Sunrise Project Final Report_25Jan2012

8/22/2019 Sunrise Project Final Report_25Jan2012

1/16

Sunrise Focus Group

Analysis

Prepared by the Peace Bridges OrganizationResearch, Monitoring and Evaluation Team

in collaboration with Sunrise

1


2/16

2


3/16

Table of Contents

I. Introduction to Peace Bridges 4

II. Sunrise Project: Conflict Mediation for Commune Leaders Project 4

III. Methodology 5

IV. Limitations of this Project 6

Baseline Report: August 2011

V. What is Mediation? 6

VI. Types of Conflict in Communities 6

VII. Qualities of Sunrise Mediators 7

VIII. Success in Mediation 8IX. Appropriate Situations for Mediation 9

X. Skills for Mediation 10

XI. Final Baseline Lessons Learned 11

End-line Report: January 2012

XII. Changes to the Mediators 11

XIII. Continued Advise and Education 12

XIV. Qualities of Sunrise Mediators: A Comparison with the Baseline 13

XV. Appropriate Situations for Mediation: Family and Divorce Mediation 14

XVI. Final End-line Lessons Learned 15

3


4/16

I. Introduction to Peace Bridges

Peace Bridges was formed in response to the recommendations of the EvangelicalFellowship of Cambodias Task Force on Unity and Peace. Originally conceived to helppastors and churches provide mediation and conciliation services, Peace Bridges visionhas deepened and expanded over the last six years. Peace Bridges now provided long-term training and partnership/mobilization services to over 200 community peace builders.Our partnership projects include peace education in prisons, schools, churches, NGOs,and other community organizations. Today, the organization extends its activities withnon-Christian groups (value based project) by cooperating with Sunrise (a local Non-Government-Organization) to run Commune Leaders project which intends to provideconflict resolution and mediation skill to village and commune committee.

Before providing skills to Sunrise, this baseline was conducted in Veal Vong commune,Kampong Cham district, Kampong Cham province. This baseline was done to understandthe capacity of village and commune committee in managing conflict in their communityand find out any solution for those conflicts. This baseline also seeks to understandcurrent attitudes towards mediation in order to assess what these individuals will gain byparticipating in the Peace Bridges trainings.

II. Introduction to Sunrise: The Conflict Mediation for Commune Leaders ProjectThis project was conducted by Sunrise with with assistance from the mobilization teamat Peace Bridges. It's also the first project which Peace Bridges cooperate with Sunriseorganization for training in order to transfer knowledge, attitude, skill and habit of conflictresolution and transformation in Vealvong commune, Kompong Cham district, KompongCham province. The goal of the project is to train 20 commune leaders so that they developadded skills and abilities to perform conflict mediation for people living in the above

commune. The phrase better conflict solving here means mediators have to be neutral,unbiased and use active listening. Almost all activities are organized by Sunrise, includingorganizing, facilitating the trainings and the lesson design.

All of above activities were designed by Sunrise staff, graduates of Peace Bridges' secondcohort of Conflict Resolution and Transformation training. The mobilization team at PeaceBridges plays a role in providing technical advice (both lesson design and facilitating thetraining) as well as some very small financial support to Sunrise for the project.The training project for Conflict Mediation for Commune Leaders began December 2010 andimplemented in January 2011. The program will be completed at the end of August 2011.

The project was focused on the development of knowledge and skill for conflict resolutionand transformation to commune authorities and proposes the trainees to:

Understand how to build peace and how to resolve conflict peacefully.

Become good effective listeners in their own family, work place and community.

Learn how to troubleshooting in their own lives and lead to help others.

Obtain knowledge and skills for consulting and mediating conflicts.

Learn about peaceful behaviors and attitudes.

Learn how to transfer their knowledge to communities through conflict mediation andconsultation.

