Recently, my conflict resolution skills were tested in my personal life. For someone who loves to help others work through their conflict, I felt lost. After attempting to talk and listen to the other parties involved, it was clear that progress was not on the horizon. When conflict is personal, it is easy for even the most seasoned mediators to forget how to apply what we use in our daily practice to develop a satisfactory resolution. I realized that the logical thing to do was draw on my mediation skills. Upon this realization, I turned my attention to five questions that I commonly use in my practice and when coaching our mediators.

These questions, initially introduced by Dallas Demmitt PhD. and Nancy Demmitt in the book titled  “Can You Hear Me Now?”, include:

1. What do you see/observe?

2. What do you think?

3. How do you feel?

4. What do you want?

5. What are you willing/not willing to do to get what you want?

Dallas Demmitt, PhD., and Nancy Demmit explain the power of these questions in regards to having healthy personal relationships. In my personal experience, these questions are also beneficial in the context of mediation. These questions are powerful since they encourage parties to reflect on the conflict from their own lenses, while actively listening to the perspective of the other parties.

One reason that I like to use these questions is that they are easy to remember. For simple recall I use my hand, starting with the first question on my thumb and then ending with the fifth question on my pinky. There is intentionality behind the order in which the questions are presented. An explanation of the advised order will become evident, as I take you through a deeper exploration of each question. These five questions are not the only way to structure or facilitate a successful mediation, but they are tools that can be used in part or in whole to close the divide between parties and help them move toward a resolution.

So, here are the five questions that can help destabilize barriers to parties discovering a resolution:

1. What do you see/observe?

The first question begins by acknowledging that all perspectives held by the parties involved in the conflict are valuable in the peacebuilding process. Because everyone wants to feel respected and heard, this question can be a great start. It encourages disputants to ponder and articulate what they would consider to be the facts of the situation. The reflection process requires parties to create some distance from the emotional elements of the conflict and engage with the issue from a theoretically objective standpoint. Responses typically reveal differences and similarities in what the parties perceive as the facts of the situation. Identifying differences and similarities can stimulate productive dialogue between parties. Once each party responds to question one, it is time to delve into deeper issues that go beyond the facts. 

2. What are you thinking? 

Next we transition from question one, which elicits the parties’ understanding of the facts leading to the conflict to the second question, which asks parties to examine their thoughts. More specifically, how are the parties conceptualizing and processing the dispute? What do they think are the motives of the other parties involved? What are their thoughts about engaging in, escalating, resolving or walking away from the dispute? 

When I am involved in a conflict, to process it, I often create a story in my head about what is occurring. This is human nature, to justify our motives for being entangled in conflict. Our narratives frequently involve portraying ourselves as victims and the other parties as mean-spirited villains. 

Question two can be challenging as it invites each party to put themselves in the uncomfortable position of exploring the reality of their narratives. With thoughtful reflection, they can explore the potential gap between each parties’ intentions and the impact of their actions.

This question builds on the impact of the first one, since the narratives we tell ourselves about a conflict drive how we engage with it, which can provide insight into their understanding of the facts of the situation. Question two really functions as a bridge between the facts of the conflict and the parties' examination of their feelings, addressed in the third question.

3. How do you feel?

It is no secret that conflict involves emotions. A lot of emotions, in fact! 

Ignoring the feelings involved in any dispute is potentially detrimental to each individual’s mental and physical health. More importantly, if dismissed or bottled-up, emotions can escalate the tension between the parties. Our default feelings to conflict drive us to fight, flight or freeze mode.

If navigated productively, even the most negative emotions can provide clarity on a path forward. 

Asking someone how they feel can be awkward. It may seem like you could open a can of worms, but research shows intensity can be diffused when parties are invited to discuss their feelings. This question helps humanize the conflict. Hearing how parties feel can be instrumental to understanding the complexity of the dispute. It can uncover underlying issues that drive their interests. An examination and sharing of feelings may help each disputant better grasp the motives and interests of the others involved. It may also surprise parties to hear how their actions impact the others involved. This greater understanding can destabilize incorrect perceptions held by parties about why those involved acted as they did. According to psychologist Paul Ekman, knowing how others feel and think can build what he calls “cognitive empathy,” which may lower barriers to productive dialogue and accelerate the development of a resolution. 

4. What do you want to change?

Once the parties have a chance to review their responses to questions one through three, it is then appropriate to begin illuminating a path forward. It is worth noting that questions four and five will reveal additional details relevant to their conflict. However, enough information is shared during questions one through three to begin the process of exploring options toward a resolution.

