Dana Casperson: Conflict Engagement Specialist, Best-Selling Author, TEDx speaker, Award-Winning Performing Artist

Mediate This! Podcast:

Hi, my name is Sydney Mitchell. Hi, I’m Matthew Brickman, Florida Supreme court mediator. Welcome to the Mediate This! Podcast where we discuss everything mediation and conflict resolution.

Matthew Brickman (00:01):
Alright I’m excited for this podcast episode to welcome Dana Caspersen. Dana, welcome to the show.

Dana Caspersen (00:22):
Thank you so much. A pleasure to be here.

Matthew Brickman (00:24):
Now, Dana, um, from what I understand, you were a conflict engagement specialist. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. You’re a bestselling author, you’ve got two books. Your first book came out, I guess 10 years ago, 2015, called Changing the Conversation, 17 Principles, uh, of Conflict Resolution. And then you just released a brand new book, uh, in January called Conflict is an Opportunity, 20 Fundamental Decisions for Navigating Difficult Times, which I’m excited to talk to you about. Yeah, thank you. Uh, you’re also a TEDx speaker, an award-winning performing artist, I believe Ballet right

Dana Caspersen (01:02):
Dancer. Mm-hmm <affirmative>.

Matthew Brickman (01:03):
Yeah. Um, you’ve worked with individuals, organizations, communities worldwide as a trainer, coach, consultant, dialogue designer. I wanna talk to you about that. I don’t know what that is, but that sounds interesting,

Dana Caspersen (01:15):
<laugh>.

Matthew Brickman (01:16):
Um, and, um, and so you empower people and organizations to navigate complex and challenging situations. Um, so, uh, I’m excited to, you know, find out more about you, your, uh, approach as a mediator, as a conflict resolution specialist. Um, being that, you know, myself, I’m a mediator. I’ve been doing it for 18 years. I specialize in family conflicts, so, you know, high energy, high dynamics, high emotion

Dana Caspersen (01:50):
Mm-hmm

Matthew Brickman (01:50):
<affirmative>. Um, but you’ve got years and years of, uh, experience and I’m excited to, you know, dig into about, you know, the new book. Uh, conflict is an opportunity. You know, a lot of times people look at conflict and they run from it instead of embracing it and figuring out, what can I learn from this.

Dana Caspersen (02:11):
Mm-hmm <affirmative>.

Matthew Brickman (02:12):
From, so, welcome.

Dana Caspersen (02:14):
Oh, thank you so much. Yeah. So my experience is the same as, and it was my initial personal experience too, to try to run from conflict or try to maneuver behind the scenes, to kind of tamp things down. And eventually I realized, okay, this just makes things worse. <laugh> and then conflict either sis or explodes, or it degrades our quality of life in so many ways, in so many areas. And so I started studying in conflict, kind of out of self defense of like, there’s just gotta be a better way to be in my life. And then as I saw how things can really unfold differently when, when we approach conflict differently, I started studying, got a degree, and began working in the field, um, with the real focus for me of how do people develop their own capacity to step into the challenges of conflict with, with some confidence, with some skill, with more ease, with less stress, with adaptability and doing it not through particular tools or techniques, but you’re really building up your own internal mindset so that you’re like, okay, woo, this might be a little hard right now, but I’m gonna take a step back.

Dana Caspersen (03:27):
I’m gonna say, right, what might be possible here? Like you say, what don’t I understand yet about this? What do we need to understand between us? What are we trying to figure out and figure out what might that make possible? If we look at what’s coming from both sides in terms of what people need, what they’re interested in, what they’re afraid of, what they’re concerned about, if we see that all as information kind of a map that says, okay, here’s where constructive change might happen Yes. If we look at it instead of pushing it down or running away from it. Yeah. Well,

Matthew Brickman (03:59):
And, and a lot of times in mediation, I I, you know, especially when I’m dealing with a husband and a wife or a mother and a father, and we’re, and we’re doing stuff, I say, you know, a lot of times people approach conflict face to face, and that can seem like me against you combative. And I said, what you need to do is turn shoulder to shoulder. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. Now you’re unified to figure out what do we have in common, and then how do we break through and embrace what we’re having to deal with, like, running from it, just like you said, running from it. It, it may rear its head later, it could be bigger and worse, or it has already degraded the relationship, which makes it hard to work through it. And so just how you view it can really, you know, change how you can work through it. And as, as a professional, you know, um, how do you help people then change their mindset and embrace it? Yeah. Like what techniques do you use to help people go, wait a second, I don’t need to run from it. I can breathe, I can look at it from a different perspective, and then we can move together. What techniques or what do you, what do you talk about in use?

