More than fair and envy-free conflict resolution
The Mediator is a program which allows you to easily create the best win-win agreements possible.
New Features: 
  • It is now possible to purchase The Mediator. See  pricing and purchase information. Limited time generous discount to judges and teachers.
  • The Mediator now handles many resolutions per issue as well as splittable issues. Both types of issues can be easily resolved together.
  • The user interface has been speeded up and made easier to use.
    You be the judge:
     
      You have two daughters. You have one orange. They both want it. What do you do? One answer below. 
    You be the negotiator:

    You are in the midst of a complicated negotiation. Right now, of all the many possible ways of structuring an offer, how easy is it for you to generate the top offers that gives gives your negotiating partner as much as possible of what they want while still giving you 85% of what you want?  The Mediator does this with one click of a button.

    You be The Mediator:

    You have been retained by a couple to mediate the property  settlement in a divorce (or estate settlement, or...). Each person knows how much each item is worth to them.  They want you to create an agreement which maximizes each person's happiness while at the same time being fair (each side gets the same percent of what they want) and envy -free (neither side would prefer what the other received).  How easy would it be for you to do this?  The Mediator does this with one click of a button.

    You be the undecided litigant:

    You are trying to decide whether or not to go to trial in a suit and have a fairly good idea of what the probability of winning is and what would be the costs and payoff of both winning and losing. You want to know what would be the expected value of going to court. Can you do this now? The Mediator does this with one slide of a scrollbar.

    The Mediator will guarantee to find the best possible agreements between two people . The real value of this program lies in the realization that different people have their own idea about how important the issues are or how much the issues are worth. It is possible then to find envy-free agreements in which all parties feel as if they've gotten the best deal. It can be used as an aid to all parties in any negotiation, mediation, or arbitration  who wish to easily determine the best agreements to reach or offers to make. It can be used in situations as varied as Alternative Dispute Resolution, business contract negotiations, international treaty compromises, management - labor contract negotiations, and psychotherapy. Judges, lawyers, mediators, negotiators, arbitrators, businessmen, union representatives, psychologists, and problem solvers of all types will enjoy the the peace of mind in knowing that have left no option overlooked in their search for optimal solutions. 

       
        This program will allow you to easily enter the areas of conflict, assign preferences for both parties, and automatically calculate the fair, equitable, and envy-free maximization of those preferences. 
     
     

    Try it for yourself:

    Instructions

    • Wait for the program to download, press the Run Demo button and then select the 'Show The Mediator' box.
    • Position and arrange the windows to size if desired.
    • Load a pre-entered conflict from the Load: choice list. (or use the Edit menu to add new issues yourself)
    • Change the values either with the sliders or directly and then press the Decide button.
    • To sort any column just press the button at the top of that column.
    • To make your own agreement, just select the button on the row of the issue or option you wish to choose or swap.
    • The best agreements page shows many different possible agreements.  To get a detailed look at any one just press the button in the left hand column of that row and the agreement page will change accordingly
    • In this demo version you may not use the File Save and File Open options.

    Inputs:

  • On the top of the main screen:
    • Title - how you wish to refer to this negotiation
    • Party1 name, Party2 name - who the parties are.
    • Make: 
      • P1 points = P2 points - find only those agreements where each party gets the same amount. (fair)
      • P1 pts better than __  find only those agreements where party #1 gets at least this amount (or at most this amount if we are dealing with minimizing loss).
      • P2 pts better than __  find only those agreements where party #2 gets at least this amount (or at most this amount if we are dealing with minimizing loss).
  • On the 'How to Decide' card:
    • Value is: gain/loss
      • Selecting gain will find the agreements with the maximum values for each party.
      • Selecting loss will find the agreements with the minimum values for each party.
    • Decide by best- you have three choices.  If any of the items are 'splittable' then it makes no difference which one you choose, they will all give the same result. If none of the items are splittable then it may be possible for the parties to end up with unequal points. These options will allow you to determine how to decide in such a case.
      • best for person behind (maximin) - Assuming that value is gain,  this option will find the agreement which maximizes the value for the person with the lesser points.  If value is loss then it minimizes such value. It is preferred by Raiffa as it is easy to explain and gives good results.
      • p1 * p2 (Nash)  This option maximizes the product of the two parties points.  It is preferred by Nash, the Nobel prize winning economist.
      • p1 + p2  - This option maximizes the sum of the parties points.  It is NOT recomended as it can give poor results.  It is only given here so you can see that such is the case and to find those agreements with the highest possible total values. It may be possible to use these agreements as a starting point to generate more efficient options. 
  • On the issues card, for each issue:
    • Issue - the issue name
    • P1 value - the first party's valuation (usually in $)
    • P2 value - the second party's valuation
        •  

    Outputs:

    • P1 pts, P2 pts - the  partys' valuation as a percent of their total valuation.
    • P1 gets, P2 gets - what each party gets (as a percent of their total valuation).
    • P1 %, P2 % - what percent of the split item each party will receive.
    • P1 rcvd, P2 rcvd - how much each thinks they will receive (in their own valuation $).
    • P1->P2 shows what person 1's valuation for each item would have to be in order that his or her total valuation equals that of person 2. (similarly for the column P2->P1).
    • court value - a third party valuation.
    • P1->court, P2->court - court's view of each party's valuation.
    • P1/P2 - the ratio of the first party's value to the second party's value.
  • Pre - Agreement card
    • This is a templat of the start of an agreement to agree.
    • To print out any of these cards you must copy the page by use of the provided button an  paste it into any word processing program and print from there.
  • Worksheet
    • This card provides a worksheet for the parties each to fill out.  It is meant to be used by a mediator or judge.
  • Agreement
    • This is where the program or user caluclated agreement will appear.
  • Person1 info
    • This shows Person1's valuation as percentages.  It is intended to be sent to a third party who then inputs these numbers into their own copy of The Mediator in order to perform the calculation for both parties in confidence. The numbers are in percentages so that not even the human mediator need know the true valuation.
  • Tab-bles - tab separated fields of information suitable for copying to a word processor or spreadsheet program.
    • The Agreement - a copy of the Issues card
    • Best Agreements - a copy of the Best Agreements frame
    • Your BATNA - a copy of Your Best Alternative to a Negotiate Agreement  calculator.
    • Their BATNA - a copy of Their Best Alternative to a Negotiate Agreement  calculator.
  • BATNA - Screens to calculate both your own and the other party's best alternative to a negotiate agreement. Sliding any scrollbar recalulates the BATNA. Foreach sub-card:
    • Inputs:
      • Number of possible future states - How many different things could happen in the future? (2-9)
      • which are/are not mutually exclusive. If the future states cannot all occur then choose are. Example - You are found liable, or you are not found liable. If the future states could all occur at the same time then choose are not. Example - You could go on vacation, ride a bike , and look for fishing holes, all at the same time, or one after the other.  The main idea is that doing one does not preclude doing any of the others.
      • For each state -
        • State name
        • Probability - how likely the state is (100 = it has to happen)
        • Value - What the net return to you will be if the state happens.
    • Outputs:
      • Expected Value - the product of the probabilty and the value.
      • Totals - each column is added up
  • Header/Footers
    • These headers and footers will appear on any of the text output cards.

    The Examples:
     
    • 2-item conflict
      • Assume the points shown reflect their true feelings.
      • Assume Ron knows somehow that Carolyn will declare as she did.
      • Assume Ron does not wish to be fair.
      • Question: What point distribution should Ron declare to maximize his payoff?
    • Jolis v. Jolis Jolis v. Jolis 446NYS2d 138 Brams and Taylor(1996)
      • This is based on a true case. After a long marriage, some of the usual suspects, protracted and costly litigation and appeals, the court  forced the wife out of the house.
      • These numbers show how the wife may have been able to save the mansion.
      • Assume the husband knows the wife will put most of her points on the mansion.
      • Assume the husband is willing to give up trying to get the mansion.
      • Question: Would he be better off putting only minimal points on the mansion and dispersing those points around to the other items?
    • DEC vs. Riverside -  Harvard Program on Negotiation   other POG case studies 
      • This example shows how easily The Mediator can handle many issues with many resolutions per issue.
      • An environmental agency (DEC) and Riverside Lumber Company are in negotiation on several issues from the type of cleanup equipment that Riverside will be required to install to the kinds of incentives possible to make them comply.
      • The problem is one of minimizing loss.
    • The Panama Canal Treaty - Brams and Taylor(1996) from Raiffa (1982)
      • The items are those announced in June 1974 as the result of two rounds of negotiation. A consulting firm interviewed Ambassador-At-Large Ellsworth Bunker and the other members of the US negotiating team about both their own preferences and what they thought the Panamanian preferences were. The numbers they came up with are the numbers used here.
      • One issue to look at here has to do with whether or not the items are separable. An item is separable from another item, if it is worth the same to you whether or not you get the other item.
      • Question: Would either the US or Panama be better off if allowed to lump two or more items into one?
      • Question: In particular, when would the US be better off lumping, say, US defense rights and US military rights into one? And when wouldn't it want to do this?
      • In other words, if the combined item was the one which needed to be split, when would this be a bad thing?
    • Camp David - paper by Brams & Togman in Harvey & Mor(1997)
    • Spratley Islands - paper by Denoon & Brams (1997)
      • These are some sparsely inhabited islands in the South China Sea which may have oil. No country has a clear title to any of them by any criteria. The ASEAN nations are: Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei. CHINA is The People's Republic of China and Taiwan acting as one.
      • There are six different examples comparing various ways the parties may try to maximize different agendas:
        • CHINA - agendas: Political cooperation, Military dominance, and Economic gain
        • ASEAN Nations - agenda: Political cooperation and economic gain together, and Concentration of control

    Other sites:

    You be the Judge:
      Ask the daughters why they want the orange. One daughter wanted to scrape the rind to put in some frosting, the other wanted to make some juice. Give each 100% of what they want. p.s.: Try to convince them to dry the seeds, compost what's left, plant the seeds in the compost, .... 

    Sources:
      Special thanks:
     
      We would like to specially thank Professor Brams for sending reprints of some of his work. We hope in particular that the parties to the current Spratly Island controversy will use his numbers as a starting point for resolving this conflict, and that someone calls to thank him. 
    Feedback:
      Final Note:
     
      Nothing here should be interpreted in such a way that you think any person or organization mentioned above endorses the use of The Mediator.

    Run the Mediator:

    Wait until a selection box appears then select the box to show The Mediator:  Then make a selection from the Load selection list. The best agreements will be automatically calculated.   

About the author:
 
     Ron Surratt is a computer professional with 20 years of experience. Currently he is involved with community based mediation in California.  When he was in charge of advanced applications research for Quotron Systems, at the time, the largest US provider of real-time stock market information and analytics to the brokerage industry, he created financial analysis tools still in use today by thousands of brokers worldwide.  These instruments are used daily to value billions of dollars worth of financial trades.
      He also has been an instructor and consultant in Object Oriented development to major sofware companies around the world, a developer
    of successful video games (remember the Intellivision?), and a high school teacher.
       He likes hiking, reading, golf, and playing with the new puppy. 
Contact us
[an error occurred while processing this directive]