Question four challenges each party to reflect on the future, by asking what they want to change. This accomplishes three objectives. 

First, the question brings to light the desires of each party. It uncovers what each party is trying to accomplish. Often, people enter conflict fixated on their positions, but they have not fully explored their interests. Interest-based bargaining is key to negotiating a resolution. Frequently, the final resolution will be vastly different from what they explain at this point, but it is productive for each party to know the initial goals of those involved. The answer to this question exposes what is motivating each party to participate in the mediation. If presented after questions one through three, the mediator minimizes the need to backtrack.

Secondly, question four helps to highlight the issues that are important to each party. Mediators will point out differences and similarities between the proposals presented by each party. This identification can encourage the parties to stay engaged with the mediation process. Additionally, it aids in further understanding which issues need to be addressed, which helps organize the remainder of the mediation.

When mediating, it may be helpful for the mediator to verbally acknowledge all of the issues that are present in the conflict. When acknowledging the different issues, it is essential to engage with the understanding that issues are deeply intertwined and other issues may surface as the mediation progresses. Identifying the issues at hand can be a useful tool in structuring the mediation process. 

For example, if parties state that there are relational and professional problems, I will first summarize their concerns. I will then ask the parties which issue they would like to discuss first. Until the first issue is resolved, we will not progress to the next problem. On the other hand, it is not uncommon to go through all five questions for each problem raised by the parties. Once the parties share responses to questions one through three, and they discuss the details of the situation that brought them to mediation, it is appropriate to then have the parties begin exploring a path forward. 

Lastly, with this question, the mediator is welcoming each party to define success in their own words. In other words, what will be considered a successful outcome for each party? This phase can be challenging for mediators who are problem-solvers, like me. It is not uncommon for parties to have drastically different definitions of success relative to the mediator. For example, a mediator may enter mediation with a desire for the parties to leave the mediation as better friends than they were before the conflict. However, the definition of success for the parties may be that they never have to interact with each other again. Ouch! 

We mediators must be willing to leave our own ideas of success behind and create an environment that encourages the parties to work together toward their definitions of success.

While it may sometimes be tempting for a mediator to propose solutions, good mediators have faith in the parties’ self-determination. The value of mediation decreases when the mediator volunteers their resolution. Ultimately, when parties lose the sense of ownership and agency over the agreement, they are less inclined to adhere to the agreement. Thus, the mediator must fight against and eliminate all temptations that decrease the parties’ sense of ownership over the agreement. To be effective in making the most of this question, mediators must tap into their fundamental listening skills.

5. What are you willing/not willing to do to get what you want?

The fifth and final question seeks to have all parties reflect on what they are willing and not willing to sacrifice on to get what they want. This question is often the most productive at highlighting hidden issues or underlying interests that seem to be obstacles to a resolution. Without fully delving into these hidden issues and understanding what parties are willing to negotiate, it can be difficult as a mediator to get the parties to collaborate on a resolution. Knowing what parties are willing and not willing to sacrifice can uncover interests influencing the conflict. Once each party responds to question five, they will most likely be ready to negotiate a resolution.

Logistics of Application

Understanding the purpose of each question individually and concerning the other questions, it is now essential to grasp the logistics of how to use them. To gain an answer to each of the five questions may require multiple questions that focus on the same topic. Regardless of how a mediator decides to utilize these questions, they must remain willing to adapt to the needs of the parties involved.

The structure of mediation is conducive to applying these five questions. There are multiple iterations in which these questions have proven useful. However, the structure I propose in this article is what I have found to work best, both in my personal practice and when coaching mediators in training. After the mediator presents the opening statement and the parties explain why they are in the mediation, the mediator should summarize the information shared. Sometimes the answers to the first three questions are provided by the parties without being prompted. Alternatively, parties may not answer the question when explicitly asked, which should signal to the mediator that the question should be reworded. After each question is answered by the parties, the mediator should then provide a summary reflecting the main components of each response before proceeding with additional questions.

Following these three questions, it is appropriate to continue exploring the path forward with the last two questions. Summarizing along the way is essential to communicate to the parties that what they said was heard, clarify any misunderstandings, and reiterate their concerns. The mediator should always acknowledge the progress that is occurring throughout the mediation, to encourage the parties to keep their momentum going.

In essence, during a mediation, asking about what the parties are observing, thinking, feeling, hoping to accomplish, and willing to do, will help each party reflect on the dispute and perspective of the other parties while exploring opportunities to pursue a better future. These questions and iterations of them not only provide structure to the mediation but also increase the agency of each party.