Mediation is a relatively new but highly relevant area of professional activity. The development of the system of conciliation services that implement mediation in the Russian Federation is regulated by the following normative acts: the federal law regarding the Alternative procedure for resolving disputes with the participation of a mediator (mediation procedure) (Law of the Russian Federation N 193-FZ, 2010); recommendations of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe No. R (99) 19, ‘On Mediation in Criminal Cases’; and standards for restorative mediation, developed and approved by the All-Russian Association for Restorative Mediation on 17 February 2009, the concept for the development of a network of mediation services until 2020.

Since 2013, there has been a trend towards an increase in the number of applications for mediation (Skripchenko, 2020). It is becoming increasingly important to be able to analyse mediators’ personal characteristics contributing to the successful performance of work functions, which will improve the training system of these specialists. In Russia, personality traits that help a person quickly learn their chosen profession, quickly adapt to the workplace and effectively perform professional functions are understood as a specialist’s important professional qualities (Klimov, 1996).

The mediator is generally facilitating a process whereby the parties can constructively engage and reach a mutually agreed to resolution. The mediator’s success is achieved through various activities, which include professional selection, adaptation, personnel training, personnel certification and others. The development of the aforementioned activities is based on professional suitability, which is an integral characteristic reflecting the degree of a person’ individual capability to perform work functions well.

One’s professional suitability for a certain activity is currently determined in Russia using two different approaches that modern scientific research and practice offer: the first one is based on the assessment of important (significant) professional qualities, while the second one – on the assessment of professional competencies (Tolochek, 2017, 2019). The competence-based approach has become widespread in assessing specialists’ professional suitability. To increase the effectiveness of personnel, it is necessary to develop the model of mediator’s professional competencies, correlated with personality traits, which are associated with high results in professional activity.

There are a number of studies devoted to restorative justice problems (Braithwaite, 2001; Christie, 2007; Yoshpa, 2013; Zeer, 2002), which reveal restorative mediation principles and approaches and discuss the problems of its implementation.

Fundamental modern Russian research includes the works of Karnozova (2014), Tkachev (2002), Vasilenko (2013), Harutyunyan (2012), Maksudov (2013) and Kalashnikova (2011). The presented works discuss the procedure of mediation, its principles, peculiarities and the possibilities of its application, including minors. Several studies discuss mediators’ training and the psychological aspects of training those in charge of conciliation programmes (Allahverdova, 2012; Karpenko, 2006).

Many articles on mediation focus on the skills that mediators should have (active listening, reframing, nonverbal communication, identifying problems) or on the models they should use (stimulating, evaluative, transformative, narrative). Negotiations, opening statements, ethics, standards, confidentiality, shuttle negotiations and getting out of deadlocks are discussed here.

These works stress the significant role of the mediator and his or her personality in the success of the procedure. However, little has been written about how the mediator’s personal qualities affect the mediation process. One of the first such studies was by Bowling and Hoffman (2003): ‘Bringing peace to the room: How the personality of the mediator influences the mediation process, thus shedding some valuable light on this previously largely unexplored area’.

Empathy as an emotional intelligence characteristic is mentioned in many works as a key personality trait of a mediator (Benjamin, 2003; Bowling & Hoffmann, 2003; Cloke, 2003; Gold, 2003; Johnson et al., 2003; Le Baron, 2003; Mayer, 2004; Reitman, 2003; Saposnek, 2003; Schreier, 2002; Shearouse, 2003).

In Waller and Alayne’s research, three types of mediators are characterised according to the dimensions of intuition, feeling and perception. It is observed that people with a tendency to intuition tend to focus on relationships and look at the big picture and relationships between facts. People who choose to use their senses when making decisions tend to be empathetic, compassionate and people-centred. People who prefer to use perception tend to be spontaneous and like to trust their ingenuity in adapting to the demands of the situation (Waller, 2000).

The aim of this study was to develop and empirically confirm a model of mediators’ professional competencies and to determine the characteristics of mediators’ professional competencies and personal characteristics with varying degrees of success in the conciliation procedure.

The authors have put forward the assumption that successful mediators are distinguished from unsuccessful ones by a higher expression level of such professionally significant personal qualities as conflict management, problem analysis and self-control, and they are also characterised by greater sociability and curiosity.

