Premier League Managers’ tips on difficult conversations

Some good learning for all managers around difficult conversations has recently emerged from an unlikely source – football – better known for causing conflict than resolving it.

A new book ‘The manager - Inside the Minds of Football’s Leaders[1]’ has a section on ‘how to have tough conversations’ which has some useful material. Glen Hoddle an ex England manager knew that a tough conversation with the most famous England player – Paul Gascoigne was coming but he was determined to tackle the core issue and not avoid it.

‘I had to sit him down in the hotel one-to-one and I spoke to him with the facts. “Listen Paul, for a year I’ve been telling you if we get to the World Cup it could be magnificent for you. You’re at your peak – but you haven’t listened and now I have to make this decision.” It was a tough tough decision.’ Hoddle had signposted his intentions, kept in touch over a period of time and was crystal clear about the reasons for his decision.

David Moyes (now Manchester United manager) ‘takes the decision rationally then prepares emotionally’: ‘I remember the tough conversation when I changed the captain. I looked for the best way to do it, tried to be fair and did what I believed was right. It was a long thought process – I don’t make these decisions lightly. Then I worked out how to give him the message a way that would keep him completely engaged and playing well.”

Carlo Ancelotti (Real Madrid manager) emphasises the value and the difficulty of empathy:

‘I think you have to show the player your character, because in a group it is normal to have a better relationship with one and a different relationship with another. By showing your character you build trust – and in this way I was able to keep friendships even whn making tough and unpopular decisions.’

Clearly at the top of the current football tree management skills have advanced massively since Ron Atkinson – football pundit and ex manager of Manchester United:

‘They’ve picked their heads up of the off the ground and now they have a lot to carry on their shoulders.’

John Crawley (PRL general manager)

Commissioned recently by the ‘Manager’ (The Magazine for the League Managers Association) to write an article on having challenging conversations as it was requested by a number of managers.

---

[1] Carson, Mike, The manager. Inside the minds of football’s leaders. Bloomsbury 2013.

Reducing Email stress at work through 'E-tiquette'

According to an up and coming study from Loughborough University reading and sending emails prompts tell-tale signs of stress including elevated blood pressure, heart rate and levels of the hormone cortisol.

The conflict risks of E-communication is one of the areas covered in our new White Paper coming up in July.

Prof Tom Jackson of Loughborough University, who led the study which has not yet been published, said: "The brain can only deal with eight to 12 tasks at any one time and if you can't shut those tasks down you start to become overloaded and fatigued.

"Multifunctional devices like Blackberrys and iPhones allow workers to be accessible 24-hours a day unlike ever before [but] because of this it is likely that there will be an increase in stress levels."

Researchers who followed a group of 30 government employees found that 83 per cent became more stressed while using email, rising to 92 per cent when speaking on the phone and using email at the same time.

Although receiving a single message was no more stressful than answering one phone call or talking to someone face-to-face, emails had a stronger effect overall because people received so many each day.

Emails which were irrelevant, which interrupted work or demanded an immediate response were particularly taxing, while those which arrived in response to completed work had a calming effect.

The study also found that people were unable to identify accurately when their body was showing signs of stress and often were unaware of their state, he added This would indicate that employees might find it difficult to self-regulate their use of communication media to ensure they do not become overwhelmed by stress."

Do you have any examples of e-mail stress and conflict?

We will be launching a useful whitepaper highlighting the issues of conflict- including Etiquette 

All female conflicts at work perceived as more negative – implications for workplace mediators and investigators

If you are about to mediate or investigate an all-female conflict at work, watch out for a tendency to view it harshly. New research from the University of British Columbia's business school suggests men and women perceive conflict between two women co-workers as being more harmful and doing more irreparable damage than conflicts between men. (1)

Participants were asked to make judgements on a scale of one to seven on the likelihood that the two managers would be able to repair their relationship going forward, and the extent to which the conflict would affect their job satisfaction and commitment to the company.

Participants rated those involved in all-female conflicts as also being more likely to let the argument negatively influence job satisfaction than male-female or male-male quarrellers.

