Why do decision makers arrive read to argue, but not to commit?

Most decision makers do not arrive unprepared. They arrive prepared for the wrong task. Preparation is not the same as readiness. Especially when decisions carry real consequences.

In continental Europe, many business leaders arrive prepared to explain. They know what happened. They know why it matters. They can walk you through the story in detail. What they often cannot do yet is indicate direction. They do not know what they would accept, where they would walk away, or what continuing the conflict will realistically cost. This is not a personal failure. It is a system outcome. When mediation is framed as a place to talk things through, preparation follows that logic. People prepare explanations, not scenarios. Arguments, not trade offs.

In jurisdictions where mediation functions as a management tool rather than a conversation, this looks different. Clients arrive with ranges. With downside scenarios. With clear ownership and authority to commit. That difference does not start with mediation. It starts earlier, in how systems confront decision makers with risk and consequence.

In places like the US or the UK, downside becomes concrete early. Costs escalate faster. Exposure is clearer. Waiting itself carries consequences. As a result, leaders are forced to think in scenarios long before mediation is proposed. Decision ownership rarely emerges in the room. It is formed upstream. Because by the time mediation starts, it is often already too late to invent it. Those systems make it harder to treat conflict as “something my lawyer handles.”

In much of continental Europe, the system allows that distance for longer. So ownership drifts. When that ownership is missing, mediation slows down immediately. Sessions meant to commit turn into sessions that explore. Not because people are unwilling. But because they are not ready yet.

For business leaders, this has a cost. Decisions are postponed. Attention keeps leaking to a conflict that was supposed to be managed. If mediation is meant to be a management moment, commitment cannot be assumed. Someone has to own it. And right now, that responsibility often belongs to no one. If readiness cannot be assumed, who should be responsible for creating it?