The ‘competence’ and ‘expertise’ concepts have synonymous meanings in many works, but these are distinctly different concepts. Competence is a characteristic of labour tasks, including the characteristics of the position and job position in the organisation; expertise is a characteristic of a labour subject, his or her readiness and ability to perform assigned tasks during work (Noskova, 2009). Through the concept of competence, the professional activity content is revealed; the requirements to a specialist’s professional activity are determined, which allows for selection, assessment, training and development of personnel.

Competencies are generalised action modes ensuring productive performance of professional activities (Zeer, 2005). Zeer differentiates between the concepts of ‘competence’ and ‘expertise’ and notes that expertise means knowledge, skills and experience of a person, and the ability to actualise and mobilise them in a certain professional situation determines the competence of a successful person. Competencies are the integrative integrity of knowledge, skills and abilities that provide professional activity; they are the ability of a person to put their competence into practice (Zeer & Cimanuk, 2005). Competencies are also considered knowledge, abilities, skills, behaviour patterns and personal characteristics, with the help of which success in professional activity is achieved (Zimnaya, 2004).

In modern literature, very few studies are devoted to the analysis of mediators’ competencies. The separate mediation competences of teachers are highlighted, including communicative, information-analytical, mnemonic, organisational and managerial, emotional competence (Smolyaninova et al., 2020) or communicative, psychological-pedagogical, autopsychological competence (Kozlova, 2008). In international publications, the main competence of the mediator is determined by his or her ability to update the client’s resources, focus on the current state of the conflict situation and facilitate mutually beneficial solutions to the conflict (Hayens, 2000).

Timokhin’ article describes an approach similar to the present study: the formulation of competencies based on a professional standard (Timokhin, 2020). However, in this study, competencies are formulated similar to work functions. This approach does not answer the question of what one has to be able to do and to possess in order to make professional activity as a mediator successful.

In the study, Collins presents a list of the most important personal competencies of a mediator, identified on the basis of the analysis of various sources (Mayer, Benjamin, Hoffmann, Levine, etc.) which mentioned the qualities necessary for a mediator. The research is based on the overall process of mediation. This list includes the following: empathy, multitasking thinking, authenticity, emotional intelligence and impulsivity control, a sense of presence, neutrality, intuition, the ability to appreciate what parties bring, artistry, curiosity (Collins, 2005). This list has been studied to determine personality traits relevant for one’s job.

In an earlier study the authors identified and empirically studied the list of mediators’ important professional qualities, such as communication skills, openness, friendliness, empathy, responsibility, democracy, independence, activity, organisation, poise and specificity (Korneeva & Rudakova, 2019). The present study was carried out as the continuation of the previous one. It allows the researchers to correlate professionally important qualities with mediators’ professional competencies and the success of this process. This will justify the model of the mediator’s professional competencies.

In this study, Tolochek’s concept has been followed, where ‘professional competencies’ are considered ‘functional systems that are formed on the basis of professional abilities and professionally important qualities in performing specific tasks process of joint professional activity in specific social environment conditions’. Competencies are adaptive and highly specialised functional systems of the subject, manifested in the success of his or her activity (its effectiveness, stability and reliability) in the behaviour adequate to the given environment (consistent with the activity and behaviour of other subjects) (Tolochek, 2020).

In Russia, since 2013, the qualifications, characteristics and skills of a specialist performing a certain type of professional activity, as well as a certain work function, have been normatively regulated by professional standards, which are approved by the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection of the Russian Federation. Occupational standards are an important element of the National Qualifications System.

The procedure for the development and approval of professional standards is determined by the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of 22 January 2013 No. 23, the Rules for the development and approval of professional standards (Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation N23, 2013).

The use of professional standards in the Russian Federation is governed by the provisions of article 195.1 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation (Labor Code of the Russian Federation, 2001). Therefore, the application of professional standards for state employers is also mandatory based on the definition of the term ‘professional standard’ given in article 195.1 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation.

For employers, a professional standard is the basis for establishing more specific requirements for the performance of an employee’s labour function, taking into account the nature of the company’s business and value proposition. The relevant provisions of professional standards should be taken into account when creating federal state educational standards for professional education.

