09/11/2026
The alternative is not longer days. It is the recovery of an older and truer idea: that mediation is a managed process of which meetings are components, not the thing itself.
In practice, that looks less exotic than it sounds. It begins with a diagnostic phase in which the mediator, appointed early, works with the parties to map the real obstacles to settlement, whether they be informational, structural, relational, or political, before anyone books a conference suite. It continues with designed exchange: not disclosure in the litigation sense, but targeted, proportionate steps that make responsible evaluation possible, agreed and supervised within the mediation. It proceeds through sequenced sessions: some plenary, some bilateral, some involving only principals, some only experts, all arranged around the settlement geometry of the case and the approval rhythms of the parties. It uses interim agreements deliberately: standstills, project-preservation measures, partial settlements, agreed frameworks initialled subject to board confirmation. And it treats implementation as part of the process, with the mediator retained through documentation and, where relationships continue, available for review points thereafter.
There is a ritual most readers of this magazine will recognise. The parties arrive at eight-thirty. Opening session by ten, if there is one at all…