Two business owners take a seat before me. They have brought with them the baggage of a nagging dispute. Joyce hired Ola's company to build a warehouse. But because of a defect — a nail penetrated a pipe 16 months after construction was completed — the warehouse and its landscaping were flooded. Ola's company offers to repair the punctured pipe, but Joyce wants full compensation for all the flood damage and the time her workers spent cleaning up the mess. The two are hopelessly deadlocked.

It’s a dig-in-your-heels conflict like many others in the business community. Only in this case, the situation is pretend. Joyce, Ola and I are trainees in a three-day mediation course offered through the San Diego Mediation Center. The three of us engage in a mock exercise, designed to teach us how to use the tools of mediation to help disputants achieve their own resolution.

The 24 participants — among them, several lawyers, human resources specialists, a police official, a psychologist and a high school teacher — have a wealth of experience in their respective professional fields. But many find learning the art of mediation a different sort of challenge.

"It was an exhilarating, energizing and exceedingly difficult procedure," says James McDonald, a lawyer who took the training. "It (mediation) is more difficult than being a lawyer litigating. You have to listen very carefully. You have to get the parties to agree to prevent a win-lose situation. But it saves time, money and lots and lots of frustration."

Mutual gain is the name of the mediation game, in which the disputants reach an agreement voluntarily. Robin Duboe Seigle, a trainer with the mediation center, notes that the first step is having people understand they have full control of the outcome. Some confuse mediation with other forms of dispute resolution, such as binding arbitration or a settlement conference. "People often have had bad experiences with things called mediation, when it wasn’t really mediation," she says.

The mediation course, led by Seigle and fellow trainers Lisa Maxwell and Jerry Harris, teaches the mediators-in-training a six-stage framework that will help them move angry people from intransigence to a written agreement, often in a matter of hours.

The mediator starts by explaining that he or she is impartial, with no decision-making power regarding the outcome, and that the process is voluntary and confidential. A few ground rules are set: Treat each other with respect. Let people finish without interruption. Follow the mediator's instructions.

Starting with the party that requested mediation, both sides tell the mediator their stories. The mediator summarizes their grievances in a single list, repeating back a "reframed" version that is wrung of all provocative language. In the soothing tones of Mediator Speak, "loud music" translates into "volume" and a disputant who accuses the other of lying is said to have "an issue of trust."

The mediator then begins a crucial phase in which the disputing parties are instructed to talk directly to one another. But this technique makes some lawyers nervous. "I’m uncomfortable when they get (disputants) hotter and hotter because they are digging this hole that they are going to come out of at some point," says attorney Dirk Metzger, who attended the training session. "We want them to say everything they want to say but not to the point where they can’t reach an agreement."

Seigle explains that the direct exchange of the mediation process is tightly structured and is not simply "opening the floodgates" of anger. Rather it’s a tool for helping disputants see each other as human beings, she says, and begin to overcome some of the emotional issues that block a resolution. The mediator has ways to help nudge the disputants toward better communication. Often, each is asked to tell the other something about his or her background not directly related to the dispute. When the parties do address their dispute, each may be asked to summarize the other’s statement to make sure they understand the other’s perspective. Also, the mediator has the option of meeting separately and confidentially with each party.

After completing the third stage of direct communication, the trainees move to the next stage, where the disputants — by now calmer and more focused — brainstorm ideas for solutions to their conflict. If all goes well, these seeds of resolution will blossom into a written agreement, specifically stating what each will do and when.

Alan Furman, an employee relations associate at Viejas Casino, says he finds instruction in the final mediation stages particularly useful to him. "I’ve learned how to write a good agreement that doesn’t benefit just one party," he says.

During the training, we spend much of the time role playing, taking turns as mediators and disputants. Which brings us back to Ola and Joyce and their impasse over who's going to pay for the damage to Joyce's warehouse.

Despite my awkwardness as a mediator trainee, Joyce and Ola find common ground and reach an agreement. Ola will not only pay to repair the defective pipes, he’ll restore the ruined landscape. As for Joyce, she’ll help Ola keep his valued reputation by not reporting him to the licensing board. They are convincing actors, who demonstrate how the carefully choreographed process of mediation — once mastered — can work in the real world.

— Lynne Carrier