The structure of a professional standard is established by the order of the Russian Ministry of Labour dated 12 April 2013 No. 147n, ‘On approval of the Layout of the professional standard’ (Order of the Russian Federation Ministry of Labor and Social Protection, 2013). The professional standard includes a description of generalised labour functions, qualification level, labour functions and actions within a specific professional field, knowledge and skills that an employee must have, as well as the name of the position in which an employee can perform these functions and what kind of education and work experience he or she should have.

To develop the professional competence model of restorative process mediator (this is a process in which the mediator creates conditions for restoring the ability of people to understand each other and agree on acceptable options for resolving problems (if necessary, making amendments for the harm caused as a result of conflict or illegal situations), identified in the course of a theoretical analysis of professional activity, the mediator’s personal qualities were correlated with work functions and professional skills, which are reflected in ‘The Professional standard of the Russian Federation’ (No. 1041n, 2014). According to the standard, for the implementation of the generalised labour function, ‘Mediation in a specialised field’, it is necessary to perform two labour subfunctions: preparation for the mediation procedure in a specialised area and the development process, negotiation of the mediation agreement terms and the mediation procedure completion. Next, the professional competencies required to perform each of the labour functions were correlated (Table 1).

The first labour function includes the following subfunctions – motivating the parties to participate in mediation by phone and holding an individual meeting. Accordingly, to perform these subfunctions, communication skills, the ability to manage emotions and conduct a dialogue, analytical skills and the ability to apply motivational programmes and the method of active listening are required.

The second labour function includes such subfunctions as establishing contact with the parties to the process, leading the process of developing the terms of a mediation agreement and encouraging restorative actions. To perform these subfunctions, the skills to establish contact and conduct a dialogue, self-presentation, mediation and active listening are required.

Based on the given analysis of the mediator’s activity and labour functions presented in the Professional Standard of the Russian Federation No. 1041n, 2014, a model of restorative mediator’s professional competencies has been developed (Table 1). When choosing mediators’ core competencies, the competencies list proposed by Dulewicz has been used (Dulewicz, 1995; Dulewicz & Higgs, 2005). The competency model is a list of competencies that are necessary and sufficient for the implementation of labour functions in certain conditions of activity (Sezonova, 2015). All of the above data are presented in Table 1.

Furthermore, on the basis of the mediator’s professional standard, the content and indicators of key competencies that are presented in Table 2 are determined. The competencies model and their manifestation levels are presented in Appendix 1.

Thus, the mediator’s professional competence model in restorative mediation included five key competencies: communication, conflict management, problem analysis and work with information, planning and self-control.

For empirical testing and diagnostics of the identified professional competencies, the authors have developed a questionnaire for self-assessment of the mediators’ professional competencies. This questionnaire was developed on the basis of the principle of constructing the 360-degree technique (Birley & Kozub, 2009; Higgs & Dulewicz, 2000; Ward, 2006), which allows it to be further adapted to assess the mediator’s effectiveness from three sides (clients and mediators themselves).

The model of mediators’ professional competence developed by the authors includes five key competencies: communication, conflict management, problem analysis and work with information, planning and self-control. In the questionnaire that the authors have developed, an approval question is proposed for each indicator of each of the five competencies, which allows them to assess the competence formation. For example:

This indicator corresponds to the statement of the questionnaire ‘looks respectably, follows one’s postures and gestures, holds posture’. These dimensions, along with their corresponding statements, were cross-checked through discussion with 15 subject experts (successful mediators, supervisors in the mediation field, trainers of mediation training programmes) and HR practitioners who are familiar with performance measurement and management.

For each statement of the questionnaire, the mediator is asked to rate on a four-rank scale how often this behaviour occurs (‘never’ 1 point, ‘sometimes’ 2 points, ‘in most cases’ 3 points, ‘always’ 4 points). For the convenience of the answers, one more assessment, ‘I have no information’, was added; however, these indicators were not taken into account in the empirical analysis because they do not have an estimated power.

Each mediator’s competence has four development levels. The first level is the development level (competence requires development): a specialist has limited competence in the form of separate elements. He or she tries to show the necessary skills and understands their importance, but he or she does not always succeed. Competence is not manifested in new and nonstandard situations.