Dana Caspersen (05:18):
Hmm. So first of all, what you brought up there I think is really beautiful. This idea of moving shoulder to shoulder. And I think of that because I also do come from a dance background, I think of things choreographically. So how are we shaping the environment that we’re in? How are we shaping the configuration that we are in, or that we understand ourself to be in? So, like you say there, there’s an internal mindset all the time that also has kind of a choreographic aspect to it that thinks, okay, this is a standoff, or this is a fight, or I’m running from danger. And what it means to, first of all, give that a place till you can see it more clearly. Sure. And that’s one of the things that I do. And sometimes I really use physicality to do that. Just like you said, you can either use it as a way to, um, highlight and, and throw light on what it is that you’re already thinking internally and how that’s impacting what you’re able to see as possible and in your relationships and in their conversations and in the overall situation.

Dana Caspersen (06:19):
And so, sometimes I will, um, sometimes I’ll literally ask people to walk side by side and have a conversation instead of sitting down at a table. Um, sometimes I will work with individuals to first of all, get a better sense of what they’re thinking for themselves. Like, oh, wow, yeah, I’m really thinking that I need to put this wall up and they’re impossible and I just need to win this situation. Get out of it, <laugh>. And once you realize, okay, that’s what I’m those, that’s where my attention is right now. So I, one of my, uh, primary things I think about is where do we put our attention? Because that’s the power that we have to shape our internal experience and also our impact on the world. So are we getting really focused in on attack and defense? And are we just kind of circling around in that without ever letting our emotions, which I see as kind of flags that are being waived by what’s needed, um, without letting our emotions guide us down to this level of like, okay, this is hard, but what really matters?

Dana Caspersen (07:21):
What really matters to me? What do I know what really matters to the other person? And being able to ask the other person, uh, without attacking them to say, okay, you know, obviously we have some different ideas going on here, but I really wanna understand what matters to you. Yeah. What’s the most important thing to you here? So, training people to see attention as a, as a movable, um, power that we have, we can focus on, um, instead on this level of what matters, we can focus on the decisions that are ours to make, how we’re choosing to respond, uh, what mindset we’re building by what we practice every day.

Matthew Brickman (08:01):
So, so, so you said something that was interesting, uh, about, you know, not even knowing what really you’re even negotiating, what, what is important to you. Mm-hmm. I just recently, so in September of 2024, um, I took a, uh, executive education course called Persuasion Without Authority at Columbia Business School, uh, up in New York. And it was really interesting because what they did is in the first like five minutes of this course with I think it was 20, 20, 23 professionals from around the world that, that flew in for this, they split the class in half. They gave us a scenario, uh, to negotiate and sent us away, had us record it, and then brought us back and said, okay, who was, you know, what was the point system? Mm-hmm <affirmative>. And it was interesting because out of all of these professionals and what the professor was, was showing us was he said, look, you know, here’s why. Here’s why you guys are here, even though you’re all high level, you know, people in your profession, but you have no idea how to negotiate. And he showed us, based on the number system, that there was only three groups that even knew what they were doing. But what was interesting was he said, look, you know what, who can tell me what the top five things in order were priority of the person you were negotiating with?

Dana Caspersen (09:36):
Mm-hmm

Matthew Brickman (09:36):
<affirmative>. And what was interesting, Dana was hardly anybody could. He goes, I just sent you for 30 minutes to have a conversation with the other side, and none of you can tell me what was even important to them. And you’re negotiating. He goes, you’re not listening, you’re not asking the right questions. You’re not paying attention. And what that did was it opened up everyone’s mind, put their guard guard down so that they could then learn what he wanted to teach for the remainder of the week. But it was interesting that we’re negotiating. It’s like, okay, what was motivating our counterpart that we’re negotiating with? Yeah. Most people did not. There were three people in the entire class that actually knew, okay, this was priority number one, priority number two, priority number three. And so as a mediator, that’s one of the things that I do at the beginning of a mediation is I’m like, okay, what are we here for?