The Conflict Mediation for Commune Leaders project was initiated by Sunrise, a partner ofPeace Bridges. The project seeks to achieve Sunrise's objective to provide 20 communeauthorities with knowledge and skills. While these mediators are experienced working invillages, they hope to expand their skills. Upon request, the mobilization team at Peace

4


5/16

Bridges conducted needs assessment of this context. The results showed that the conflictmediations that were often done were family or land related. However, it was shown theystruggled in their work for several reasons and hoped to improve in the following areas:

Learning about the strategy of effective conflict resolution and transformation

Specific process on how to consult and mediate conflict Communal problem solving and management skill

Having seen the above requests, the mobilization team and Sunrise teams developed thefollowing curriculum to response to their demands and problems as the following:

Content and title of lesson

Term 1: Characteristics of conflict mediatorsTerm 5: Option Evaluation (Finding Strategies

for Meeting Needs)

Lessons on Shalom as a path to peace. Option generation (need strategies)

Non-violence communication Option evaluation

Quality of conflict mediators Agreement generation

Monitoring strategy

Term 2: The understanding of conflicts Term 6: Conflict Transformation

The understanding of conflicts and type of conflict The understanding of forgiveness

Causes of conflicts (identification, prejudice, perception,

stereotype and discrimination)

The difference between forgiveness and

reconciliation

Listening skill I The cycle of reconciliation

Term 3: Issues identification and analysis Importance of confessions and changing attitudes

Individual interviews (skill of using question to collect

information)

Role Playing: Learning how to apply good

mediation technique

Paraphrasing and reframing skill

Problem analysis ( problem tree and map)

Term 4: Problem identification and option generation Term 7: Conflict Mediation Examination

Telling the story without interruption (create ground rule,

summarizing)Trail mediation, 8 conflict parties (1h30mn/trainee)

Creating problem list and its types (treatments and

solutions)Monitoring and how to use power

Stress managementDiscussing what the participants learned, and

training evaluation

As another piece of the Peace Bridges and Sunrise partnership, this baseline analysiswas conducted in order to understand what the mediators know and practice prior to thetrainings. An end-line will be conducted at the conclusion of the trainings to determine how

the lessons have assisted the mediators to become better at conflict management.

III. Methodology

To understand their skills, the research, monitoring and evaluation team at Peace Bridgesconducted three Focus Group Discussions (FGD) using direct open-end questions.The survey also provided some scenarios of conflicts and encouraged them to discusssolutions to the conflict. Problem Ranking and Possible Solution Ranking were techniqueof conducting among those committee members in the field. There were four participants ineach group. The results from the field were recorded and later transcripted and transcribedfor analysis.

Two FGD moderators and three note-takers were trained by the Peace Bridges Research,Monitoring, and Evaluation Unit staff a week before data collection in January 2011. This

5


6/16

training included specific instructions about how to administer the surveys as well as generallessons about the ethics of administering surveys. Oral consent was obtained from allindividuals participating in the FGDs. For each FGD, the moderators explained the purposeof the project, how the data would be used. This occured for the baselines and the end-linefocus group discussions.

IV. Limitations of this ProjectThis project--both the baseline and end-line focus groups--encountered several challengeswhich placed limitations on this report.

Language: While the focus groups were conducted in Khmer, the transcripts were latertranslated into English for analysis. This could lead to some different understandings ofterminology and confusion over how certain words are used.

Sample: Its possible that the individuals sampled in the focus group do not entirelyrepresent the feelings of the entire group, or that mediators not present at either or both of

the focus group have different opinions.

Timeline: The mediators participated in the end-line focus group several weeks after thetraining course was completed. This leaves limited time to practice their new skills, andfewer examples to share how they have changed.

Baseline Report: August 2011

V. What is Mediation?

Mediation is a process where two conflicting parties have the opportunity to come together

and resolve their differences in a way which they decide for themselves. How and whypeople come to mediation varies. People can seek mediation for anything from land disputesto child custody settlements. In its purest form, the mediator is the individual who guidesthe conversation in a direction which allows both parties to feel heard and ultimately cometo a settlement themselves. Ideally, mediation preserves the relationship between the twoparties. However, in some cases, reconciliation is impossible and both parties decide thatthe conflict has broken the relationship beyond repair. One such example is divorce cases.In these cases, the parties need help reaching an agreement, and moving on with as littlebitterness as possible.

This baseline report looks at how mediators with Sunrise approach their practice. This isdone to understand how they currently approach their mediation, in hopes of seeing changeover the course of the trainings. In some areas, Peace Bridges will be able to assist thesemediators. Other elements might not change, but this will be determined in the end-line.

VI. Types of Conflict in Communities

In the Focus Groups, the problems which the Sunrise mediators face are most commonlyland conflict among people in community. The second topic of conflict they most frequentlyencounter is domestic violence, and thirdly are cases of debt. Some of them found otherroots of the conflicts such as drug addict, debt, and a lack of respect between individuals.These issues are the reasons people seek mediation. However, they did not mention howthey categorize the size of conflict whether it is big or small conflict or if its bigger than their

ability to solve it.

