Mediation and Trust

Mediation Matters! Issue 16. Mediation Clinic at University of Strathclyde July 2026

“We must infuse any mediation with a sense of hope to displace what may well be a deep-seated cynicism.”

- Gordon Murray

One of the first things a mediator has to do after being instructed in a mediation is to establish a rapport with the parties for whom they have been asked to mediate. Without creating an immediate level of trust with both parties, a mediator will struggle.

In many cases, mediators are not given much time to achieve that, especially if only 15 or 20 minutes have been allocated for a pre-mediation conversation with each party.

According to Google, an individual will react positively - or negatively - to someone else within seconds of the initial encounter. That’s a high bar to clear and yet, on balance and judging by results, we each seem to be able to achieve that, at least in the majority of cases.

When you think about it, that is really quite extraordinary because so many of the mediations we now do are on Zoom, where we have restricted body language available for interpretation. However, we do have our tone of voice, our smile, the use of open questioning and the like - but what is the magic that makes this work?

It all boils down to trust: an amalgam of many elements and techniques deployed by mediators using their individual styles. Empathy is one core part and yet is almost impossible to define. We all know the sense of what it entails, and we judge how successful we have been in its use by the way the parties then communicate.

The parties themselves are also taking a bit of a risk, opening themselves up to someone they have never previously met. To have both parties trusting the mediator to be both understanding and constructive sets the scene for positive dialogue. It reflects that, on balance, each party is willing to accept that element of uncertainty.

We have our own experiences from the mediations we are instructed in, and we also read about mediations taking place on a far greater scale.

The current conflict in the Middle East is one example where state actors have put themselves forward as possible mediators when they have political and economic links with both parties. This must be on the basis that the parties acknowledge and accept that the mediator has an interest in resolving the conflict, thereby broadening the perspective brought to the table.

Where two parties are willing to place their trust in that process - or are at least willing to explore it - there is an element of ‘realpolitik’ at play. The main concern, however, will be that if it ends up being a political fix, what hope is there of a lasting and enduring settlement?

That said, not many of us are faced with such macro-mediation challenges, working as we do with Sheriff Court referrals and other more mundane disputes. The mediations we take part in, however, are still of real importance to our clients.

We must infuse any mediation with a sense of hope to displace what may well be a deep-seated cynicism from parties who have struggled to find an escape route from their conflict. If we can inject an element of positivity, that too should encourage a degree of trust in their mediator.

A sense of optimism should pervade the mediation. How we present ourselves as mediators will have a material impact on our effectiveness. Each mediator brings their own strengths and influence to a mediation.

We have all been drilled in the concept of bias, both conscious and subconscious. In recognising that inherent behaviour, we have to adjust our approach to achieve a workable rapport.

We have to stay light on our feet and be aware of the nuances of the responses we can see and hear. This introduces the concept of judgement, in that we have to make a call as to what is working and what isn’t - quite tricky, really.

At this point, and at the risk of heading off on a slight tangent, the strength of co-mediation is highlighted and comes to the fore. By creating space for one mediator to observe while the other does the talking, the parties will recognise an element of teamwork and interaction.

This dual approach, with one mediator bouncing off the other, is not exactly ‘good cop, bad cop’, but it creates a contrast. The mediators can be seen to be working together, supporting one another, reinforcing what the other has said and creating opportunities to explore different angles.

The interplay between the mediators can help foster confidence among the parties that this is a proactive exercise. It can also lead to a fundamental reassessment of what the parties are actually looking for.

We are all privileged to be invited to work with parties who, for whatever reason, are under immense emotional and financial strain. We are encouraging them to take a leap into the dark by trusting us as mediators when it is likely that the trust between the parties themselves has disappeared.

The fact that we all manage to do this in our individual styles is a testament to the training we have received and the support given by our colleagues. We just have to get the word out and encourage more folk to use mediation!

Gordon Murray is an experienced mediator who was formerly a solicitor in private practice and has a particular interest in the performing arts. He completed an LLM in Mediation and Conflict Resolution at the University of Strathclyde in 2024.

He is a member of the Strathclyde Mediation Clinic, is accredited with Scottish Mediation and also advises on business strategy.