Matthew Brickman (10:32):
Mm-hmm <affirmative>. Okay, what’s most important to you? And then I ask them, okay, well, what are your biggest fears and hesitations? <laugh>. Yeah. Because if I know what’s their goal and what’s the pitfall they’re trying to avoid as a, as a conflict resolution specialist, as a mediator, I’m able to then help them navigate. Because if I don’t even know, and sometimes they don’t even know, you know? Yeah. You know, I think sometimes we’ve gotta draw it out of them asking those open-ended questions and mm-hmm <affirmative>. Exploratory questions going, what do you want from this? I just want it to be over. Okay.

Dana Caspersen (11:13):
<laugh>, what will that help with? Tell,

Matthew Brickman (11:14):
Tell me what that looks like in your universe.

Dana Caspersen (11:18):
Yeah. Yeah. I think that’s absolutely, and that’s what really interests me in terms of working with individuals as well, is how do individuals, if there’s no mediator around to help them, right? How do they develop their own capacity to say, okay, what is it that, what does matter to me here? And to be able to really develop a mindset of curiosity that helps you kind of step out of this sort of fortress of defense or, or some kind of attack modality and a real curiosity that says, okay, I just, I disagree with this person. I might not even like them, but I need their information to be able to understand how we’re gonna move forward in, in a way that works. Because a one-sided, of course, strategy will probably fail pretty quickly. And so what does it mean to build up this mindset that says what might be possible here? Um, what does that, what’s important to you? What matters? Yeah.

Matthew Brickman (12:13):
Well, and, and a lot of times, you know, uh, and, and I’m sure that, you know, dealing with maybe organizations and whatnot, sometimes the conflict may be just a one-off. Like, we’ve got a business deal and you know what, we’re not gonna see ’em again. We’re not gonna deal with them again. Yeah. But then you’ve got the, the, the personal relationships where mm-hmm <affirmative>. Like, you know, if I’m doing a divorce and they’ve got kids, they’ve got an ongoing daily interaction year after year, that they really need those tools. So my question is, in your new book Hmm,

Dana Caspersen (12:45):
Uh,

Matthew Brickman (12:45):
20 Fundamental Decisions for Navigating Difficult Times, do you talk about, um, you know, the, the tools for the individual, like, you know, are, are there, are there, is this a good resource for them to, you know, to if they don’t have a mediator, if they don’t have you? If they don’t have me Yeah. But they can learn their own internal techniques to deal with that.

Dana Caspersen (13:11):
Yes, absolutely. The book is based around these is is set up to be a, a guide to be with you, kind of a friendly, so

Matthew Brickman (13:19):
It’s like a self-help guide

Dana Caspersen (13:20):
Kind of. Yeah. Yeah. And, and I set it up to, in the way that I find is most helpful, which is what are the decisions that I’m already making in every conflict and how is the way I’m approaching them impacting me so that you make these decisions more visible and really start to make them consciously. So it’s set up in these 20, uh, short chapters. Each chapter has a practice section so you can really integrate, um, the ideas. And the first, there’s three sections. One is, what am I doing? So what are all the things that I’m doing internally before I get involved with anybody? And then the second section is, what are we doing? So what are the kind of patterns that are in place between us? What decisions are being made that are impacting our interactions? And then what are the systems doing?

Dana Caspersen (14:03):
Because we’re always already being impacted by systems. So what decisions are we making in relationship to existing systems? And it’s very functional book. So you could either read through it from the beginning and just kind of work with the practice sections, build up your own capacity to be able to step into those challenges and think, okay, okay, where am I? What am I doing? What would I like to do? What steps do I wanna take next? And, or you may be wanting to analyze a situation you’re in or prepare for a difficult conflict. And then you can go through these 20 questions and say, okay, uh, which one’s resonating? I’m gonna go to that chapter, I wanna read that and help me out. So it’s not like a big textbook that you have to slog through. Sure. But instead, it’s a very targeted, useful handbook to have on your hand hand.

Dana Caspersen (14:49):
And it might also be some people say if they’re just finding themselves getting stressed out with something, they just pick it up and open to a page. Because it’s also set up in a way that there’s a lot of space and around ideas so that you can find an idea quickly that just kind of helps you ground yourself, get yourself back into the mindset you want to be in. Um, and, and it’s functional in the sense that this is not something you have to decide whether or not to do. You’re already doing it. Yeah. So, so that we notice, okay, I’m already in this, I’m already doing this practice. How is what I’m currently doing impacting me? Is it, is it how I want to be in the world? And what decisions can I make differently, um, that will actually help me move in my real goals?

