Colleagues recently had a lively discussion on the DRLE listserv about negotiation and mediation theory.  This post summarizes my perspective and includes my posts in that discussion.

I hadn’t planned to write the series of posts, but comments in this thread prompted me to summarize my perspective.  Many of the comments raise broad questions about the models and language we use to describe negotiation and mediation.

Ideas in our field evolve much like they do in other fields.  Influential frameworks emerge, help people think more clearly about important problems, and – over time – people see their limitations and develop improved approaches.

The negotiation and mediation theories developed in the 1980s and 1990s made important contributions.  Len Riskin published his grid 32 years ago.  Getting to Yes was published 45 years ago.

After all these decades, it’s not surprising that we see both the strengths and limits of these ideas.

As discussed in my previous posts, some of those limitations involve the simplified models and terminology that have become embedded in our writing and teaching.  I described problems with mediation theory (including a meta-analysis of empirical research finding no consistent support about effects of “facilitative” and “evaluative” mediation) and negotiation theory.

To address those problems, I developed Real Practice Systems (RPS) Theory, which focuses on how negotiation and mediation actually work in practice.

This post highlights the benefits of RPS Theory and invites you to incorporate it in your work.

Benefits of RPS Theory

RPS Theory improves on traditional negotiation and mediation frameworks in some important ways:

• Focuses on helping parties make good decisions by using multiple techniques rather than relying on a single model.

• Highlights parties’ tangible and intangible costs of continuing a dispute, not just expected court outcomes.

• Examines the entire dispute resolution process, including preparation before negotiation or mediation sessions and reflection afterward – not just the interaction across the table.

• Emphasizes preparation, highlighting the analysis that occurs “behind the table” before parties meet.

• Recognizes that strategies in a dispute evolve over time as parties gain information and experience.

• Focuses on the people involved, including their experience, skills, goals, motivations, values, and the kinds of cases and parties they encounter.

• Recognizes the central role of lawyers, encouraging parties to obtain legal advice about likely outcomes and strategy early in the process rather than only during mediation sessions themselves.

• Integrates negotiation and mediation into a single framework reflecting how practitioners actually move between these processes in real cases.

• Can be used by practitioners regardless of their preferred negotiation or mediation theories.

• Uses clearer language, avoiding much of the confusing jargon that has developed in traditional negotiation and mediation theory.

RPS Theory has also yielded practical tools.  In particular, I developed detailed checklists for mediators and attorneys representing clients in mediation that outline procedures before, during, and after mediation sessions as well as ethical obligations and methods for improving practice.

Applying RPS Theory Through RPS Coach

These ideas are incorporated into the AI tool RPS Negotiation and Mediation Coach, aka RPS Coach.  It can help mediators, attorneys, parties, program managers, educators, and students apply the insights reflected in the checklists quickly and conveniently.  Among other things, it can help users:

• Analyze negotiation and mediation situations more systematically and efficiently.

• Prepare for negotiations and mediation sessions by identifying issues that might otherwise be overlooked.

• Use clearer language that avoids much of the confusing terminology in traditional negotiation and mediation theory.

In short, the goal is to develop frameworks and tools that reflect how dispute resolution actually works in practice.

Invitation to Use Updated, Practice-Based Theory and Tools

For many years, practitioners and scholars have recognized limitations in traditional negotiation and mediation theories but lacked frameworks that better reflect how dispute resolution actually works in practice.  RPS Theory is an effort to provide such a framework.

I invite you to incorporate insights from RPS Theory in your writing, teaching, training, and practice – and to gain the benefits of using an AI tool based on RPS Theory.

Take a look.