VII. Qualities of Sunrise Mediators

6


7/16

In the process of analyzing the FGDs, several trends in behaviors were discovered in theSunrise mediators, and how they understand their role in mediation.

Problem-Solvers: All the mediators are practicing problem-solving mediation, instead ofother forms of mediation such as transformative or narrative mediation. To these mediators,mediation is a place to resolve issues and problems and is this is their primary focus and theapproach that they prefer. The FGDs found most of the participants will begin a mediationby asking questions to both conflict parties, find out the problem or root of the conflict, finda solution, and finally encourage agreement towards this solution. One of the mediatorsdescribes this in the following, after we know the reason why they have conflict, we callthem and suggest them to be in accord and let them make decision to find out any solutionand agreement from that conflict such as about land conflict. Some of these mediators tryto discover the problems by asking the parties, and both parties decide to mediate with eachother and agreement to stop the conflict.

Neutral:All the mediators emphasized the importance of neutrality. They want to be a

neutral party. They will unfailingly listen unbiased to both parties. The mediators alsoemphasized the need to make sure everyone has a space to voice their concerns andthat the person bringing the complaint does not control the session. They will also bring inadditional voices and perspectives in if they need facts verified, such as in land disputeswhen someone else in the community might know important information.

Even though they value neutrality, in the FGDs, the language is frequently biased; thechilds mistake, we need to understand their problem, the husband is lazy, and theperson is a drunkard. This could simply be how the mediators talk outside mediation, or itcould be worth exploring. Even though they value neutrality, perhaps they are not practicingit as well as they could be.

Everyone has biases. However, its important that in the mediation, the mediatorsconcentrate only on facilitating a peaceful solution. When working with the parties,the mediators must carefully choose neutral words and phrases that help both partiesunderstand that mediation is good for everyone involved and its possible that both partiescan reach a solution which benefits both of them.

Educators: Several mediators reported that they see it as their responsibility to educate andgive guidance. This was especially true when asked to evaluate a case study. This tendencyto give advice and guidance could be problematic, or it could simply be an example of howmediation has been adjusted to be more appropriate for Cambodia.

Similarly, the mediators believe part of their responsibility is to helping people see the future

repercussions of their behavior as central to their role. The word consequences appearedwhen discussing outcomes of the mediation, but also talking about behavior which themediator perceives is unhealthy. This could simply be how the mediators describe theirwork outside of mediation, or it could represent attitudes towards the role of mediation.The mediator could be appealing to this as a motivational tactic to make the parties moreinvested. In other contexts in other places in the world, mediators sometimes speakabout common humanity or mutual respect as reasons to change ones behavior. This isnot the case for the Sunrise mediators.

Regardless, its worth considering how meeting unmet needs fits into this framework. It alsoappears that the mediators sometimes use threats if behavior is unchanged. This is mostcommon in situations of abuse where the mediator threatens that if a husband does notcooperate they will seek legal help. Making threats could be counterproductive, and mightnot always make people want to cooperate for the right reasons.

7


8/16

The mediators easily agree that its important for the parties to come to their own solutionsto their own problems. If this is a strong value, then its worth considering if giving advice oreducating could make this difficult for the parties, who might feel coerced into a solution.

Arbitrators: Another role that the Sunrise mediators sometime take is arbitrator, wherebythey feel comfortable telling parties what they think is the appropriate solution. Thistendency could go alongside their role as educator and guide. This could upset the powerdynamic. When a mediator takes on a position of authority, this contradicts the ability to be afacilitator. In the end, the role of silent facilitator mediator does not describe these mediatorswho appear to be comfortable inserting themselves into the outcomes of their mediation.

Listeners:All of the mediators agreed it was important to listen to the parties and they allemphasized that they do their best to listen and help the parties listen to each other. Whatthis means practically, is not entirely clear.

Investigators: The mediators also describe their role as trying to find the causes andspecifics of the conflict. When describing several success stories, the mediators describe

how they went to multiple sources and individuals looking for facts and sorting out whatreally happened. They are willing to take time to understand the context and situation behindthe conflict.

