How Do Mediators Decide What to Do? Implicit Schemas of Practice and Mediator Decisionmaking.

In this paper I address a vexing, but curiously understudied subject: How do mediators decide what to do under the volatile, unpredictable, and fast moving circumstances under which they work? There are two familiar responses to this question. One is that mediator decisionmaking is "intuitive," especially for highly experienced professionals. Another is couched in terms of mediator identification with some formal model of practice such as facilitative or transformative mediation. There are good reasons to believe that neither intuition nor reliance on a formal model provide a satisfying answer to questions about mediator decisionmaking. I summarize the findings from three in-depth studies using reflective case study methods that suggest a more complete answer to the question. These studies include an investigation of divorce mediation, a study of the work of ombuds-mediators working at the National Institutes of Health, and a study of mediators brought into the psychology laboratory to mediate a simulated conflict between two college roommates. We have learned from these investigations that tacit knowledge--which we have variously described under headings like mediator "styles," "mental models," or "schemas of practice, "--plays a powerful role in such decisionmaking, is often at striking variance with what practitioners consciously believe they are doing, and can be gotten at by methods that help practitioners access their tacit decisionmaking knowledge. The methodological and practical implications of these findings for future research on mediator decisionmaking are considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]