Dana Caspersen (15:31):
’cause sometimes, like you say, um, if, let’s say some parents are in, um, in a big ongoing conflict, they can get into a zero sum mentality, kind of a win-lose situation. But that’s not their ultimate goal. It starts to seem like the goal. Yeah. But their, their goal is probably to have a good life for their kid to be safe, peace, be able to go on with themselves rest. Yeah. And so to take a step back and say, what are my decisions currently supporting or preventing, what do I want to support and prevent? Yeah. And, and then to make those decisions consciously.

Matthew Brickman (16:05):
So back in 2019, it’s interesting. In 2019, um, I took an executive education program, um, at Harvard Law School and they, they had given us a tool that I have used ever since, similar to that in a mediation setting where when, um, and you had mentioned before, like, like when, when things seem to start going in a circle mm-hmm. I call it, alright, we’re circling the wagons, we’re repeating ourselves. Mm-hmm. We’re going nowhere. We’re getting stuck in the mud. Yeah. You know, and, and usually I know that that’s when like everything has been said, there’s like, now they’re just seeming they, they seem blocked. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. So that’s when then I break out a tool and I hand them a sheet and I said, okay, now do let the other person see your answers, but I need you to fill this out. So we sort of just put pause on the whole conversation mm-hmm <affirmative>.

Matthew Brickman (17:01):
And on the sheet it says, it says, what are the top five reasons why it’s better to settle than to go to court and let a judge decide on the other side why is it better to go to, to the judge decide than to settle. And it says, what will I gain by settling rather than going to court? And then what will I gain by going to court rather than settling? And I said, okay, now fill this out. Now don’t show the other person what you’re doing. Keep your answers private. So they’re like sneaky filling it out and and whatnot. But what’s interesting, one of the things that they had taught us was, as soon as hand goes to paper, emotions cannot exist. The brain kicks in Mm mm-hmm <affirmative>. And all of a sudden whatever emotion we were dealing with in the room, it’s like, it just gets sucked out.

Matthew Brickman (17:52):
It’s the coolest thing to feel and watch because all of a sudden all that tension and that clouded emotion gets sucked down. And what I tell people often in, in, in a negotiation is I said, look, think of yourself like a fore burner stove. You are emotional. If I was to say, take your emotion out of this Dana. Well, okay, now you’re either a sociopath or you know you’re gonna be a serial killer. No, you’re, you’re emotional human being. Yeah. But you can’t let your most important decisions be run by your emotions. ’cause today it’s here tomorrow. It’s here. I said, so what we need to do is we need to simply not take your emotions off the stove, put it on the back burner, and let’s be front burner thinkers. Let’s put logic and reason and let’s talk about things. Yes, we are still emotional, but we can’t let the emotions drive this.

Matthew Brickman (18:44):
So what’s interesting is when they start jotting down their answers, all of a sudden the emotion subsides. They’re still emotional, but it lets the brain kick in and be like, okay, what are the pros and cons? And what does this really look like when they’re done? I said, okay, gimme your papers. I said, alright, now we’re gonna exchange ’em. And they’re like, and of course they’re like, well, I thought it was secret. I said it was, but I didn’t say it was gonna stay secret <laugh>. So, so now I say, okay, exchange. And then I have each of them read out loud what the other person said. And Dana, what’s interesting is a lot of times they’re in the same head space mm-hmm <affirmative>. And I’m, and that’s where then I can, I, you know, then they can see without the emotion clouding it, they’re able to start to look towards that goal and go, instead of face to face, shoulder to shoulder, because they see, wait a second, we both think that the same outcome is better figuring this out rather than going to a judge.