Detail-Oriented: The mediators all agree that finding the root causes of problems is veryimportant. They understand the importance of going beyond interests and positions andlooking for core reasons people are in conflict. However, when evaluating case studies,the mediators are likely to become distracted in the details and lose the big picture. Forexample, in the case of the child skipping school, several mediators wanted to discuss theappropriateness of dating while in high school, or went into great detail about the appropriateage for a child to skip school. While these are factors in the case study, these are detailswhich received way more attention then was probably needed. The mediators would benefit

from stepping back and understanding the entire situation and then learning to focus downon problem solving without getting distracted by details.

VIII. Success in MediationMediation hopes to provide both parties with a satisfactory solution to their problem.However, often success at mediation is difficult to measure. In the focus group transcripts,we discovered that the mediators also have a difficult time defining success. We askedwhat they defined as success, they would offer examples, mostly of situations involving landdisputes where its easier to agree to establish a logical outcome. Its worth consideringwhat this might mean about the types of cases that mediators normally take on. This couldalso be a sign that mediators do not always consider relationships to be important. Or this

could be a sign that they prefer to mediate situations involving a clear problem that needs aclear resolution. Or, this could simply mean that they most commonly mediate land disputesbecause these are the most common problems in small communities.

The mediators also do not offer clear guidelines of what they consider a failure either.Sometimes a specific mediation simply does not work out and they do not offer specifics.Its impossible to know if they are referring to the long-term solution, to the relationshipin question, or to the actual agreed upon solution. It would be interesting knowing whatspecifics they use to evaluate their mediation, or know how much follow-up is involved.

All the above findings to inform us that mediation is also a narrative experience, meaningthat while the mediators want to find solutions to the problem, they see mediations to belike stories. Mediators tell stories about their experience and mediations rather than strictlygive answers. Mediation is not a clear linear line of steps that are taken. Instead, sometimes

8


9/16

cases fall apart, sometimes the mediators dont even know why.As is likely true in mediation globally, there are also cases where there is no resolutionoccurs because the parties are uninterested in continuing the process:

One year ago, we tried to solve land conflict in our community, and one of conflictparty told us that another party take his land. We tried to find out the problem byasking him deeply. Later, we invited another party to come and solve the problem;however, they did not come and solve that problem and I decided to send this conflictto commune council.

As is also common is mediation globally, one mediator also reported occasionally, theparties find their cases unsolvable and take their land disputes to court. Its also commonthat parties are secretly backed by powerful individuals who use their influence to swaymediations outcomes outside of the mediation.

IX. Appropriate Situations for Mediation

Mediation--like most tools--has its limitations. It is not always the best tool for resolvingconflicts. Of particular concern on the focus group transcripts, was that most the mediatorsseemed very comfortable with the idea of mediating cases involving domestic violence. Mostmediation experts strongly discourage mediation in situations of physical abuse becauseof the unequal power dynamics. These Sunrise mediators might say that they are simplyadapted their practice to the Cambodian context, or they simply perform a meditationwhen they are asked no matter what the conflict. It is not uncommon for courts to mediatesituations of domestic violence. This is considered very normal in Cambodia and if the wifeleaves the mediation process, she is often vulnerable to poverty and more abuse.Whatever the reasoning, its worth questioning if domestic abuse is continuing unnecessarily

because mediators do not have the direct power to force parties to end violence. They canonly hope the parties decide for themselves to end violence. If the mediators are givingguidance and advice in the mediation, what they say could be very damaging, particularlyif there are no support structures, monitoring, or follow-up. Mediators do not always sidewith the victim in some of these cases, but rather continue to want to remain objective andrational. The emphasis on neutrality in these specific cases could be problematic. Mediatorsmust be aware of respecting the parties feelings, the pain involved with abuse and theabsolute gulf of imbalanced power between victim and offender.

The mediators are open about the complexity of these situations, but there is also aprevailing belief that they can be resolved in mediation. In these situations, the mediatorswant to be reconciling figures. This is an honorable ambition, but could be unhealthy if

it means that the abused party is coerced into staying in an abusive relationship. Also insituations of domestic abuse, the mediators attempt to educate the abusive party whyhis behavior is harmful. Mediation could be the wrong place to discuss these questionsor educate the abusive party. If one party tends to behave violently, perhaps it is idealisticto think that mediation will change this, no matter how well the mediator facilities the session.Its worth considering if this is healthy. Similarly, there were situations in which mediatorstried to resolve cases involving alcohol. This could also be worrying. An individual couldrationally agree to mediation. However, if they continue to use alcohol, this could upset anypossible long-term solutions.