The second level is the experience level (basic): the specialist successfully solves standard work tasks using competence. In complex, new situations, competence manifests itself in the form of separate fragments, but it is unstable.

The third level is the skill level: a specialist confidently owns competence and demonstrates it in any situations that arise. A specialist helps others to exercise this competence. This level assumes the ability to predict negative events.

The last, fourth level is the leadership level: a specialist has a particularly high degree of competence development, which serves as an example for others. The employee creates the environment for the development of this competence in others: he or she organises events, sets the rules and norms that contribute to the manifestation of competencies in others.

To assess the content of expert judgements identified for the present study’s proposed items, a content validity ratio (CVR) proposed by Lawshe (1975) has been carried out. This was calculated in the following way: (n_e - N/2)/N/2, where n_e is the sum of members indicating an item as ‘essential’, and N is the total number of experts who participated in the survey to examine the comprehensiveness and clarity of the items and dimensions of a proposed scale. Lawshe (1975) had prescribed the rule of thumb for achieving the minimum CVR value of 0.49 from 15 experts for considering an item as a scale component.

As an outcome of this analysis on employee performance dimensions, two items were discarded because of disagreement among experts, and finally 42 items with four corresponding three dimensions were retained in the scale, having 93% of agreement among experts with a CVR value higher than 0.49 for further analysis.

The model of competencies and the levels of their manifestation are presented in Appendix 1. The competence formation level was determined on the basis of the arithmetic mean of the answers to the questions compiled on the basis of indicators of all competences.

To assess the social desirability of answers, four sincerity testing questions were added to the technique; five duplicate questions and five questions with inverse scaling were included to assess reliability. The final version of the questionnaire contains 42 statements and is presented in Appendix 1, Table 3-A1 along with the questionnaire key.

The research was carried out at Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov in 2018–2019.

In 2018, 61 mediators of the Arkhangelsk region of Russia took part in the study, and in 2019, 42 mediators of the Arkhangelsk region aged 25–69 years (average age 41.22 ± 1.588) with a total experience of 2–48 years (average total experience of 17.30 ± 1.670) and mediator experience from 0 to 9 years (average experience 2.5 ± 0.313). The total sample size was 103 people.

In general, mediators conducted from 0 to 300 mediations (average number 29.81 ± 7.924) and concluded from 0 to 50 conciliation agreements (average number 17.05 ± 2.768). In the present study, mediators were considered successful if the completion of the procedure with a conciliation agreement was higher than the average value of the entire sample determined by the median (more than 6). In this sample, 55.7% of the interviewed mediators were successful according to objective criteria, and 44.3% were not successful. Table 3 shows comparisons by age, length of service and experience of mediators with varying success.

As can be seen from the data in Table 3, no differences were found between the mediators of the two studied groups in terms of age and total length of service, while such differences exist in the number of mediations performed and experience as a mediator. This indicates that the inclusion of the conciliatory process in real activities and the acquisition of various experiences allows increasing success for mediators.

For a more detailed analysis of the differences in the mediators’ groups, the authors studied their professional experience and education before they became mediators. The respondents included managers, social educators, teachers and psychologists. It was found that a greater percentage of successful mediators had education and experience in the psychologist’s position (18% of 44, 3%), and a smaller percentage had experience in teaching (4.9% of 44, 3%), χ² = 8.9 at p = 0.06. What can be explained by the peculiarities of the profession? The psychologist’s position, in contrast to the teacher’s position in activities, presupposes a lesser function of strict control over the changes in the person being interacted with, because they communicate on an equal footing and are both responsible for progress in their work; that is, this position is closer to that of a mediator. Empathy and communication on an equal footing with the client are more characteristic of psychologists, while teachers need to be able to educate students and present information correctly so that it can be easily assimilated. In this regard, teachers may be more directive, having a desire to control and manage the process.

The expressiveness of mediators’ personality traits, measured using the ‘11 personality factors’ method, is presented in Table 4.

As can be seen from the data in Table 4, mediators are characterised by the following psychological features. They are sociable, responsive, able to accept different opinions and, if necessary, give in, as well as being able to organise space and time. At the same time, they strive to adhere to moral and ethical standards. Such a specialist is flexible and proactive, bringing new things to activities.

