People sometimes ask me what makes a good mediator, and they're often surprised by my answer: it's not legal brilliance, and it's not forceful persuasion. It's a specific, demanding type of communication style that mediation requires.
A good mediator must listen first. Not politely waiting for a pause, but hearing what a grieving family, a defensive physician, or a frustrated claims adjuster is really saying, including what's behind the emotional words. In my more than 35 years trying medical malpractice cases on both sides, and now sitting as a neutral, I've learned that most impasses aren't really about the number on the table. They're about a person feeling unheard.
Then comes the harder part: taking genuinely complicated information, such as standard of care, causation, comparative fault, policy limits, verdict ranges from similar venues and translating it into something each side can absorb, in a room where emotions are often raw. That means choosing words carefully. I can tell a plaintiff's family the real risks of trial, or tell a defendant the real exposure they're facing, without it landing as a threat or an accusation. The goal is clarity, not pressure.
And eventually, every mediation comes down to an honest conversation about risk: what litigation actually costs in time, money, and uncertainty, weighed against what a negotiated resolution offers right now. A mediator who can lay that out plainly, for both sides, in language that respects their intelligence and their pain, is usually the difference between a case that settles and one that doesn't.
Communication isn't a soft skill in this work. It's the whole job. What else do my readers think separates a good mediator from a great one?
Call 407.493.0899 or visit my Appointments page to book your next mediation with me.