A key lesson which the mediators would benefit from understanding is that reconciliationcannot be forced. You cannot force the parties to trust each other, and you cannot forcepeople to forget events in which they were verbally, physically, or mentally hurt. While thesemediators are experienced and comfortable mediating, in these specific cases of family

9


10/16

violence, reconciliation might be impossible, even unnatural. The mediators should learn tobe comfortable when the parties decide to end their relationship, and when the mediatorsrole becomes to help that separation be as peaceful as possible.

These concerns and questions are raised for consideration and reflections and there isno easy answer. The focus groups did not give any indication of the severity of the abusethey have indicated, as extreme violence can be considered a crime in the courts. Its oftencommon in Cambodia that mediators are pressured to reconcile the parties and restorethe broken relationship. Mediation is seen as the appropriate place for that to take place.Its important to preserve the relationship. Within mediation, there is the expectation thatreconciliation must happen and when it doesnt, there is shame. However, even though thisis the cultural expectation, its still useful to consider if this attitude is healthy for the peoplewho come to the mediation.

X. Skills for Mediation

Mediation as a skill can be perfected. There were very clear requests from the Sunrise

mediators about what they hope to learn. They requested assistance in several areas:

Dealing with money/financial-based disputes

General mediation skills

Speaking well as facilitators

Psychological education

Ability to analysis the situation more critically

Land issues

Family conflict and issues

The mediators also frequently face issues involving land disputes. This is an area where

they could be strengthened and assisted with a strong skill set. These disputes are also lessrelational-based, and therefore problem solving mediation is ideal as the mediator does nothave to focus on restoring the relationship to the same extent. The mediators did not requestongoing mediation training, but perhaps they did not realize that this was an available optionfor them from Sunrise and Peace Bridges. This could be a source of encouragement aswell as attempting to hold the mediators accountable for the skills that they will learn in thetrainings.

The mediators would also benefit from understanding several key differences betweendialogue, mediation and intervention. These three situations all demand differentapproaches and skill sets which look very similar but are different. If this distinction is clearlyunderstood, this clarity could assist their practice, help them decide when giving guidance ishelpful, and help these mediators understand which details to focus on, and when arbitrationis appropriate.

Finally, in the FGDs, here was little to no discussion of power imbalances from themediators. This is a foundational value in mediation, and something which these mediatorsshould eventually incorporate into their practice. It is important to understand different typesof power and the effect of power on parties in mediation. Once they are exposed to theselessons, this will significantly help their practice.

XI. Final Baseline Lessons Learned

The mediators in these FGDs demonstrated a good knowledge of mediation. They knowthe fundamentals of mediation and even some of the ideas around conflict transformation.However, their skills are still limited and they would benefit from increased training and skill

10


11/16

building which Peace Bridges and Sunrise will try to offer.

The two issues which the mediators continually address are land issues, and familydisputes. Peace Bridges and Sunrise should consider how it can best equip mediators andpeace builders to handle situations of domestic violence, physical abuse and family disputes.This appears to be a fairly common issue facing Cambodian mediators, and yet needs to beaddressed sensitively with respect for all parties, particularly the abused party.

This report is simply an analysis of how these mediators are currently practicing their skills.This is a reflection of where these mediators are. There are good things about this currentposition. There are also challenges which these mediators face. We can hope that by theend of the training, the Sunrise mediators will have acquired the skills to face these complexissues with confidence, with respect for both parties, and with listening ears.

End-line Report: January 2012XII. Changes in the Mediators

The end-line focus group discussion was conducted on 17 October 2011. Analysis ofthe changes occurred December 2011 and January 2012 in order to discover what haschanged over the course of the training. The end-line report highlights major changes in themediators.Increased Knowledge: The mediators reported a high level of satisfaction with the training.Two reported that they are happy to share the knowledge they have gained. Severalreported the training contained very useful material, and another mediator shared that hehad used the lesson principles in his meditations and found them very successful. Yetanother mediator indicated that after the course, he was more respected in his community,giving him more prestige as a mediator.

One mediator reported that previous to the training, he didnt know how to approach theconflicts he encountered in his community. The same mediator reported that he nowfelt equipped to handle 70 to 80 percent of the conflicts that he encountered. Anothermediator indicated that he was pleased with his new abilities to better handle land disputes.Summarizing the training experience, one mediator noted that, I just felt like before I startedthe course, I was like a little kid, but after the course, I could run like an adult.

