Another look at Power and Balance
Notes to presentation by Ann Edge at AMINZ/IAMA Conference, Christchurch, New Zealand
August 2010
Introduction
Power is a serious consideration in the practice of mediation. There are many views, perceptions and
opinions regarding the role of a mediator in attending to an imbalance of power between
participants. Many practitioners and commentators maintain that it is the mediator’s responsibility
to ‘balance the power’. If mediators were dealing with a balance such as this one,
would it
be possible to shift power between the two sides and rearrange it until it balanced? If it were
possible to do just that, then would it be possible to make the power stay where you put it?
These questions may seem somewhat facetious, but even definitions of power are numerous and
varied. Often, power is spoken of as a fixed, but moveable ‘element’ that can be altered by a 3rd
party skill set.
Power – what is it?
Just as power seems to have an intangible quality, it is equally challenging to define.
On-line dictionaries list numerous possibilities as in the example below:
Power 2(1)Definition: Ability to act, regarded as latent or inherent; the faculty of doing or performing something; capacity for action or
performance; capability of producing an effect, whether physical or moral: potency; might; as, a man of great power; the power of
capillary attraction; money gives power.
Power 3Definition: Ability, regarded as put forth or exerted; strength, force, or energy in action; as, the power of steam in moving an
engine; the power of truth, or of argument, in producing conviction; the power of enthusiasm.
Power 4Definition: Capacity of undergoing or suffering; fitness to be acted upon; susceptibility; called also passive power; as, great power
of endurance.
Power 5Definition: The exercise of a faculty; the employment of strength; the exercise of any kind of control; influence; dominion; sway;
command; government.
Power 6Definition: The agent exercising an ability to act; an individual invested with authority; an institution, or government, which
exercises control; as, the great powers of Europe; hence, often, a superhuman agent; a spirit; a divinity.
Power 7Definition: A military or naval force; an army or navy; a great host.
Power 8Definition: A large quantity; a great number; as, a power o/ good things.
Power 9Definition: The rate at which mechanical energy is exerted or mechanical work performed, as by an engine or other machine, or
an animal, working continuously; as, an engine of twenty horse power.
Power 10Definition: A mechanical agent; that from which useful mechanical energy is derived; as, water power; steam power; hand power,
etc.
1
http://ardictionary.com/Power/10093
1
Power 11Definition: Applied force; force producing motion or pressure; as, the power applied at one and of a lever to lift a weight at the
other end.
Power 12Definition: A machine acted upon by an animal, and serving as a motor to drive other machinery; as, a dog power.
Power 13Definition: The product arising from the multiplication of a number into itself; as, a square is the second power, and a cube is
third power, of a number.
Power 14Definition: Mental or moral ability to act; one of the faculties which are possessed by the mind or soul; as, the power of thinking,
reasoning, judging, willing, fearing, hoping, etc.
Power 15Definition: The degree to which a lens, mirror, or any optical instrument, magnifies; in the telescope, and usually in the
microscope, the number of times it multiplies, or augments, the apparent diameter of an object; sometimes, in microscopes, the number
of times it multiplies the apparent surface.
Power 16Definition: An authority enabling a person to dispose of an interest vested either in himself or in another person; ownership by
appointment.
Power 17Definition: Hence, vested authority to act in a given case; as, the business was referred to a committee with power.
Power 18Definition: physical strength
Power 19Definition: possession of controlling influence; "the deterrent power of nuclear weapons"; "the power of his love saved her"; "his
powerfulness was concealed by a gentle facade"
Power 20Definition: possession of the qualities (especially mental qualities) required to do something or get something done; "danger
heightened his powers of discrimination"
Power 21Definition: a mathematical notation indicating the number of times a quantity is multiplied by itself
Power 22Definition: a state powerful enough to influence events throughout the world
Power 23Definition: a very wealthy or powerful businessman; "an oil baron"
Power 24Definition: one possessing or exercising power or influence or authority; "the mysterious presence of an evil power"; "may the
force be with you"; "the forces of evil"
Power 25Definition: (physics) the rate of doing work; measured in watts (= joules/second)
Power 26Definition: (of a government or government official) holding an office means being in power; "being in office already gives a
candidate a great advantage"; "during his first year in office"; "during his first year in power"; "the power of the president"
Power 27Definition: supply the force or power for the functioning of; "The gasoline powers the engines"
These definitions only partially satisfy a need to define power. What this list does demonstrate is a
difficulty – of pinning down what we mean by power.
