When Doing Less Gets More Done: The Power of Strategic Restraint in Mediation

I recently mediated a case just days before trial. After nearly five years of hard-fought litigation, not a single settlement offer had been exchanged before the mediation. But finally, both sides were ready to talk.

Almost immediately, a clear pattern emerged: every $50,000 move down by the plaintiff was met with a $25,000 move up by the defendant. Round after round, the numbers shifted predictably. As I considered how to help bridge the gap, I realized something important.

They didn’t need me to steer.

They were already moving on their own.

What some might view as a stalled pattern, I recognized as productive. One colleague refers to this approach as a “zipper” negotiation—each side making consistent, proportional moves. It was measured, methodical, and effective.

Had I jumped in with a new strategy too early, I might have disrupted progress. So, I held back.

A few hours later, the case settled.

The takeaway?

A good mediator knows how to guide.

A great mediator knows when not to.