Increased Empathy: Towards the end of the focus group, the mediator posed a scenarioinvolving a situation of domestic violence and asked the mediators how they would handlethe situation. Several mediators responded with empathy to the situation, acknowledgingthat it was difficult and there were no easy answers. In other examples that they shared fromtheir work, the mediators demonstrated increased empathy for the parties. This empathywas new, when compared to the baseline.

Increased Value on Listening: Several times throughout the focus group, the mediatorsnoted the importance of listening to the parties. More than any other skills or characteristicsthat the mediators reported learning in the training, listening was emphasized again andagain. According to one mediator from the focus group,

We need to listen to them and try to understand each partys intention. We cantfulfill one sides desire, but we need to fulfill them all, what both of them want. Weneed to listen more and more to spot the weakness and the strength to help us

mediate the case well. Especially, listening. Solving conflicts requires us to listen.Without listening, we cant mediate.

11


12/16

Increasingly People-Focused:In the baseline, the mediators focused on land disputes andtechnical mediation skills. In the end-line, there was more discussion of family conflicts thatthey encountered. This might indicate increased sensitivity to these types of conflict andperhaps even an interest in resolving these types of conflicts.

Personal Awareness: Two mediators noted that after the training, they were more equippedto process their anger and they had found peace in their own lives. One mediator reportedthat he has better relationships with his family. This could indicate that the mediators areless likely to compartmentalize their knowledge, instead behaving more holistically.

Single Party Mediation: An interesting development in the end-line focus group was severaltimes the mediators reported conducting a mediation with only one party present. Themediators still called these cases mediation, even if they only communicated with oneperson. This could represent two things. First, that the mediators practice more shuttlediplomacy, going from one party to the other to communicate between the groups tofind solutions. Secondly, that they practice more counseling, even though they callthis mediation. If the first, then this is a highly interesting fact worth mentioning as a normal

part of these mediators lives. If the second, then exploring exactly what this means, and apossibly better name for this, would make an excellent discussion.

Changes to Success:When compared with the baseline, the mediators are less concernedwith defining what is success in mediation. One reason for this change might be that theyare increasingly people focused and less concern with counting successes. The mediatorsreport a fairly equal number of land and family mediation cases, whereas in the baseline, themediators talked more about land dispute cases. This development could indicate that theyare willing to involve themselves in family situations, an area often considered personalor family issues and with little to no financial compensation for the mediator. This changecan be considered positive for Peace Bridges and Sunrise.

XIII. Continued Advise and EducationThe focus group revealed that the vast majority of mediators give advise in their meditations.This was unchanged when compared with the baseline. In fact, the mediators were greatlyexcited that the training had given them new ideas on how to advise and educate people.

The role of the mediators could be described as counselors or wise leaders. Theseindividuals see their role as community problem solvers, offering guidance and words ofwisdom. They try to assist their community in whatever way possible when conflicts arise,stepping in when they see a need. Mediation for these mediators doesnt fit into Westernconcepts of mediation. However, these mediators are likely fulfilling a more traditional

expectation of their role. Now they are able to fulfill these expectations more competentlywith their new knowledge and skills. One mediator said in the focus group that, we canprovide some good advise for them to think and try to prevent the problems from gettingworse, demonstrating that he sees his role as an advisor. In rural situations where legalopinions are unknown, mediators educating people on their legal rights can be a good thingand mediation can be an excellent place for this to occur. This can be a valuable service.

One mediator shared an example where he felt compelled to intervene in a situation ofdomestic battering. His neighbor was beating his son, and the mediator encouraged theneighbor to stop beating the child. The neighbor repeatedly agreed to end the beating butthe behavior continued. Eventually, the police were involved. The mediator summarized thestory with I thought that I could help the family...I wanted to mediate the conflict in his family,but he did not listen to me. As a result, he had to face the law. This situation could be bettercalled an intervention instead of a mediation. This situation demonstrates how mediators

12


13/16

could possibility feel responsible to help their community when they see a problem, insteadof waiting for their community to bring conflicts to the mediators.There will always be a concern that the mediators are advising incorrectly or that one ofthe parties in the mediation will feel coerced into a resolution. This tension will always exist,especially if mediation increasingly resembles counseling or therapy which requires adifferent set of skills.