The study also found that female experiment participants were just as likely as males to see the all-female conflict as more negative.

"I think people perceive female conflict negatively because it violates the way they think women should be," researcher Leah Sheppard told CBC News in an interview. "We want them to be always nurturing and kind and supportive."

It's an assumption that people don't impose whenever men deal with each other, even in a hostile way, she says.

"We are hard-pressed to think of a term comparable to 'catfight' that is regularly used to label conflict and competition between two men," she notes. "This term is troubling because it dehumanizes women and suggests that competition and conflict between women is akin to a disease when, in reality, moderate amounts of same-sex hostility are natural and expected across [men and women.]"

We all have our hooks which make it difficult for us to see things as they are and remain impartial. What do you think? What implications does this have for training workplace mediators and investigators? Do we concentrate too much on the technical side and not enough on the pitfalls of human bias?

We would love to hear your view. Get in touch. 

John Crawley

(1)http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2013/02/25/business-sauder-female-conflict.html   

‘A manager reluctant to investigate a disciplinary issue’ – I'm not surprised!

‘Can we compel a reluctant manager to investigate’ asked a Federation of Small Businesses member to the legal team in the FSB magazine ‘First Voice.’ In a recent edition of the FSB magazine Contact the People Resolutions Team for more on improving investigation capacity. The reluctant manager apparently felt he had not been trained for this role.

The FSB legal team suggested that this could be a disciplinary matter as the manager may be seen to be refusing to do ‘any additional duties that are suitable and appropriate for his role.’ Sensibly though the FSB legal team recognised that it was much more important to ensure that the investigation is conducted correctly and not by someone who could later be alleged to be incompetent or biased.

In many small or large businesses investigations continue to challenge even the most skilful and experienced manager. It is one of those responsibilities that people acquire and it comes with great expectations is hugely challenging. Just imagine if you suddenly put in the position of investigating whether or not a college who you had been working with years was a ‘bully’ or not? A team member alleges that they are. You need to interview witnesses, write up notes, put a report together, maintain confidentiality.

We all possess investigative skills to some degree and could not survive if we could not gather verbal information from the people around us, collect documentary evidence, draw conclusions, feed back our information and recommendations to others (say about an area we are thinking of moving to).

In the workplace though people’s livelihood and well being can depend on the skills of an investigator if someone raises a grievance, or makes an allegation of wrongdoing against them. I can see why a manager might be reluctant but I would not then want to compel them to do it, rather support them and their colleagues in ensuring that they did it fairly, rigorously and well.

Contact the People Resolutions Workplace Investigation team about investigation training, outsourcing the most complex, senior investigations, investigator mentoring. If you are a small business contact John Crawley about ‘Investigation Pooling’.

When is a Mediation not a Mediation? When it’s ‘Conflict Coaching’

Recently we have handled a number of cases where a manager is ‘in dispute’ with a team, or vice versa and we have developed an interesting hybrid approach which offers much to mediation but also to coaching.

Mediation’s strength is its ability to encourage people to move towards common ground, rebuild communication and resolve issues. In these team versus manager situations there are often power issues (e.g. 5 team members v one manager) and blocking behaviours (e.g. lack of of self awareness and destructive, habitual negative management habits) which inhibit the success of mediation.

As many of our consultants have a wide range of assessment, coaching, facilitation and mediation skills they have been successfully creating a tailored process which involves three main ingredients:

o   ‘Conflict coaching’ with individuals (often the manager) where necessary to encourage behavioural change and build self-awareness

o   Mini-mediations to build resolution and rebuild trust

o   A team mediation to reset working relationships, reset future working and restore performance.

This approach is particularly useful we find when a manager or particular team member has had a series of difficult situations. All coaching services explicitly aim for supportive and appropriate behaviour change. Coaches don’t just listen, observe and encourage they must challenge too. Coaching is about improvement and change. ‘Conflict coaching’ utilises a number of tried and tested facilitation and ‘breakthrough’ techniques developed from our years of successful work with challenging situations at work. All our practitioners are committed to a non-blaming and constructive approach.

