Does the End Justify the Means?

If we can achieve a desired outcome, does it matter the method that we use to get there? If we can get disputing parties to settle, does it matter what techniques we use? If we can get our children to behave, does it matter what parenting approach we use? If we can achieve a goal, does it matter how we do it? These are questions that I’ve been meditating on a lot lately, with the conviction of my answers growing stronger the more that I consider them.

In short, I say: Yes, yes, and yes. The process matters. Maybe even more than the outcome. In parenting, in life, and certainly in conflict resolution. It’s a matter of integrity - how well we align our values with our life.

When I lead a mediation training I spend a lot of energy helping my students understand the full implication of facilitating a process focused on empowering parties’ self-determination. What does it mean to focus on party agency and choice? One of the challenges to embracing this aspect of our work is the letting go of our attachment to a particular outcome. The idea that a successful mediation means that the parties reach a settlement, or agreement, on all tangible issues. The reality of conflict is that “successful” resolution can take an infinite number of forms. Sometimes there is no settlement, but the parties still get what they need from the process.

So the question often comes up of what to do if the parties are not finding a mutually agreeable resolution? What if there is no settlement? Is it then okay to exert pressure on the parties? Or to steer the conversation to our idea of a reasonable outcome? What’s the harm? One challenge in assessing the true impact of our intervention as mediators is the limited timeframe of our interaction. We provide a service to our clients, but don’t get to follow them over the long term to find out what happens. But it is possible to imagine some of the ways that our covert or overt pressure to settle may negatively impact clients.

At the very least, when a mediator pressures parties to settle, it undermines the durability of the settlement. Without the feeling of ownership that comes from a truly self-determined outcome, parties may be more likely to default on their agreement.

And there are potentially more serious negative consequences, but my brain won’t form any more coherent thoughts at the moment! I’m sure I’ll come back to meditate on this topic again, as it seems to be a major theme for me these days.

What do you think? How do you wrestle with this question of ends and means? I’d love to know.