On February 12 and 23, 2024, together with Catherine Emmanuel (CEMA), I led two training days at the ECOA, the bar school in Poitiers, on the FCRBVD method, “a method of pacification serving the mediator, the lawyer and the negotiator.” Here are the key takeaways.
Why a method of pacification
All amicable methods share one thing: negotiation, with its substantive techniques and its communication techniques. Principled negotiation is the foundation, but it reaches a limit in high-conflict cases: emotion blocks reason. Hence the idea of moving from principled negotiation to pacified negotiation.
The starting point is simple: every conflict is a conflict between frames of reference. The FCRBVD method helps clarify, understand and translate each person’s frame of reference, then build a shared one. The aim is to move from a non-negotiable demand to a negotiable request, by working on differences in perception, making room for emotional outbursts and revealing the shared common goal.
Six steps, six questions
The third party invites each person through six levels (in French: faits, croyances, ressentis, besoins, valeurs, demande, hence FCRBVD). Facts: “What did you see? What did you hear?” Beliefs: “What did you think? What did you imagine?” Feelings: “How did that make you feel?” Needs: “What would you have needed?” Values: “What would have mattered to you?” Finally, the negotiable request: “What could you and the other person do to…?”
Each step has its pitfalls: telling facts from beliefs, feelings from disguised judgments, needs from values, a negotiable request from a demand. The third party reformulates at each level (“If I understand correctly…”) and asks the question that leads to the next one. The aim is to move “from the accusing You to the responsible I.”
From a conflict statement to a negotiable request
The materials give examples of reformulation. “Nobody ever congratulates me!” expresses a belief: the third party checks, “You feel you are not recognized for your true worth, is that right?” “That’s unacceptable!” calls for acknowledging a feeling: “I sense anger in what you are saying…?” “I want to be at peace” opens the way to a request: “What can you do to get there? What could the other person do?”
For lawyers, the benefit is direct: you negotiate from what is not negotiable, looking for the fundamental need hidden behind a position. To say yes, one must first have been able to say no.
From theory to practice
Each day alternated theory, from 1 to 3:15 p.m., and role-play, from 3:30 to 5 p.m. The skills covered ranged from knowing the six steps to pre-pacification in individual meetings, then pacification in joint sessions. The role-play used a situation invented for the example: a couple married for six years, two young children and a jointly owned house; the wife seeks primary residence of the children and the house, the husband alternating residence and the house. The ground rules were set from the start: speak in the first person, confidentiality, responsibility, goodwill.
Key takeaways
- 1A clash of framesEvery conflict pits frames of reference against each other; the method helps clarify them and build a shared one.
- 2Six levelsFacts, beliefs, feelings, needs, values, negotiable request: one question for each.
- 3Tell things apartFacts and beliefs, feelings and judgments, needs and values, request and demand.
- 4ReformulateAt each level, the third party checks understanding before moving on.
- 5A tool for every third partyMediator, lawyer or negotiator: the method works from the very first individual meeting.
General information. This account of a talk reflects only my personal opinion and is not legal advice. The cases mentioned are fictional, or inspired by real cases, modified and anonymized.