This this style emphasizes the "empowerment" of the parties.  Specifically, transformative mediators aim to allow the parties ("empower" them) to frame the issues themselves and work to resolve them to the best of their ability.

Transformative is a term that has been used for a number of years but it really came into focus as a process after the publication in 1994 of "The Promise of Mediation" by Jossey-Bass. Gary Friedman and Jack Himmelstein's path-breaking book "Challenging Conflict Mediation through Understanding" published in 2008 was a major step in what is described as the 3rd wave** (**See below)in the reformation of the justice system. There is a similarity between the facilitative and the transformative approach. Both emphasis the right of the parties to resolve the dispute with little input from the mediator.  The underlying approach of the transformative process is the philosophy that if/when the opposing sides understand (not necessarily agreement with) each other's position, they will become empowered and pro-active: a positive transformation in their respective perspectives taking into account each other's interests and needs

 

Leonard Riskin, has described the facilitative mediator as one who assumes that the parties have the best understanding of the dispute.  Facilitative mediators tend not give advice or recommendations.  They will only ask questions to assist in seeking resolution. Sharing their opinions is also something many shy away from.   The facilitative mediator's goals are achieved when he/she has created communication between the parties in a safe environment that promotes open and direct communication between the parties.

 

For attorneys and retired or former judges Evaluative mediation is the style most commonly practiced. The main reason this is so is that the evaluative style more closely replicates the techniques used by judges in settlement conferences.  Caucusing, i.e. confidential conferences with each party is the main tool used to individually assist the parties to recognize and consider the strengths and weaknesses of each case.  In this way the Evaluative mediator by default becomes the only party in the session that knows all the facts pertinent to the dispute. This is in direct contrast to both the facilitative and transformative principals. Evaluative mediators generally maintain much more control over the process and even the substance of discussion.  Caucusing, has been called 'shuttle diplomacy' because the mediator is in effect maintaining a constant physical separation between the parties.  Evaluative mediators argue that caucusing is an essential tool where one or both parties constantly overwhelms or disrupts the process. A situation which transformatve mediators will address in the pre-contract conference.

The Third Wave

A fundamental tenant of the third wave of the access to criminal justice movement is that criminal offending, family and relationship problems, other civil justice problems, long standing social problems in areas such as debt, housing, or employment problems, and mental or physical disabilities are interconnected problems in people’s everyday lives. In the
seamless ness of everyday life, understanding and effectively dealing with one problem, in this case criminal offending, cannot be taken out of its context which, from this perspective, is the complexity of interrelated problems that may characterize individuals’ daily lives. This is the foundation of a fundamental principle of access to justice: that it is necessary to look at individuals’ legal problems from the point of view of the people who experience them.
extract from Paths to Justice: Research in Brief