Some people who have no experience with mediation assume it’s similar to a trial or an arbitration—particularly regarding the use of evidence and witnesses.

Remember, in a trial or arbitration you and your attorney will need to present arguments, evidence, and witnesses to persuade the judge, jury, or arbitrators of your position. Evidence and witnesses are very important in those arenas to establish what happened. This demonstrates trials and arbitrations are focused on the past, on what happened, which is a major contrast to mediation.

That’s because mediation generally focuses on the future concerned with what the opposing parties do moving forward. They may never agree as to what happened in the past; they may never agree as to who, if anyone, is to blame, but they can agree on how to proceed once an agreement has been reached.

Unfortunately, some people come to mediation not understanding this critical difference. I’ve heard parties say “when the mediator sees my evidence they will agree with me.” Actually, that’s not the mediator’s role at all. Typically, mediators will encourage parties to share what evidence they have, but they’ll focus the discussion on how best to resolve the issue and move on.

I’ve had parties come to mediation clutching photographs and documents “to prove their case.” Others have brought witnesses to the session, again, treating the process like a court case.

Being able to “let go” of the past and focus on the future, as well as understanding what mediation offers compared to a legal setting, is a challenge for some people, but necesary to appreciate the benefits mediation offers to all involved.

Mediators are known to share that parties in mediation often confide all they really want is an apology.

This might explain why in recent years apologies from public figures and corporations seem to have become more and more common.

Apologies are difficult for many, as they may have learned to do so is to admit fault or guilt. But mediators can help parties express regret without accepting blame. Sometimes a genuine statement, such as, “I can’t tell you how badly I feel this disagreement has hurt our relationship,” can open otherwise closed doors.

Based on data, researchers suggest certain elements can make an apology effective:

A clear statement, such as, “I apologize.”

Sincere expression of regret.

Identification of the offense.

Acknowledging responsibility for one’s action.

Explanation for why the action occurred.

Promise the action will not occur again.

Offer a form of repair.

Request forgiveness.

Once an art professor objected to President Obama’s comment comparing trade education to art history. President Obama responded in a handwritten note: ‘Let me apologize for my off-the-cuff remarks. I was making a point about the jobs market, not the value of art history. As it so happens, art history was one of my favorite subjects in high school… So please pass on my apology for the glib remarks to the entire department and understand that I was trying to encourage young people who may not be predisposed to a four year college experience to be open to technical training that can lead them to an honorable career.”

An effective apology can open the door to reconciliation while the alternative can result in a permanent lock.