Matthew Brickman (19:43):
Yeah. And it was such a great tool. Um, and I have not had the opportunity I wanna move into to, to this. I have not had the opportunity to really deal with businesses like that. Or in a corpus setting. I could imagine it would work the same way. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. Um, probably not as emotional or maybe, I mean, I’ve, you know, I’ve heard stories of unions and <laugh>, they can get pretty emotional. Yeah. Um, but, you know, it was, it was a great tool to really, like you said, like, okay, well let’s figure out what are the goals? Do we have the same goals? Do we not have the same goals? How do we achieve those goals? And a lot of times I find that as people are trying to move forward, there can be, I mean, I’m sure as, as you know, helping people resolve conflict, we, we are very creative. We could find 20 different ways to get to the same end goal. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. They’re gonna argue all day long about which, which of the 20 is better. Instead of, okay, look, here’s the end goal, who cares how we get there? How do you want to get there? Yeah. And sometimes reverse engineering, it actually helps better, because otherwise we just argue all day on the method of reaching the end goal.

Dana Caspersen (21:00):
Exactly. I love that because I see what you’re doing. There is something I think about a lot when I’m working training people or working in, in groups is what is the question between us? So previously in your scenario there that the question had been, you know, who, whose strategies are are gonna be the best ones and who’s gonna win them. But you introduced a different question, a common question that contained them both. And then through having them read it, you had them, you really made it clear that both people’s experience was in that, in relationship to this question. Yeah. And I find it’s the same thing in, in, uh, in business or in, you know, educational se settings is that oftentimes the question that people feel like they’re holding between them is an adversarial one. And when you take the time to, to step it back and say, okay, so if we look first of all at where that adversarial question is gonna take us, I think of this Buddhist phrase that says, revulsion is the foot of meditation.

Dana Caspersen (21:58):
Meaning people have to get sick enough of something to be able to put in the work, um, to change. And so it oftentimes, and it, it has to be like, kind of like you said, what, you know, what, what’s gonna happen if I really go hard on this, um, adversarial thing? Okay, we’re probably gonna end up with this ongoing comp, whatever, make a scenario. So they feel, because the emotion is part of it too, that they can feel like how awful that’s gonna be if we continue like this for the next 20 years, oh my god’s life’s gonna just suck. This is terrible. Yeah. And so to have that, okay, so that’s what would happen with that. So the, the common question, for example, that you introduced there was what do our current options offer us and how do they connect to what our real goals are on a deeper level?

Dana Caspersen (22:41):
And then people had that between them and they’re commonly working on it. And I find it’s the same thing in any organization is that people very quickly get into a strategic argument. Like you say, they could go all day, they could go for years. But once the, once the common question gets introduced, and there might be several questions that need to happen in advance of that before we can understand what that question is. Um, and that, and all those in all those informations you had them write down, help us then ultimately shape a new question. That is the common question for going forward.

Matthew Brickman (23:14):
So, so whether you’re coaching individuals or dealing with groups or organizations, what tips do you have for like to, to help people like remain calm, cool, collective, like in stressful situations or in negotiations?

Dana Caspersen (23:33):
Yeah, so there’s some, some somatic things that help some body-based things that can help. One is, uh, one is the, one of the most powerful things is breathing. So right when you inhale, make your exhales longer so that you get your nervous system kind of down regulated. You can always do that no matter where you are. Sometimes if you find yourself really, uh, escalating out in a way that you don’t want to, it can be helpful to think about a person or an even an object that kind of personifies the type of energy you’d like to be engaged with. Imagine them next to you lending you that energy so that you let your body physically help you calm down. And another little practice that I do with people is a lot of times it helps to work on this stuff in advance because when you’re in a middle of a conflict, it’s too late to practice what you want to do <laugh>. Yeah. So, so a lot of what this book is about is how do I practice in advance so that I’m more likely to be able to be in the mindset I want? So a little practice

Matthew Brickman (24:32):
Preventative maintenance, like Yeah, like the get ready, do your prep work before you get to the negotiation table. Yeah. Preventative maintenance. So you’re not sitting there and then doing damage control.

Dana Caspersen (24:44):
Exactly. And to notice that you are already doing practice. And what is the practice that you’re already doing? How is that, what’s that supporting? So like a little practice I do sometimes with people say, okay, imagine yourself in a super defensive mode. You’re angry, you’re defensive. Just really get into it physically how it feels and sit how you might sit. And so to have people just feel how that feels to tighten down and get how narrow your mind get and your body gets tight. And then shake that off and say, okay, if you were feeling really open and like curious about this person and willing to talk, how do you feel physically? And people tend to notice an opening and a kind of an uprightness and a, an an opening of what they can see. And then I ask them to go back and forth physically between those things so they start to notice that that is changeable. Yeah. We have a lot of impact on our own attitude and mindset so that you can get used to, okay, I, I can actually access that even when I’m stressed out. I might, I might habitually go into this other mode, but I can direct my attention again, back to attention to say, okay, how do I wanna be? All right, let me just take a step back here. I wanna get into this curious mindset. Okay, what don’t I know yet?

