The following checklist may assist the mediator and participants in attempting to develop a process for the negotiation and mediation of multi-part public policy issues.

1. What is the problem (plan, issue, etc.) we are trying to reach some agreement about? What is the purpose of the mediation?

2. Who are the parties or interests who need to be involved in addressing this problem or range of issues? How many from each should sit at the table? If new parties become known during the mediation, should the process provide for their inclusion?

3. Will this effort involve organizations, interest groups, etc.? If so, is each group sufficiently organized so that representatives can speak for their constituents? Do representatives understand the importance of keeping constituents informed throughout the process?

4. What is our timetable for the process? What deadlines should we establish for completing, discontinuing, and/or evaluating the progress?

5. How does the undertaking relate to existing governmental structures, processes and decisions?

6. Are officials of government agencies with jurisdiction supportive of this undertaking? Are there reasonable assurances that they will cooperate in implementing an agreement if one is reached?

7. How do we define consensus? Are we seeking a consensus of individuals or of groups? What do we do if we are not able to achieve it? Understanding that voting and majority/minority reports as fallback decision procedures can inhibit the chances for agreement, might it be acceptable to reach agreement on just some of the issues? In that case, would it be useful to produce a statement defining areas of disagreement within the agreement? Should we have explicit provisions for disbanding the effort? For example, should we agree beforehand to restrictions on subsequent use of information and positions developed and divulged during the negotiations?

8. What type or form of agreement are we seeking? Will it be a written contract? A set of consensus recommendations to an agency or agencies with jurisdiction? A memorandum of understanding? An agreement to testify for (or at least not oppose) a plan or project or new zoning ordinance, etc.?

9. If organizations, interest groups, etc. are represented in the negotiations, will constituents need to ratify an agreement? Have we allowed time for our different decision processes?

10. If it is likely that new information will be needed, how shall we gather it so that the collection process is credible and the product advances the negotiations?

11. Will the meetings be open or closed? If closed, will there be observers?

12. Who will deal with the media and how?

13. How will results of meetings be recorded?

14. Are there clear understandings about our responsibilities in dealing with interests not at the table? What role would a mediator have in this regard, if we use one?

15. What will the mediator's role will be?

16. Are there any ground rules regarding behavior during the meetings or outside them that we should establish?

17. Have we reached explicit agreement on the questions in this list that are pertinent to our situation? Are there any others not on the list that we should consider, such as a provision for setting agendas and forming working groups? Shall we put them in writing as a set of ground rules or protocols that describes our purpose and the process we intend to follow to achieve it? Can we each commit to follow the process we have here defined in our protocols and make a good faith effort to reach an agreement?

This site managed with Dynamic Website Technology from Mediate.com Products and Services