- Why they created it: to reclaim mediation’s relational value—supporting parties’ self-determination and humane interaction.
- Field impact: transformative mediation changed discourse, influenced policy/ethics/certification in places, and sparked international debate, but uptake remains minority; the label “transformative” and misunderstandings (like “anti-settlement”) hindered clarity.
- Key failures/challenges: poor choice of the name, but difficulty in getting wider adoption, and insufficiently robust independent observational research.
- Some reflections for the future:
- Training: stress that transformative practice requires extensive skill-building, not quick workshops. Mediators need to “follow the parties’ conversation closely, listen for empowerment and recognition opportunities, and support shifts without steering outcomes.”
- Broader application: TM has potential with family and workplace disputes. After all, the goal of TM is to influence how society approaches conflict itself.
- Institutional support: mediator credentialing bodies and court programs will give it structural legitimacy…