Matthew Brickman (25:53):
Yeah.

Dana Caspersen (25:53):
What do I wanna ask this person? Uh, what do I need to find out? And then one really super valuable tool is to get used to making requests and requests versus demands. So if you make a demand, which is often what people do in a conflict, then you’re, you’re leaving the person just with two, you’re putting, you’re creating, again, back to this kind of choreographic thing. You make a demand, you’ve created a scenario where a person only has two choices. Yes. They can comply to, yeah. They can comply to your thing or they can defy you. Right. And both of those promote resentment and anger and simmering. But if you make request,

Matthew Brickman (26:30):
Well, it goes back to what you were saying. It creates that win-lose scenario instead of a win-win. ’cause if I comply, I’ve lost you lost. If I deny I’m trying to win. But do you really win long

Dana Caspersen (26:41):
Term? Right. Nobody’s won. Yeah. Yeah. And the difference I see is that when, and this is something I work with a lot when I in trainings, is developing a request because a request is something that is coming from what matters. So you start from what matters to you, and you might find out what the other person’s thinking, what they’re concerned about, what you’re concerned about, and then to make a doable request in relationship to like, okay, it sounds like, you know, we’re, we’re both having concerns around this sounds like this is important to you and I’m really caring about this. Here’s some things that I’m wondering, would you be willing to do blah, blah, blah. And it might be something simple like, would you be willing to sit down and talk about how we want to structure the kids’ sleeping schedule, for example? Right. Um, and a request, you know, it’s a real request if it’s okay if the person says no. Right. Because you stay connected to what matters to you. And that’s just kind of an information gathering thing. They say no. Oh, okay. So is it because of this? So then you can start to unpack these things and it places again, this question between you to figure out so that the two of you are working on something, even if you’re in disagreement, as opposed to, um, being in reaction to a demand which already spins off into a secondary conflict.

Matthew Brickman (27:53):
Yeah. So, so as you’re using a request as a valuable tool Hmm. Um, you know, probing and, and you know, sometimes I find that even with that you can use it as a tool because you may find out that something’s important to someone else, and it isn’t to you, but you could trade it for something that’s important to you. I mean, just mm-hmm <affirmative>. Being able to have that conversation and explore instead of just going Yes or no demand. Yes or no.

Dana Caspersen (28:24):
Yeah.

Matthew Brickman (28:25):
What if, what if you just have that person on the other side that is just no, no, no, no. Like everything is just difficult. No. Yeah. And they sort of just like, they’re there to negotiate, but they’re not there to negotiate because it’s their way or the highway and they’re not going to move. Okay. Then what?

Dana Caspersen (28:48):
Yeah. So first of all, I think it can be really useful to, um, put a question between you. Like, okay, it sounds like you really don’t want to, all the stuff I’m suggesting doesn’t make sense to you, what doesn’t make sense to you. So then they’ll come at you with a bunch of strategies. Then you can say, oh, okay, so, so that sounds like it makes sense. What will that help with? So that you help them even though they’re coming at you strategy. Yeah. You help them name more clearly what it is that they care about. Because of course, everybody gets into conflict because they care about something. Yeah. Nobody’s not there. Nobody’s there because they don’t care. Sure. So even the person who’s like, no, we have to do it my way and shut up and whatever, um, they care about something. And if you can figure that out, you’re much more likely to be able to say, okay, so it sounds like this really matters to you.

Dana Caspersen (29:35):
And oftentimes that acknowledgement, as of course, you know, is one of the primary things that helps get conversations going because we usually skip over acknowledgement. We’re like, I don’t need to. That’ll just be supporting them. But to say it sounds like, okay, it sounds like for you autonomy is really important. You know, you really wanna be able to make your own decisions and then that they can be like, yeah. So then that’s your first Yeah, yeah. <laugh>, and then you say, okay, and it sounds like in the situation now that’s not happening and you’re feeling kind of stuck. Is that, is that it? Yeah. Yeah. And then you can start to unfold. Okay. And figure out what it is that, what would, what would be the components of a situation that would work for both of you to make sure you’re trying to figure that out. And then of course, if there’s someone who’s really not there in good faith and it doesn’t, doesn’t wanna have a conversation, then you come back to the question, okay, what is my decision to make in relationship to that? Sure. Instead of trying to, uh, jam through something that’s not your decision to make, a lot of times we get stuck wasting your energies there. So to keep checking back, what’s my decision to make in this current situation? What are my goals? Are, are are the decisions I’m making in connection to those goals? Yeah.