This hybrid of coaching and mediation is proving successful with a range of customers and can unstick some very blocked situations. We can, of course, also train people in conflict-coaching skills and watch out for some new training courses in this area.

Contact John Crawley for more information.

Does justice always have to mean ‘punishment’?

Home Secretary Yvette Taylor recently expressed horror (1) when hearing that community resolution was applied in 10,160 incidents of "serious violence" - about 12 times the figure for five years ago. She described the figures as ‘very serious’ and that this it is ‘letting people off.’ She added "That's bad for justice, bad for victims and goes against all the evidence."

Community Resolution is a well established victim-led resolution technique, in many cases including a mediation-style ‘restorative’ dialogue.  Yvette Taylor’s comments are understandable but fill me with dismay as they focus on the potentially negative aspects of a mediation-style resolution process which generally has well-evidenced success.

Association of Chief Police Officer's representative Assistant Chief Constable Garry Shewan speaks positively about how community resolution “will be victim-led and above all reflect their views and wishes." Closure for many victims is an important part of justice. Just like mediation, people who may be responsible for bad behavior also get the chance to move on.

ACC Shewan continues "Going through a restorative justice meeting has also been proven to have more impact on an offender than a prison sentence or a court punishment alone, as they see the consequences of their actions and so want to make changes in their future behaviour."

Mediation in the workplace is also uniquely win/win. It challenges conventional views of justice and often generates strong negative reactions. On other hand those who try mediation very soon see its benefits.

There is good learning here for organisations that are thinking of using a workplace mediator or setting up an in-house mediation service.

1.   Do not push people into mediation – it must be their choice

2.   Mount a campaign to promote the many benefits of mediation alongside the risks.

3.   Do not use mediation in cases where it would send out the wrong message and where a more formal, disciplinary approach might be more suitable.

4.   Make sure you are really thorough in measuring the cost of conflict and the subsequent cost benefits of mediation when used appropriately.

5.   Be persistent and resilient as mediation is always put under much more scrutiny than other more legalistic, formal approaches.

So what have you done in your organisation to overcome negative views of mediation?

John Crawley

---

[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22346971

The Five A's of Resolving Workplace Conflict

For today’s post, we’ve summarised the five key elements of addressing workplace conflict in a handy visual (you can save, share and print the image above).

Let’s look at each step in more detail:

Step 1: Acknowledge that there is tension or conflict that needs addressing rather than let it fester any longer. As people, it’s natural for us to avoid and downplay conflict because dealing with it is hard, it takes effort and honesty, and it often brings things out that can make the situation more uncomfortable before it improves. So your first step is to take ownership of the problem.

Step 2: What is it actually that you want to achieve from putting yours and others’ time and energy (and organisational investment), into dealing with the conflict? That is, are you looking to address the underlying issues at the very heart of the conflict, or can you see other ways that the situation could be brought to some sort of closure – like moving someone to another department, reaching a compromise agreement, or conducting an investigation to tick a particular policy box? Your answer to this question fundamentally affects what you do and how the conflict may or may not be resolved. In our experience, if you can get to the root of the issue, it always yields the most positive, and cost effective, result for the business and individuals concerned.

Step 3: Addressing conflict early is always the best approach before it escalates to a point where it becomes increasingly costly to resolve. For example, reaching Employment Tribunal is a situation where nobody really wins. Your aim is to nip the conflict in the bud as soon as it is picked up.

Step 4: Try not to jump to solution mode before you’ve assessed some key factors. It’s important to fully understand first why the conflict occurred, and its seriousness. With groups, it could be helpful to roughly visualise the conflict on paper –representing the many lines of interaction and what each relationship is like, what incidents have occurred between people, so where the hot spots are, etc.

Step 5: Finally, it’s important to accept that some kinds of conflict are easier to resolve than others. A spat in a meeting can be diffused relatively quickly, but resolving the issues bubbling underneath could be a lengthier road. But it’s certainly possible, if there has been a commitment (Step 1) to support individuals during what can be a tough period of dealing with negative emotions, of self-reflection and changing their own behaviour.

We hope you found these steps useful when facing conflict in your organisation. You’ll find more information about our services here and free video recordings of our workplace conflict webcasts.