One positive way of approaching this dilemma is observing how the mediators report thatthey must gain peoples confidence and respect. One mediator said, if what we used wasnot effective, the people would not listen to us. Mediators must build credibility. In this way,the community indirectly holds the mediator accountable. If a mediator fails to peacefullyresolve cases, his mediation services and advise will no longer be desired.

Finally, perhaps it is more helpful to consider how this habit of giving advise and educationcan be used to build peace, instead of insisting on a more Western model for how amediation will take place.

XIV. Qualities of a Sunrise Mediator: Comparison with the BaselineIn the end-line focus group, the mediators shared which characteristics they considerimportant for a good mediator. They reported the following:

Neutrality

Listening/listening to both sides

Confidentiality

Asking questions

Honesty and trust

Collecting background information

Assessing the possibility of success

Identifying secret supporters of both parties who may influence the mediation

Verifying information before accepting it to be true

When compared with the baseline, there are some similarities and some differences.

Problem-Solvers: Its very clear in the baseline and the end-line that the mediators valuefinding solutions to problems. In fact, the mediators might perceive this to be their mainresponsibility. In the end-line, the mediators appear to consider themselves problem-solversfor all problems which face their communities, not just in a mediation. The role of mediatorand problem-solver are very intertwined.

Neutral: This value did not change between the baseline and the end-line. According toone mediator, we cant just say who is wrong or right. We should not think that way. In theend-line, there was also mention of the importance of trust and confidentiality. However, inboth the baseline and end-line focus groups themselves, the mediators themselves usedbiased language when they shared examples; talking about parties who were wrongor selfish. As noted in the baseline report, this could simply be how the mediators talkoutside mediation, or this could be a more serious issue. This could also imply that they didnot fully grasp lessons on nonviolent communication.

While its obvious that mediators value the concept of neutrality, practicing neutrality inmediation requires action. When conducting a mediation, the mediators must carefully

choose neutral words that help both parties understand that mediation can be good foreveryone involved and everyone has valuable feelings and opinions.

13


14/16

Educators: In the end-line focus group, the mediators still reported that they consider it theirresponsibility to educate and give guidance (see section Continued Advise and Education).Similar to the baseline, the mediators attempt to educate people on the negative outcomesof continued violence, particularly within family mediation.

Arbitrators: Also apparent in both the baseline and end-line is that Sunrise mediatorsoccasionally take the role of arbitrator. They feel comfortable telling parties what they thinkis the best solution. This compliments their role as educator. The value of taking the role ofarbitrator can be debated.

Listeners: All of the mediators agreed it was important to listen to the parties and they allemphasized that they do their best to listen to both parties. In several instance, mediatorsreported that they pose questions as a way to encourage the parties to think, or tocommunicate. This was a new development and not seen in the baseline. (See IncreasedValue on Listening, pg 12)

Investigators: In the baseline, the mediators discussed how they try to find the causes andspecifics of conflicts. This was also seen in the end-line. Also in the end-line, the mediatorstalked about investigating secret supporters behind each party to understand if the mediationhad any chance for sustainable success. One mediator reported that, we have to seriouslytake a good look at the party to find who have people behind them to protect them...we haveto balance it or else our mediation will fail. This was a new role for investigators that wasnot seen in the baseline.

The mediators also talked about investigating if they would be respected, we need tomake sure if the parties listen to us or not. Again, if they listen, we will do our job, but if theydont, then we should not involve. The mediators reported they were also unwilling to takecases that were too large for them to handle, one mediator saying, we are not the court

who judges someone beyond our scope of just providing mediation. If we could mediate theconflict successfully, that will be great, but if not, then we need to bring it over to our superiorto solve it. Again, this was also new when compared to the baseline.

XV. Appropriate Situations for Mediation: Family and Divorce MediationIn the baseline, there was concern about how mediators were taking cases of domesticviolence without much hesitation. This was troubling because of the unequal powerdynamics as well as a concern that perhaps domestic violence was continuing unnecessarilywhen it should end. Issues of domestic violence were not substantially explored in the end-line and there is not enough information to make a fair comparison. However, there were

several related points that are interesting to consider.