Matthew Brickman (30:45):
Yeah. Well, and, and, and you know, for me doing divorce is like, okay, if you’re not gonna figure this out, a judge will figure it out. Yeah. And so, and so when I, so sometimes when, when I’m dealing with a difficult person like that, I’m like, look, you know, today, today is your opportunity to have input and a say in the outcome. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. Now you can choose not to, and then you’ll go to court and you’ll lose all decision making authority. That’s still a choice.

Dana Caspersen (31:15):
Yeah.

Matthew Brickman (31:15):
It’s still a choice. So if you don’t want to have a choice and input and to say, that’s a choice, and then somebody will make it for you. And that sometimes then breaks through that because it’s like, you know, they may just be there. And again, a lot of times it’s emotional that they’re just saying, no, I remember Dana, it was, they always say, you never forget your first, I have never forgotten the first family divorce mediation I ever observed. When I was doing my certification, I had to do an observation. So I was co mediating with the director of mediation in a, in a judicial circuit. And it was a military divorce. And, and it was interesting ’cause I was there as the observer co mediator, but for the most part I was quiet watching and observing how this was going down. So the mediator was a woman, of course, the wife, a woman, her attorney was a woman.

Matthew Brickman (32:18):
And then the, um, then the husband was pro se had no attorney. And then I was sitting there observing and the attorney was appearing on the phone via his battleship that was getting ready to be deployed over to, uh, the Middle East. And so it was a very interesting dynamic because it was just a constant barrage of nos. Hmm. And anything that the mediator said, it was met with a no. Anything that his wife said was met with a no, anything that her attorney said was met with a no. So this was going on and just, it was sort of just getting to the stalemate. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. And I remember the, the mediator observe, or the, the, the mediator looked at me like across the table, like, you want to try something? And so, and so the first thing that popped into my head was I said to him, I said, Hey, this is Matthew Brickman. He’s, he’s like, okay. I said, okay. So what I hear is you’re not going to do this. You do not want to do this. You, this is non-negotiable. You’re, you’re absolutely opposed to this. Am I hearing this right? Yes. I said, well, look at that everybody, we finally have a yes on the table,

Dana Caspersen (33:45):
<laugh>.

Matthew Brickman (33:46):
Yes. And I, and so then I said, okay, would you possibly be open to this or this? And I started listing things and he is like, well, yeah, I’d be open to that and I’d be open to that. And what I found Dana Hmm. And it was a very important lesson I learned day one ever was, A lot of times even gender can come into play. Oh yeah. And power, there’s a power. And being that this guy was a high ranking male military figure mm-hmm <affirmative>. And then he had a of his wife and he, and she had a female attorney in power. And then you had the mediator female in power. The last thing this guy wanted in his divorce was three women telling him what to do with his stuff. But when I came on and I started going, okay, so you don’t wanna do this, you don’t wanna do this. Well what about this? And it was interesting ’cause everyone was going, did we just not say all of that and get nos? There was a dynamic there. Mm-hmm. But also there was a rephrasing of the question. There was a, alright, let me understand. These are all nos that got me a yes. And then we were able to start exploring, well, what other things? It took us 10 hours, but we got it all done.

Dana Caspersen (35:08):
Yeah. And and acknowledgement. That’s what you gave him. Yeah. Yeah.

Matthew Brickman (35:11):
And, and, but there was a pow I mean, we had so many variables. I mean, you had Yeah. Gender, you had power struggles between, you know, military attorney mm-hmm <affirmative>. It so many dynamics. Plus for her, the, the wife, you know, he had cheated on her. She was emotional, it was vindictive and you’re gonna pay. But also there was a feeling of abandonment. And then there was the fear of, how am I gonna do this alone with the two kids and do I have enough resources? I mean, you’ve got all of those things in play.

