Originally from:

Journal of American Arbitration (JAA) - Vol. 4, No. 2

Preview Page

ARTICLES

Neutrality and the Role of Conflict
Professionals
By Bernard S. Mayer and Robert M. Ackerman

I. INTRODUCTION
This paper addresses the larger question of neutrality and the role of
conflict professionals, which we see as a question very distinct from that
of mediator or arbitrator neutrality. The concept of mediator and
arbitrator neutrality raises issues of whether we can be neutral, what it
means to be neutral, what are the ways in which neutrality can be
disempowering, what parties want from third-parties, how we achieve
credibility in conflict, what are the cultural variables regarding belief
systems about neutrality, and what are the ethical limits on our
commitment to neutrality. These are very important questions, but they
avoid what has come to be the most important question we have to face
as a field about neutrality.
Parts of this paper are based on the argument made in Beyond
Neutrality: Confronting the Crisis in Conflict Resolution.1 For some, the
title Beyond Neutrality implies an argument for the need for mediators to
abandon a strict adherence to neutrality. That is a discussion that is
worth having but it is neither the point of the book nor our greatest
concern. Indeed, the heart of most professional ethical commitments is