mediation-analysis

What this skill does

> **⚠️ EXPERIMENTAL** — This skill is provided for educational and informational purposes only. It does NOT constitute legal advice. All responsibility for usage rests with the user. Consult qualified legal professionals before acting on any output.

# Mediation Analysis

Production-ready framework for analyzing disputes and preparing mediation strategy. Covers the full cycle from dispute assessment through settlement calculation, interest mapping, and mediation readiness.

---

## Table of Contents

- [Operating Modes](#operating-modes)
- [Tools](#tools)
- [Core Analysis Framework](#core-analysis-framework)
- [Underlying Interests Analysis](#underlying-interests-analysis)
- [Legal Analysis](#legal-analysis)
- [Settlement Strategy](#settlement-strategy)
- [Reference Guides](#reference-guides)
- [Workflows](#workflows)
- [Troubleshooting](#troubleshooting)
- [Success Criteria](#success-criteria)
- [Scope and Limitations](#scope-and-limitations)
- [Anti-Patterns](#anti-patterns)
- [Tool Reference](#tool-reference)

---

## Operating Modes

### Mode 1: Guided Information Gathering

Use when starting from scratch without structured materials.

**Step 1 -- Dispute Overview:**
- Who are the parties? (names, roles, relationship)
- What is the dispute about? (summary in neutral terms)
- When did the dispute arise? (timeline of key events)
- What is the current status? (pre-litigation, filed, discovery, trial date)

**Step 2 -- Positions and Claims:**
- What does each party want? (stated positions)
- What are the claimed amounts? (monetary and non-monetary)
- What evidence supports each side?
- What are the weaknesses in each side's case?

**Step 3 -- Context and Constraints:**
- Is there an ongoing relationship? (employment, commercial, family)
- Are there power imbalances? (resources, information, leverage)
- Are there time pressures? (deadlines, statute of limitations)
- What has been tried so far? (direct negotiation, prior mediation)

### Mode 2: Direct Analysis

Use when dispute materials are already available (pleadings, correspondence, statements).

Provide the materials and specify which analysis sections are needed. The framework will extract the structured analysis from the raw materials.

---

## Tools

### Dispute Analyzer

Extracts structured dispute data from text descriptions.

```bash
# Analyze a dispute description
python scripts/dispute_analyzer.py --input dispute.txt

# Analyze with JSON output
python scripts/dispute_analyzer.py --input dispute.txt --json

# Analyze inline text
python scripts/dispute_analyzer.py --text "Party A claims breach of contract for failure to deliver..."

# Save structured analysis
python scripts/dispute_analyzer.py --input dispute.txt --output analysis.json
```

### Settlement Calculator

Calculates BATNA, WATNA, ZOPA, and settlement scenarios.

```bash
# Calculate from parameters file
python scripts/settlement_calculator.py --input params.json

# Calculate with JSON output
python scripts/settlement_calculator.py --input params.json --json

# Quick inline calculation
python scripts/settlement_calculator.py \
  --claimed 500000 \
  --litigation-cost-a 80000 \
  --litigation-cost-b 120000 \
  --probability 0.65 \
  --time-to-trial 18

# Save settlement analysis
python scripts/settlement_calculator.py --input params.json --output settlement.json
```

---

## Core Analysis Framework

The analysis produces 6 sections. Each section builds on the previous.

### Section 1: Case Summary

Write a neutral chronological summary covering:

| Element | Description |
|---------|-------------|
| Parties | Names, roles, and relationship |
| Timeline | Key events in chronological order |
| Dispute trigger | The event that escalated to a dispute |
| Current status | Procedural posture (pre-suit, filed, discovery) |
| Prior resolution attempts | What has been tried |

**Neutrality check:** The summary should be acceptable to both parties. Avoid characterizing conduct as "wrong" or "unreasonable."

### Section 2: Issues in Dispute

For each issue, document:

| Component | Description |
|-----------|-------------|
| Issue statement | Neutral framing of the disputed question |
| Party A position | What Party A asserts and why |
| Party B position | What Party B asserts and why |
| Key evidence | Evidence supporting each side |
| Strength assessment | Strong / Moderate / Weak for each side |
| Legal basis | Applicable law, contract terms, or principles |

### Section 3: Underlying Interests Analysis

Move beyond positions to interests. See detailed section below.

### Section 4: Legal Analysis

Per-issue assessment of legal merits. See detailed section below.

### Section 5: Mediation Strategy and Settlement Directions

BATNA/WATNA, ZOPA, and settlement scenarios. See detailed section below.

### Section 6: Mediation Readiness Checklist

| Item | Status | Notes |
|------|--------|-------|
| All parties agreed to mediate | | |
| Mediator selected and confirmed | | |
| Decision-makers attending or available | | |
| Key documents exchanged or available | | |
| Opening statement prepared | | |
| Settlement authority established | | |
| BATNA/WATNA analysis complete | | |
| Non-monetary interests identified | | |
| Creative options brainstormed | | |
| Authority limits clarified with client | | |

---

## Underlying Interests Analysis

Interests are the needs, concerns, and motivations behind stated positions.

### Interest Categories

| Category | Description | Examples |
|----------|-------------|---------|
| Legal | Rights, entitlements, obligations | Contract rights, statutory claims, precedent |
| Commercial | Business and financial concerns | Revenue, costs, market position, reputation |
| Relational | Relationship preservation | Ongoing business, employment, community ties |
| Emotional | Personal feelings and values | Fairness, respect, acknowledgment, vindication |
| Procedural | How the process unfolds | Speed, privacy, control, voice, transparency |

### Interest Mapping

For each party, map interests by category and priority:

| Party | Interest | Category | Priority | Compatible? |
|-------|----------|----------|----------|-------------|
| A | Preserve business reputation | Commercial | High | Yes -- shared |
| A | Recover financial losses | Legal/Commercial | High | Negotiable |
| B | Avoid setting precedent | Legal | High | Negotiable |
| B | Maintain relationship with A | Relational | Medium | Yes -- shared |

### Shared and Compatible Interests

Identify interests both parties share or that do not conflict:

- **Shared:** Both want confidentiality, speed, cost control
- **Compatible:** A wants acknowledgment, B wants no public admission -- private acknowledgment possible
- **Conflicting:** A wants maximum payment, B wants minimum payment -- negotiation zone needed

### Barriers to Resolution

| Barrier | Description | Mitigation |
|---------|-------------|------------|
| Reactive devaluation | Offers seem less attractive because they come from the other side | Have mediator propose options |
| Anchoring | First number distorts all subsequent negotiation | Use objective criteria to anchor |
| Loss aversion | Parties feel losses more than equivalent gains | Frame in terms of gains vs current state |
| Principal-agent | Party's representative may have different interests | Ensure decision-makers participate |
| Information asymmetry | One party knows more than the other | Structured disclosure through mediator |

---

## Legal Analysis

For each disputed issue, assess:

| Factor | Assessment |
|--------|-----------|
| Applicable law | Statute, regulation, contract term, or common law |
| Strength of claim | Strong (>70%) / Moderate (40-70%) / Weak (<40%) |
| Key uncertainties | Factual disputes, legal ambiguities, evidentiary gaps |
| Likely trial outcome | Best case, worst case, most likely |
| Damages range | If claimant prevails, likely award range |
| Costs to trial | Attorney fees, expert fees, opportunity costs per part