top of page

In Defense of Remote Mediations

Many lawyers hold firm that in person mediations are more effective than remote mediations. I like in person mediations. I enjoy meeting new people and hearing their stories face-to-face. I like the (hopefully) friendly banter with parties, and (often) find it easier to convey my warm but direct communication style. There’s a connection you can achieve in person that is much harder to find over Zoom. And it’s relaxing not to worry about technological failures. 

  

But, aside from the obvious benefits (convenience, cost, time), Zoom mediations offer other benefits you may not fully be aware of if you don’t mediate over Zoom often. Parties often feel less vulnerable and more relaxed over Zoom. Those are key when trying to encourage dispute resolution. Parties are less likely to become overly excited or furiously angry over Zoom. It’s easier to restore calmness over Zoom. Often, mediators and even counsel are more likely to observe body language information because they are limited to facial expressions. When limited to just the face, you may pick up on furrowed and raised eyebrows, forehead rubs, curt or strained smiles, pursed lips, and you are not distracted by other stimuli. This becomes critical in assessing whether your client is keen on the settlement proposal or distressed by the feedback from the other party.


Not all disputes are conducive to remote mediation. And, not all mediators mediate effectively over Zoom. I encourage counsel to be open to remote mediation as an option. You just might find that your otherwise-anxious client is much more relaxed when she is in her own environment and isn’t burdened by travel, or that your mediator is more in tune with your client’s reactions when other stimuli are eliminated from the scene.


Let me know what you think!  And, either way, your favorite mediator offers both in person and Zoom mediations for your dispute.

2 views

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page