Tag Archives: civility

ABA Mediation Week 2013 – Additional Resources

The ABA has a number of resources to help families, businesses and other organizations think about how to effectively resolve disputes through mediation.  Many of these are available through the Mediation Week Toolkit.   If you are a party thinking about mediation or a mediator working with parties, you will find the downloadable mediation guides  useful.  In addition to the general guide there are guides for family mediation, and complex mediation.  The ABA has also prepared a resource to help businesses plan for early dispute resolution.   Another great resource for parties to a dispute – including parents battling over custody, feuding partners, and disputing neighbors –  is the “difficult conversation preparation worksheet” and instructions created and shared by Triad Consulting on their website.  We urge you to review, use, and share these resources!

ABA Mediation Week 2013 – Civility Is Not Enough

Yesterday we wrote about how a commitment to civility and more widespread use of the communication tools that mediators use can make a difference in our national politics.  Today we look at the importance of critical thinking.  Critical thinking requires ongoing and systematic analysis of how we are thinking so we can improve how we evaluate, use, and integrate different kinds of information.   This extends also to thinking about how we communicate our thoughts, and how we receive and process what we hear.  In a world of sound bites, competing and biased narratives, and positional maneuvering, critical thinking is “critical” to finding our way.

One resource I really like and have used in several dialogue contexts to help participants think about how and what they are communicating is the “Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools” booklet from The Foundation for Critical Thinking Thinker’s Guide Library.  As is noted in the very beginning of that booklet, without the effort to think critically, much of our thinking is “biased, distorted, uninformed, or downright prejudiced”.  As the authors go on to note, this is dangerous because “the quality of our life and that of what we produce, make, or build depends precisely on the quality of our thought.  Shoddy thinking is costly, both in money and in quality of life.”

The stages of critical thinking outlined in the booklet align well with the “data to wisdom continuum.”  Both tools can be used to help participants generate questions about where they are, what they know, and what they don’t know and would like to explore further.  Developing these types of questions helps people move from simply trading talking points, to more productive dialogue.  Another great resource to check out is  FlackCheck.org. Here you can review some of the common ways information is manipulated or distorted when reported through the media, illustrated with real life video examples.  Our post series on cognitive errors  also works well with this resource.

The educator John Dewey observed that “Democracy needs to be reborn in each generation and education is its midwife.”  As Dan Yankelovich has pointed out, our national problem solving capacity has eroded as our collective ability to think critically together has declined.  By integrating educational tools like those above into our dialogues we can help to restore that capacity.

ABA Mediation Week 2013 – Looking Back At Resolution 108

In 2011, the American Bar Association passed its Resolution 108, affirming civility as a foundation for democracy and the rule of law.  The accompanying report warned that the increasing levels of “acrimony and venom” and “polarizing diatribe”  in our political discourse endangered the quality of governmental decision-making and left “citizens frustrated, disillusioned, and reluctant to participate in democratic governance.”

And here we are, starting ABA Mediation Week 2013, in the midst of a shutdown of the federal government.  And this is accompanied by the fear of a possible default on our national debt.  Will reason and statesmanship prevail over distrust, misinformation and power-based gamesmanship?  We can hope that it will, and we can also each individually resolve to act to improve our national politics in the year to come by practicing and promoting the skills needed for more civil discourse.

Mediators and facilitators are well equipped to teach the tools that can help citizens actively question the information they receive; identify and focus on common interests;  reaffirm and apply commonly held values; and change the patterns of communication that lead to debate rather than productive dialogue.

In the words of the report accompanying ABA Resolution 108,

“Words matter.  How we treat each other matters.  In our public discourse, it is time to begin talking to each other with mutual respect, no matter how much we disagree.”

If enough of us commit to this principle, work to understand both those with whom we may not agree and the complexity of the issues before us, and demand that our elected officials do the same, we may be able to fix what is broken in our current system.

Planning For Civil Discourse About Gun Violence

As we noted in our last post, political parties and citizens alike remain deeply divided on what might be done to reduce gun violence. There is however growing support for reducing that violence. Doing so will require more  substantive and civil dialogue that is sustained over time.

In February we were selected by the National Institute for Civil Discourse to write an essay on how to navigate this difficult dialogue. A review of why dialogue on this issue is so difficult can be found in our last post. Below are some of our recommendations on how to plan for dialogue on gun violence.

  • At its base level “civility” means communicating in ways that reflect mutual respect, care and concern, and that support joint action and effort.  Leaders can model communication patterns that respect rather than attack those with whom they disagree.  Leaders can also demonstrate an understanding of (or make an effort to understand) views that differ from their own.  What we need is less partisanship and more listening and reflection. You can read more about the dangers of extreme partisanship and the role of civility in navigating difficult policy issues here.
  • Those seeking dialogue need to frame issues in ways that invite and allow the underlying fears, distrust, and differences in values, information and experience that derail most discussions on gun violence to be addressed. This means starting at a level other than positional debate on, or evaluation of, specific policy proposals.
  • Transparency regarding information development and evaluation is another key element in building trust in a dialogue process. Although dialogue participants need access to clear, consistent, understandable and honest data, they also need to be invited to discuss what makes data understandable and honest.
  • When dialogue is difficult, leaders need to allow the necessary time and space for reflection and also provide participants with choices on how and when to engage as they proceed to work through the issue.
  • Starting dialogues on gun violence at the local and regional levels around questions that reflect a common concern – such as “how do we want our communities to be?” —  can also help to mitigate fear and distrust and set a good foundation for a broader national dialogue.
  • Leaders can further promote civil discourse by using “stories of wisdom.”   These are narratives that emphasize the common good, accept the fact that differences exist, and reflect the hope that a path forward will be found.  Stories of wisdom help dialogue participants to navigate differences in experience, interests, values, and information.

You can download our complete essay, “Aim Higher, Dig Deeper” as a pdf here.  This essay was prepared for and with funding by the University of Arizona’s National Institute for Civil Discourse, as part of a collection of essays on supporting a national conversation about gun violence. The collection has also been posted on the NICD blog.

Celebrate ABA Mediation Week 2012

Welcome to ABA Mediation Week 2012!  You are invited to join us at a celebration of mediation and civil public discourse at the University Missouri law school on Friday October 19 at 5:30 p.m.  The ABA’s Mediation Week Tool-kit features several resources on civic engagement, including this blog.

We have been busy over the past few months promoting civil public discourse.  Just last week Dave was in Seattle, Washington presenting  our paper “Conflict Clues That Help You Navigate To Resolution” at the Civil Discourse to Resolve Governmental Crises conference that was co-sponsored by the Evergreen Chapter of the American Society for Public Administration and the Daniel J. Evans School of Public Affairs of the University of Washington.

Sarah was a chapter moderator for the NCCD’s first-ever book club, helping lead the discussion on the Aristotelian model of public deliberation.  Sarah also spoke again on managing conflict at the Missouri Municipal League’s Elected Officials Training in June and recruited some members there for a pilot project we are running with our new workbook, “The Civic Health Diagnostic Workbook”.  You can order copies of our workbook ($80.00) by e-mailing us at info@buildingdialogue.com.

Several post series from this blog continue to be actively accessed resources.  Most popular series currently include the series on  working through hate, structuring engagement, and using evaluation to strengthen dialogue efforts.  We welcome your ongoing review and comment and thank you for your work!