Successful mediations start with the right HR mindset. When was the last time you checked yours?

When conflict boils over in the workplace, it is tempting to quickly bring the parties together and point them towards a resolution. You can see how they need to work it out, ‘It is just a matter of telling them, right?’

No, not really. A more sensitive approach, based on our current knowledge of interpersonal relationships, usually gets better results which are more relevant to the individuals, and longer lasting.

Time and again, we come across well-meaning, but perhaps ill-advised, colleagues confusing informal HR meetings with mediation in its most valuable and effective form.
 Perhaps it is time for HR professionals and line managers to gain a better understanding of what mediation is, what it can do, when it should be used, and whom is best placed to mediate competently and without bias. After all, the way mediation is introduced into your organisation will shape the way it is embraced and embedded in your culture.

Once the relevant line or HR manager has learned of a conflict situation at work, they will probably want to sit down with each party to gain a fuller picture of the situation. There is much to be gained from these conversations, and one possible outcome may be to propose a mediation.

Problems occur when the meeting turns into the beginnings of a mediation of sorts, before the parties have been duly prepared and have an understanding of what is involved. There is also a risk that, in this context, there is a lack of complete impartiality and that professional mediation practice models are not being followed. This poses a significant risk to the credibility of the process and the way the parties are being supported.

Here are some of what we believe to be the core objectives of an initial needs assessment:

- Gain overview of concerns

- Establish the history of the issue/s to date and the people involved

- Understand what the parties are looking to achieve 
All of the above can, with the consent of the parties, feed usefully into a mediator's background knowledge of the situation, if indeed mediation is the most appropriate next step. 

People Resolutions provides independent conflict resolution services, including workplace investigations and mediation. If you’d like to talk through any situation, please don’t hesitate to give us a call on 01908 488 828, at no obligation.

Can a workplace investigation be a positive thing?

The circumstances surrounding most workplace investigations are serious and negative for all involved. While everyone focuses on fulfilling their personal or company objectives, many organisations lose sight of the positive aspects of conducting an investigation, as a form of business best practice.

Try looking at investigations in a different light:

They are mobilising. First and foremost, an investigation is doing something about the situation. After a conflict situation escalates to formal stages, it may be difficult to know what to do, or who is right. An investigation is designed to clarify a muddy situation by unscrambling the allegations.

They listen. Investigation interviews allow each party to state their case. On a more emotional level, they feel that their concerns are fully heard and have been able to say their piece to an unbiased listening ear. When handled professionally and independently, this can significantly help to diffuse the cloud of tension surrounding most investigations.

They are enabling. Once outcomes are determined, the HR or line manager is then able to take appropriate action. A well-written investigation report should shine a light on how the parties can move forward, whether it be a warning, or some training, or a mediation.

They are fair. Our investigation reports are always written in such a manner that doesn’t blame, criticise or criminalise the parties but treats all equitably and with respect, leaving room for everybody to move forward afterwards.

They are constructive. In many investigation cases, the parties will be required to work together afterwards. This is where investigation report can be of additional value, by including practical recommendations as to how the relationship can be brought back on track.

They provide learning. While some parties will be unhappy with an investigation outcome, even Respondents whose allegations against them have been upheld can take something positive from the experience. Having had their behaviour under the spotlight, they will no doubt be clearer on boundaries of conduct in the workplace and their own style. Depending on the visibility of the outcomes, the case may also provide learning for other colleagues about what is expected in terms of respectful co-worker interaction. For Complainants, even if their allegation hasn’t been upheld, it can be reassuring to know they weren’t being discriminated against, for example.

Finally, it is worth mentioning that you don’t have to wait for a formal grievance to be raised in order to conduct an investigation. If concerns have been raised, a line manager can action an investigation to get to the bottom of an informal conflict situation. This could prevent further escalation i.e. an eruption, a grievance, a departure, etc.  

People Resolutions provides independent conflict resolution services, including workplace investigations and mediation. If you’d like to talk through any situation, please don’t hesitate to give us a call on 01908 488 828, at no obligation.