gathering to create A Perfect Storm that “will force lawyers to change their attitude and perspective.”  Gone are the days of blank-check litigation.  ““Resolvers” will replace “litigators.”

Who’s saying these things?  The authors are in-house legal counsel for twelve multinational corporations.

Lawyers: ride out the storm by providing a new service for your clients. Get a new dispute resolution tool for your lawyer’s toolkit to go with your litigation hammer. Your clients are moving beyond litigation and beyond the courthouse – can you keep up with them?

The Uniform Law Commission has removed the resolution regarding the Uniform Collaborative Law Act (UCLA) from consideration at the ABA House of Delegates Mid-year meeting. You can hear Robert Stein, ULC’s delegate, on that decision here (choose Day 1, PM, Report 111C).

I think this is quite appropriate. A lot of good feedback was generated by the resolution, feedback which indicates there could be some revisiting of the UCLA by the drafting committee. But more importantly, there is now more opportunity for discussion and dialog about what Collaborative Law Practice is and how it works.

We’ll see if the UCLA drafting committee will be reconvening. But whether they do or not, there’s still a lot of good work that the rest of us can be doing.

Most of the comments raising sincere concern I’ve heard were not really directed at the UCLA, but at the practice of Collaborative Law more generally. So now there is time and opportunity for various stakeholders to have those discussions, to inform, to share ideas, and to see how the concerns might be addressed.