Most people arrive at mediation with a knot in their stomach. They have usually been living with the problem for months. They have rehearsed the argument in their head more times than they would like to admit, and they have no real idea what the room will feel like. So it helps to know, in plain terms, what the process actually involves.
The initial consultation
The first conversation is short and there is no cost. Usually it is with an HR lead, a line manager or one of the parties directly. We talk about what has happened, who is involved and whether mediation is the right tool at this point. Sometimes it is not. If a formal investigation is already underway, or if there is a safeguarding concern, I will say so and suggest a better route.
If mediation does fit, we agree practical matters: timing, location, who will attend and what happens with any written outcome. Nothing is booked until both parties have agreed to take part voluntarily. That word matters. Mediation imposed on someone rarely works.
Individual pre-mediation meetings
Before anyone sits in a room together, I meet each party on their own, usually for around an hour. This is confidential. It is a chance to say the things that are difficult to say in front of the other person, and to be heard properly without being interrupted or corrected.
I am listening for two things. The first is the story as that person experiences it. The second is what they actually need in order to move on, which is often quite different from what they have been demanding. Someone who says they want an apology frequently wants an acknowledgement that the workload was unmanageable. Someone who says they want a transfer often wants to feel safe in meetings again.
What I do not do in these meetings
I do not investigate. I do not weigh evidence, gather statements or reach a view about who behaved badly. That is not my role, and the moment I start doing it I lose the impartiality that makes the process work.
Mediation is not about deciding who is right. It is about finding a way forward that both parties can live with.
The joint session
The joint session is the heart of it and typically runs for half a day. We start with ground rules, which sound bureaucratic but are simply the agreements that make an honest conversation possible: no interruptions, no raised voices, and anything said in the room stays in the room.
Each person then sets out their position uninterrupted. It is often the first time they have heard the other side without a manager present or an email chain in between. That alone can shift things. From there we build a shared list of the issues that need resolving, and work through them one at a time.
If the conversation becomes stuck, I may hold short private sessions with each party and then bring everyone back together. Progress is rarely linear. There are usually one or two moments where it feels as though it might collapse, and those moments are normally the point at which something real gets said.
What resolution looks like
A resolution is not a verdict. It is a set of specific, workable commitments that both people have chosen: how they will raise concerns in future, how meetings will be run, who handles which piece of work, what they will say to the wider team. Because they wrote it, they tend to keep it.
Where the parties want one, I draft a short written agreement in their own words for both to review. It is not legally binding unless they choose to make it so. Occasionally there is no agreement, and that is a legitimate outcome too. Even then, people usually leave with a clearer understanding of the other person and a calmer working relationship than they arrived with.
If you are dealing with something that feels stuck, an early conversation costs nothing and often clarifies a great deal.
