In mediation, especially within the understanding-based approach, practice and feedback are not optional enhancements – they are essential elements of developing real skill. The mediator’s work requires more than theoretical knowledge or professional intention. It requires awareness, presence, and the ability to respond with authenticity and steadiness in moments of uncertainty. Each stage of the mediation process benefits deeply from guided practice, where skills are not only applied, but reflected on, refined, and embodied.
The mediation process generally follows five key stages – contracting, defining the problem, creating the ground of understanding, developing and evaluating options, and reaching agreement. While each stage is distinct, they are all interconnected. When mediators practice these stages, especially with constructive feedback, they build fluency in working with people in conflict. Without practice, even skilled professionals can revert to default behaviors that undermine the principles of the understanding-based model.
In the contracting stage, the mediator invites the parties into the process and clarifies what it will involve. This is where the groundwork is laid for everything that follows. It may sound straightforward, but without practice, mediators often over-explain, miss subtle resistance, or fail to truly make contact. Practicing this stage helps mediators develop clarity and transparency in introducing the process while staying attuned to the parties’ concerns or hesitation. Feedback often highlights the tendency to push ahead too quickly or to frame the process in terms that feel abstract or disconnected. One common pitfall is using language that sounds neutral but carries implicit direction. Practice helps mediators recognize this and instead invite parties to engage with genuine choice.
Defining the problem requires the mediator to gather relevant information while helping each party begin to express their view of the conflict. The goal here is not just to identify issues, but to support each person in articulating what matters to them. Without practice, mediators may inadvertently shape the conversation around legal categories or assumptions, missing the opportunity to let the parties define the problem in their own terms. Practicing this stage supports the mediator in staying curious, avoiding assumptions, and making space for ambiguity. Feedback helps identify patterns – for example, interrupting, over-summarizing, or narrowing too soon. Practice enables mediators to become more comfortable with complexity and more skilled in helping the parties name what is truly at stake.
The third stage – creating the ground of understanding – is the heart of the understanding-based approach. This is where mediators help parties go beneath the surface of the dispute and begin to understand what is important to themselves and to each other. This stage can be emotionally charged and challenging to navigate. Without practice, mediators may shy away from strong emotions, revert to problem-solving too quickly, or avoid engaging with the deeper layers of the conflict. The loop of understanding – a core tool in this stage – takes practice to use well. It is not a script, but a skill that requires attunement and honesty. Through repeated practice, mediators learn how to support understanding without forcing agreement. Feedback reveals whether a mediator is truly listening or merely appearing to listen. It also helps build awareness of the mediator’s internal reactions, which can shape how they respond, often unconsciously.
Developing and evaluating options is the next stage, and it can bring a new set of challenges. When parties begin to generate ideas, mediators must support creativity without controlling the direction. Practicing this stage allows mediators to work with options in a way that keeps the parties’ values and interests at the center. A common mistake is introducing options that reflect the mediator’s preferences or assumptions rather than emerging from the understanding created. Another risk is applying pressure to reach closure before the parties are ready. Practice helps mediators support parties in exploring possibilities with openness while remaining grounded in the deeper work that has already occurred.
The final stage – reaching agreement – can feel like the goal line, but it too requires care. Mediators without adequate practice often rush through this stage or shift into a transactional mindset, reducing the agreement to a checklist. But in the understanding-based approach, reaching agreement is about alignment – not only with external terms, but with the parties’ internal sense of resolution. Practice helps mediators learn how to pace this stage, check for readiness, and make sure that each party feels clear and committed to the outcome. Feedback is essential here to identify whether a mediator is overly invested in achieving resolution or whether they are staying present with the process, even at the end.
Throughout all stages, practice without feedback can reinforce blind spots. Feedback without practice lacks context. Together, they create the conditions for true learning. Guided role plays, supported by thoughtful observation, help mediators build awareness of their own habits, develop emotional resilience, and learn to be transparent and responsive in real time. Common pitfalls that can be addressed through practice include over-identifying with one party, avoiding difficult emotions, over-reliance on technique, and confusing neutrality with detachment.
The understanding-based approach to mediation invites a deeper kind of engagement – one that asks mediators to be real, grounded, and present. This is not something that can be learned by reading alone or by observing from a distance. It is learned by doing – by practicing with intention, by receiving feedback with openness, and by committing to the ongoing development of one’s capacity to support others through conflict. It is this commitment to practice and reflection that allows mediators to not only facilitate resolution, but to do so in a way that honors the autonomy, connection, and humanity of the people they serve.