Written by My Collaborative Team President Edward S. Sachs

One of the toughest challenges in the Collaborative Process is for the two neutral professionals to maintain their neutrality.  And neutrality is often in the eye of the beholder.

A neutral professional loses neutrality when one or more parties begin to perceive, correctly or incorrectly, that the professional is no longer serving the process equally. Neutrality is often less about absolute objectivity and more about maintaining trust from all sides.

The most common ways neutrality gets lost include favoring one side’s agenda by giving one party more speaking time, framing issues in language that benefits one side and prioritizing one side’s concerns while minimizing the others.

A neutral’s role, whether they are facilitator or financial, is usually to manage communication and process, not steer toward a preferred result. They can provide options for settlement, but neutrality erodes when they start pushing a settlement they personally think is “best.”

Most importantly, offering opinions or advice must be handled with extreme care. Statements like “You should accept this offer,” may seem as though you are taking sides.  However giving your opinion that the options being formed are reasonable is more neutral.  Do not endorse, just give tacit approval. Extensive private caucuses with one side, undisclosed communications, or appearing overly friendly with one party can create suspicion even if no bias exists.

Neutrals sometimes unconsciously empathize more with one party.  They may be the more articulate party, the perceived victim, the more cooperative negotiator, or the party whose values resemble their own.

Neutral professionals should be neutral about the parties, but not neutral about the Process itself.