In order to assess the expressiveness of personality traits in successful and unsuccessful mediators, a multivariate analysis of variance was used, where the dependent variable is attribution to the group of the mediator’s success and the independent variables are the scale of the ‘11 personality factors’ method.

According to the data of multivariate tests (Pillay’s trace 0.228, F = 2.251 at p = 0.019), statistically significant differences are observed in the expressiveness of personal qualities in mediators with varying success.

According to the data of univariate tests, there are statistically significant differences in mediators with different success in the following parameters: curiosity (p ˂ 0.001), originality (p = 0.02) and morality (p ˂ 0.001). Based on the limitations of the MANOVA method, the value of the Box M criteria will be analysed. The Box M criterion is 202.102 when p is less than 0.005, which means that considering one-dimensional criteria, a correction has been made for the multiplicity of comparisons, according to Banferoni. In this case, the border of the type 1 error is 0.05/11 = 0.005. This criterion is satisfied by two variables: curiosity (p ˂ 0.001) and morality (p ˂ 0.001).

According to this study (Figure 1), successful mediators are more curious than unsuccessful ones. This can be explained by the fact that successful mediators are open to new information and focused on existing knowledge; they are ready to learn new things and develop in their field of expertise. They learn, reflect and analyse their activities deeply. Successful mediators confidently know the mediation procedure and the sequence of stages, but at the same time they are not tied to them; if necessary, they can use a nonstandard way to achieve the goal. Curiosity characterises a mediator as a specialist who is interested in his or her work and shows creativity in it.

It should be also observed that successful mediators are characterised by morality at the level above average, but this indicator should not be overestimated, because excessive humanity and gentleness, as well as unduly harsh views about acceptable behaviour and high requirements can lead to conflicts with others and will be harmful to activities. Excessive morality and exaggerated friendliness will hinder the mediator’s objectivity; one of the principles of the mediator’s activity is impartiality. Both of these areas also seem to speak to unconscious bias – and the curiosity to identify one’s own unconscious bias so as to be aware of any potential impact this may have.

To clarify the structure of personal qualities important for the mediator’s professional activity, Costa and McCray’s FFI in Bodunov and Biryukov’s version was used (Biryukov & Vasiliev, 1997), as well as multivariate methods of analysis. The five-factor questionnaire scales are correlated with the mediator’s important professional qualities, which allows confirming the possibility of their application for research purposes. This ratio is shown in Figure 2.

Thus, all the mediator’s important professional qualities identified in Collins’ work were evaluated, except for attentiveness, because its verification is possible only with the help of broader tests for assessing intellectual abilities (Collins, 2005).

Descriptive statistics were used to determine the mean values and standard deviations of professional competencies, measured using the self-assessment questionnaire, and the professionally important qualities of the mediator’s personality, measured using the FFI method. The results are shown in Table 5.

As can be seen from the data in Table 5, mediators have the following important professional qualities: empathy, specificity, responsibility and organisation. Consequently, mediators are benevolent, have needs for interaction, are impartial in relation to the parties, understand and bear responsibility for the process and result of the mediation procedure, strive to transform reality, have sensitivity and are able to make decisions but have an average resistance to stress, which can be expressed in tension, anxiety, excessive sentimentality, self-criticism and depression.

The analysis showed that most of the key competencies are quite pronounced and have a value above average. The most pronounced is the professional competence ‘planning’. It can be can said that mediators have a well-developed strategic planning skill, the ability to recognise the emotions of others and listen actively. Regarding conflict management, mediators are flexible in their judgements, respecting the views and values of the parties to the conciliation procedure, which undoubtedly contributes to successful mediation.

To describe the relationship between the Big Five main scales, the questionnaire that was developed by the authors for assessing professional competencies and the criterion for the success of the number of conciliation agreements, a correlation analysis was carried out, which determined the presence of correlation relationships at the 5% significance level (with a coefficient value r > 0.229, Figure 3).

