This phase is essential in order that any unrealistic expectations are recognized and addressed, and that an agreement is based upon a full understanding of expected behaviors rather than upon semantic misunderstanding or confusion. This is done by creating a scenario that reflects and challenges the nature of the current issue or dispute. The disputants are asked how they will react. Their behavior determines whether the agreement can be made to apply in that context. If it does not work in the scenario, then the apparent agreement is illusory and more work needs to be done.
Some mediators conduct testing en route to the agreement.
I argue that one must also test after the agreement is in writing, but before signatures are added. The disputant's must have developed sufficient trust to get to the agreement, but the history of the disputants will still contain nagging memories and anxieties as to the trustworthiness of others required to live by the agreement. Therefore, testing after final form validates that trust, and reinforces the manner in which the stability of the terms will be protected and assured. This condition of amplified trust gives increased power and credibility to the signatures. Empower the participants to continue the negotiating process.