The origin and etymology of the word power
po
are expressed thus: 1250–1300; ME pouer ( e ), poer
( e ) < AF poueir, poer, n. use of inf.: to be able < VL *potēre (r. L posse to be able, have power).2
Other references demonstrate similar linkages which also suggest power as ‘ability’ and ‘being able’.
In the mediation context, this may be the critical distinction.
2
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/power
2
Power: who’s got it and who hasn’t?
The Parties?
Traditional to the ‘power’ discussion in mediation is the attribution of power more or less as
quantum which, in the perception of the mediator, is apportioned amongst participants. The sources
of such power have been perceived as economic, positional, emotional, physical, status, language,
information, education etc.
It is common-place for mediators to talk about needing to ‘balance power’ however, when the
question as to ‘how’ this might be done is asked, power matters become worrying.
The following is one of a list of suggestions as to how a mediator could “level the playing field”
during mediation:
By using pitch and inflection, you know sort of like talking more calmly and rationally and an
even tone to the person you're trying to help. More aggressive and louder with the person,
you are trying not to help.3
There are assumptions on the part of mediators as to where power lies and its impact. Whilst
mediators should be mindful of power, attempts to ‘balance’ power, or ‘level’ the playing field are
contentious, and may be risky. To claim a mediator has a role in ‘empowering’ participants4 is quite a
different matter.
The Mediator?
Frequently downplayed in the ‘power’ discourse is the power held by the mediator, the impartial
intervener who can use “procedural power …to balance the negotiating advantages available to each
party”5. That a mediator holds power is perhaps obvious, but the mediator’s power is not normally
of concern with regard to balance.
The dilemmas connected with attempts on a mediator’s part to balance power are relatively welldocumented. The persistent question, expressed this way by Fisher and Brandon: “Is there a conflict
between the mediator’s role as an impartial facilitator of process and the mediator’s function as a
power balancer?”6
Rick Voyles7 says “We do not live with a balance of power in everyday life…” and he wonders why we
are surprised and concerned when an imbalance exists in mediations.
What is the ‘issue’ really?
Any assessment made by a mediator as to distribution of power in relationships between
participants in mediation is necessarily made through that mediator’s filters and is that particular
3
http://www.civilrightsmediation.org/topics/1710.shtml
Boulle, Goldblatt, Green, Mediation: Principles, Process, Practice, (2008) LexisNexis, Wellington, page 161
5
Fisher, Linda and Brandon, Mieke, Mediating with Families, (2009) Thompson Reuters, New South Wales,
page 219
6
See Fisher and Brandon at 5 above, page 221
7
Voyles, Rick, “Managing an Imbalance of Power”, www.mediate.com, 22/03/2010
4
3
mediator’s perception. Many assumptions are made regarding who holds power, for example, in
employer/employee relationships and domestic relationships. For some people there is an
assumption that the employer must hold the power, and in the perception of other people the
opposite is ‘true’. There often seems to be a sense that holding power inevitably disadvantages
someone.
Fisher and Brandon8 acknowledge that the power dynamic in mediation is “always shifting” and, as
already noted, that mediators can use their own procedural power to “counteract what is happening”
and to “balance the negotiating advantages available to each party”.
Power dynamics in mediation and in other human relationship situations seem to have the qualities
of power as in electricity. Electrical power is apparent by the effect it has, for example, my computer
is working! Electrical power, like other types of power could not be strictly described as visible. What
is visible is the effect of the electricity in ‘powering’ machinery, light etc. When the effects of
electricity are not visible, for example, when the lights are switched off, the electrical power is
present although we are mostly unaware of its presence. To take the analogy further, from time to
time we experience power surges. This is when there is a boost of power for a brief time, and then it
passes. We know a power surge has occurred because the lights flicker, but again, we do not actually
‘see’ the power. A power surge can wreck havoc with some aspects of life, and have no effect at all
on others.
Power is the source of energy (see definition 10, page 1). If we return to the fundamental definition
of power as “being able”, we are perhaps closer to the aspect of relationship dynamics with which
mediators should be concerned.
The subject is tricky! If a mediator fails to address a serious power imbalance, they could be
perceived as siding with the stronger party, and similarly, if a mediator terminates mediation in the
face of an irresolvable power imbalance, then the mediator could be perceived as a collaborator
with a bullying party.
As Voyles9 notes: “Imbalance in and of itself is not a problem.” Neither is power a problem in and of
itself. It is when power imbalance affects the ability of participants to negotiate effectively, or, in
other words an imbalance of power risks self-determination that there is a problem. The obligation
of mediators is to ensure that participants have the capacity and ability to determine their own
futures through effective communication and negotiation.
8
9
Page 219 see note 6 above
See note 7
4