As can be seen from the data in Figure 3, the ‘self-control’ indicator has the strongest positive relationship with the indicators ‘playfulness–practicality’ (r = 0.364) and ‘number of conciliatory agreements’ (r = 0.312) and a positive relationship with ‘attachment-separation’ (0.268). Controlling naturalness has the strongest positive relationship with conflict management (r = 0.376), a positive relationship with problem analysis (r = 0.265) and a negative relationship with the number of conciliation agreements (r = −0.258). ‘The number of conciliatory agreements’ has the strongest positive relationship with ‘communication’ (r = 0.295), a positive relationship with ‘extraversion–introversion’ (r = 0.251) and also a strong negative relationship with ‘attachment–separation’ (r = −0.308). Emotionality–restraint has a strong negative relationship with conflict management (r = −0.323) and a negative relationship with problem analysis (r = −0.229).

Thus, from the list compiled by the authors and the mediator’s important professional qualities (empathy, activity, sociability, specificity, openness, organisation, responsibility, poise, attentiveness, impartiality), the qualities of activity, specificity, openness, poise, organisation, responsibility and communication skills have significant correlations with the number of conciliatory agreements. From the list of professional competencies (communication, conflict management, problem analysis, planning and self-control), communicativeness and self-control have significant connections with the number of conciliatory agreements.

To identify the influence of personality traits on the success of conciliation process, the authors applied step-by-step regression analysis, where the number of conciliation agreements was set as an objective criterion for the mediator’s activity success (translated into the square root of the Z-score) as a dependent variable, and the independent variables were five key personality scales of the ‘Big Five’ method: ‘extraversion–introversion’, ‘attachment–separation’, ‘control–naturalness’, ‘playfulness–practicality’ and ‘emotionality–restraint’. As a result of the step-by-step application of the five predictors method, only one is included in the regression equation: ‘attachment–separation’. The multiple correlation coefficient R reflects the relationship of the dependent variable of success with the independent variable and is equal to 0.332.

Thus, it can be concluded that the predictor of the mediation procedure success is the low indicator of the ‘attachment–separation’ scale. This means that mediators who are more independent, acting in accordance with their principles, are more successful. Mediators with a warmer, more trusting attitude have fewer successfully completed mediation processes. Thus, the connection revealed by the correlation analysis was confirmed: more successful mediators do not have a pronounced control over the procedure, in contrast to unsuccessful mediators. The R² value is 0.110 and shows that 11% of the variance of the success variable is because of the influence of the predictor. The F-test shows that this relationship is statistically significant (p < 0.05).

To identify the influence of professional competencies on the success of the conciliation process, step-by-step regression analysis was used, where the dependent variable was the number of conciliation agreements as an objective criterion for the mediator’s success (translated into the square root of the Z-score), and the independent variables were five key mediator professional competencies, measured by the questionnaire for assessing professional competencies: self-control, communication, conflict management, planning and problem analysis. The mediator’s professional competence was also converted to the square root of the Z-score.

As a result of the stepwise method of five predictors, only one is included in the regression equation: conflict management. The multiple correlation coefficient R reflects the relationship of the dependent variable of success with the independent variable and is equal to 0.279. The R² value is 0.078 and shows that 7.8% of the variance of the success variable is because of the influence of the predictor. The F-test shows that this relationship is statistically significant (p < 0.05).

The hypothesis of this study was partially confirmed, because in the present study, statistically significant differences were established in mediators with different performance levels only in two personal characteristics: curiosity and morality. It was found that successful mediators are characterised by a higher level of curiosity. This finding is consistent with research by other authors, which has shown that one of the first tools that mediators should use to solve this problem is the relationship of surprise and curiosity (Winslade & Monk, 2001). Also, this property has been identified as important for the work of the mediator in other studies (Benjamin, 2003; Reitman, 2003). They show that the mediator should be genuinely interested in finding out what the client is thinking about, rather than trying to confirm his guesses. The mediator’s questions are likely to focus on stories rather than facts. Communicating a message of curiosity and interest in the experiences of the conciliators is the first step in building trust and relationships.

Thus, curiosity helps to confirm the parties’ belief that the mediator is truly interested in their situation, their feelings and their perception. This helps to strengthen the bond between the mediator and the parties and also helps the parties to feel that they have been heard.

The obtained results should be taken into account when teaching and training mediators by expanding the programme with additional psychological trainings. It is also necessary to provide additional support for novice mediators, because this will facilitate more active involvement in activities, conduct more conciliation process and subsequently lead to increased success.