In divorce cases, mediators still encourage reconciliation.1 Because reconciliation is such astrong a cultural norm, it cannot be expected that this will have changed significantly. Onemediator shared an example where he told a woman in a divorce case that I did not supporther idea of packing up and leaving her family before giving her additional advise, and then Iasked them [the couple] to think of all the advise that I gave them. The mediator told thisstory to illustrate the importance of listening to each party. However, this story illustrates twocompletely different points. First, in the situation the mediator was not upholding neutrality.Secondly, the mediator illustrates just how strongly reconciliation is considered normal. Fromother examples the mediators shared, they understand the importance of allowing parties to

1 It's important to note that legally, the court encourages reconciliation in at least two divorce mediations

before divorce is considered. This context makes it difficult for the mediators to discourage reconciliation.14


15/16

make their own decisions. Realistically, the mediator can strongly influence the outcome asseen in the above example.As part of the focus group, the mediators were asked how they would handle a womanrequesting a divorce. The focus group collaboratively crafted their response; collect bothparties perspectives, bring the parties together, let each side share, identify the conflict,and finally work on finding a solution. They emphasized the importance of finding a solutionbefore the issue gets larger. They reported they would mediate to avoid divorce and wouldprioritize protecting any children involved. They also noted they would try to validate thewifes feelings (its normal for a woman to get angry when the husband doesnt care forthe children). Finally, they reported they would try to help the husband, we could help himchange is ways of thinking, help him stop partying out late at night.

In at least two cases, the mediator reported that he would attempt to advise or educatethe husband why he should invest in his family or help raising the children. These are allpeaceful and positive messages. However, when a couple is so angry they want to divorce,its very late to be teaching them these lessons. This might be a consideration for future

mediators to reflect upon.Finally, the end-line revealed that mediators often experience very dramatic emotionsfrom women seeking divorce. Its clear the mediators become frustrated in these situationsand must spend a lot of time calming down both husband and wife in order to conduct themediation. Its possible that these frustrations influence how the mediators approach thesetypes of situations and that perhaps the mediators grow impatient with these cases.

XVI. Final End-line Lessons LearnedThe end-line focus group revealed that the graduates of the Sunrise-Peace Bridges trainingdemonstrate a better awareness of conflict transformation. They feel significantly more

skilled in their work. They demonstrate a knowledge of good mediation skills. They reportthat they are respected in their communities. They highly value listening. Their examplesdemonstrate that they attempt to be practical problem-solvers. They express a strong desireto help people. There is still a strong spirit of reconciliation, yet there were also several newreferences to forgiveness. In the situation of smaller conflicts, the mediators approachedsome of these situations by encouraging people to let it go.

While some behaviors appear to be unchanged or only changed a little, there are certainlychanges in attitudes. For these mediators, their knowledge, attitudes and skills havecertainly been affected positively by the training. They have been affected, and hopefully willcontinue to change their habits as they continue integrating lessons into their work.

Future mobilizations should consider the following,

Increased content on family therapy and mediation. This appears to be a critical partof the mediators work and there is clearly an interest in this topic.

Clarifying limitations of mediation. In future mobilizations, it might be helpful todiscuss the limitations of mediation. It would be useful to understand differencesbetween dialogue, mediation, counseling and intervention. These four situations alldemand different approaches and skill sets. If this distinction is clearly understood,this could assist mediators understand different ways of helping their communities.

In-depth discussion of power: Mediators in Cambodia have a lot of power over theparties. Often the mediator is the clear arbitrator. The mediator will always be in aposition of power and can influence the outcome even if he doesn't mean to. It would

be good for the mediators to understand the differences between arbitration andsimply education or even advise.

15


16/16

Patience: It's clear that often the mediators must face cases involving dramaticemotions and that it can take considerable length of time to create a space for amediation. Learning how to care for themselves as mediators, and develop evenmore empathy might help them stay healthy and productive.

Ongoing Support: These mediators are new to conflict transformation. The couldbenefit from continued informal support from Peace Bridges so that the new lessonsaren't forgotten. Sunrise and Peace Bridges have invested in these mediators. Theymust continue to invest in order to insure long-term change.

Continuation of current program. The content as it was presented was highlyappreciated by the mediators. There was no criticism of the current material orcontent.

One final quote sheds light on one final new development within the mediators, We needto be peacemakers in the society. We should not create problems with other people. Ifthey create conflict with us, we should let these conflicts go. This quote suggests that themediators see that peacebuilding begins with them and that they realize that they are alsopart of bring peace to their communities.

16

Sunrise Project Final Report_25Jan2012

Documents