Dana Caspersen (35:46):
Yeah. And, and you know, what’s one thing, oh, sorry, go ahead. No,

Matthew Brickman (35:49):
No, no. Go

Dana Caspersen (35:50):
One, one thing that you’re bringing up power there. And I think that’s such a, a valuable thing. And a lot of times we see power as kind of monolithic who has more power. Right. And there’s a chapter actually in this new book that’s looking at sources of power, which sources of power are available and which are being endorsed. And it, and it goes through and looks at all the different kinds of power because a lot of times we feel powerless. Right. When actually there’s so much, so many different kinds of power that are available. And we can also align with other people in terms of how to build power. We can even build power with the people we’re in conflict with. Yeah. And to really take a look at this myriad, the myriad nature of power, uh, so that we, you know, and for example, in a situation where there is no mediator, there is nobody that a person who feels low power can still take a look at where they are, what’s available to them, and how, what they can access and also what they can endorse in the other person. ’cause sometimes we just endorse one aspect of them, and then that takes precedent. Yeah. But we can also, you also, you endorsed this guy’s ability to, uh, to move a little bit

Matthew Brickman (36:58):
Yeah. Have his power, not, not surrender. Yeah. Probably have his power and still be able to move along. Yeah. I had another one very recently being that we’re still talking about power.

Dana Caspersen (37:07):
Mm-hmm.

Matthew Brickman (37:09):
This shocked me, Dana. So I had a mediation last year. The husband appeared from prison virtual sitting in his jumpsuit next to his prison guard for his divorce. Okay. The wife was in her lawyer’s office. I’m thinking whatever she wants, she’s going to get, he’s in prison. Like there’s a definite power. Like she’s gonna ask it. He’s in prison. He doesn’t really have any power. And it is, I think it’s gonna be a quick mediation. Right. I was, I was shocked. I mean, I’ve been doing this for 18 years. I was shocked. This guy, no attorney in prison. Like you had just said he found his own power. Hmm. He actually had power. And this, this, this is, this is what happened. She wanted to get divorced. He’s in prison. He’s served one year, he’s got two more left. She just wants to get divorced and move on, but he’s got some things that he wants. Well, she’s like, well, you’re not getting them. And he said, well, then I do not consent to, uh, um, the, the prison transfers in order to show up in the court in person as I’m required in order for you to get your divorce and you can wait two years until I get out.

Dana Caspersen (38:48):
Okay.

Matthew Brickman (38:49):
I was like, what? This guy’s got power to negotiate because Yeah. In order to get divorced, if they didn’t figure it out today or on that day, then you know what, in order for, for that to happen, he’s gotta be transferred from the main prison. He’s gotta go through two different other jails to finally end up in the local jail. So he can go in front of the judge with her to actually have a trial. But that’s based on his consent. And he’s like, I’m not going to consent to it. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. Therefore you are not getting divorced. We’re gonna be married for the next two years. You can’t move on. And when I finally get released, then we’ll deal with this. He had, he found his own power, and it was power.

Dana Caspersen (39:34):
The decisions were his to make was

Matthew Brickman (39:35):
Shocked. I I, I’m like, what is a prisoner? What kind of power does a prisoner have? Well, he found his power.

Dana Caspersen (39:41):
Yeah. And I think that’s so applicable. You know, now in the world there’s so much chaos going on that, and people feel, I I find people are really feeling helpless a lot. Yeah. And that the focus on, okay, uh, I, the things I can and cannot impact, but to really look at what I can impact. Yeah. And within that, what kind of power do I have to, to be able to make the impacts I want to. So I think it’s a very important generative place that we have of what am I, again, paying attention to in terms of power? What might I pay attention to and what is it that I, I wanna move toward? Am I moving toward it? What’s gonna help me move toward it? Yeah.

Matthew Brickman:
Occasionally Sydney and I will be releasing Q&A bonus episodes where we’ll answer your questions and give you a personal shoutout.

Sydney Mitchell:
If you have a comment or question regarding anything that we discuss, email us at info@ichatmediation.com that’s info@ichatmediation.com and stay tuned to hear your shout out and have your question answered here on the show.

Matthew Brickman:

For more information about my services or to schedule your mediation with me, either in person or using my iChatMediation Virtual Platform built by Cisco Communications. Visit me online at www.iMediateInc.com. Call me at 561-262-9121, Toll-Free at 877-822-1479 or email me at MBrickman@iChatMediation.com.