It can be concluded that the predictor of the success of the mediation procedure is the reduced level of conflict management. Most likely, mediators with excessive caution do not allow the parties to speak out to release the emotional pain of the parties, which is necessary for a constructive solution to the problem. As a result of the fact that this does not happen, the number of procedures completed by the contract may decrease. Conversely, providing an outlet for a conflict leads to an increase in completed mediation process. Consequently, more successful mediators do not have such professional competence as conflict management.

According to the results of the correlation analysis, professionally important personality traits were identified that affect the success of the mediation procedure: activity, sociability, unexpressed responsibility, impulsivity, abstractness and closeness, as well as such professional competencies as communication, self-control and conflict management. At the same time, according to the results of the step-by-step regression analysis, the characterological feature ‘separateness’ was revealed, which most affects the success of the mediation procedure.

It can be said that this hypothesis was partially confirmed: successful mediators are distinguished by a higher level of expression of such professionally important qualities of a mediator as activity and communication skills, as well as such professional competencies as self-control and communication.

The developed questionnaire for assessing professional competencies will help in the training and selection of mediators. It will help to highlight which key and specific competencies of the mediator hinder the achievement of a successful result in the rehabilitation procedure and which require development. Based on the answers, the effectiveness of the mediator’s behaviour models in certain situations is revealed. Also, this questionnaire can be used to conduct a 360-degree assessment which will bring objectivity and accuracy in identifying poorly developed competencies.

The methodology for assessing professional competencies can be applied both in individual and group form. The completed form is processed using the key presented in Appendix 1, Table 3-A1. After that, the expressiveness of each key competence is highlighted in four levels of its manifestation.

The questionnaire shows not only what competencies require development but also at what stage of mediation more difficulties arise. The main stages of mediation were identified in the previous study: the preparatory stage (the first mediated interaction with the parties); the individual meeting with the parties; and the final stage (meeting of the parties) (Korneeva & Rudakova, 2019). The authors have identified the necessary competencies at each stage of the mediation procedure (Table 6).

Thus, an additional key to the questionnaire was compiled, which determines at what stage of the conciliation procedure problems arise:

Finally, a limitation of this study should be mentioned: the need to expand the sample size and the inclusion of mediators of various specialisations (territorial and school reconciliation services).

The next step of the study will be aimed at eliminating the identified limitations and involve the use of the developed self-assessment questionnaire of professional competencies by the 360-degree method. Mentors and trainers who train mediators, leaders and participants in mediation will be included as evaluating experts. This will allow the researchers to look at the mediation process from different angles and increase the efficiency of the procedure. Also, this questionnaire can be used at competitions of professional skills of mediators to assess the expressiveness of their competencies, which they will demonstrate by completing competition tasks.

A mediator competency model has been developed and empirically confirmed, including communication, conflict management, problem analysis and work with information, planning and self-control. In the course of empirical research, it was revealed that the success of the conciliation procedure is influenced by such professional competencies as self-control and communication. Initially, it was suggested that successful mediators are distinguished by a higher level of expression of such professional competencies as conflict management, problem analysis and self-control, in contrast to unsuccessful mediators. However, the hypothesis of this study was partially confirmed, because successful mediators are characterised by a higher level of expression of such professional competencies as self-control and communication. This can be explained by the fact that the main role in the mediator’s activity is played by building effective communication with the participants in the mediation procedure and the ability to control their emotions, behaviour and thoughts in order to contribute to solving problems that arise in restorative mediation. It can be concluded that the goals and objectives set at the beginning of this work were achieved.

The authors have developed the self-assessment questionnaire of professional competencies for mediators, which can be used both for a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of a specialist’s activity and the professional suitability of a mediator. Also, a qualitative analysis of the self-assessment of competency indicators allows to plan a strategy for the professional self-improvement of a mediator, to identify those competencies that need development.

The obtained results can be applied not only on the territory of the Russian Federation but also in South Africa, because the study was based on the general model of mediation and the basic principles of its application. The tested model of mediator’s professional competencies is also relevant for other countries because of the fact that its development was based on international studies. The questionnaire is valuable and can be adapted to the samples of South Africa, which will help to determine the key competencies of the mediator and assess their severity among mediators.

In the future, it is necessary to increase the sample size for the possibility of standardising the questionnaire, conducting additional research about the factors of the mediator’s success.