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

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.

The ‘root’ to resolving workplace conflict - an insight into our process

The root to resolving workplace conflict

Every first phone call we receive from a client organisation paints an individual problem scenario of workplace conflict. And while there are unique aspects to each situation, many will share common themes that help guide us along the appropriate route to resolution and closure for all stakeholders.

A return to work clouded in anxieties, interpersonal clashes within a whole team, an under performing manager - all of these could be perceived as being ripe for mediation. But conflict has roots, often buried beneath the surface, which can make an immediately obvious solution hard to spot.

Mapping the conflict picture

The key is to try and map the ‘conflict picture’, complete with roots and branches, to indicate which interventions will work most effectively and in which order. We also look at risks (such as imminence of a grievance being raised or a person leaving) and what is the end goal we want to reach. This isn't to say that all workplace conflict can be ‘solved’ in a scientific manner - we’re dealing with people here - but it certainly helps gain a handle on the situation.

For example, if there is a fallout within a group of employees, it is worth examining whether there is a line management issue underneath, or perhaps a hotspot between two individuals that is causing others to take sides. Informal one-to-ones with each member of the team can go a long way to making everyone’s concerns feel heard and to pinpoint the conflict anchor.

By taking things a level deeper, it may become obvious that conducting a group mediation ‘cold’ might not be the best approach; it could be better to mediate between two people at the centre, and/or provide some coaching or training for the manager to take ownership of their team’s respectful co-worker behaviour. When all the pieces are in place, in the right order, the situation can be brought to a close for everyone to move forward.

In this way, mediation becomes one of many tools available to employ at the appropriate time. Training, either before or after a conflict situation, is very effective in moving towards a culture where tensions are addressed early (and therefore do not require costly time and resource to handle), and where mediations and investigations are carried out by competent internal individuals.

We have over 20 years expertise in helping organisations with workplace mediation, investigations and training, using our network of UK wide specialists. If you have any conflict questions, or a current case or would like to speak to us about, we’d be happy to hear from you. Contact us at information@peopleresolutions.com 

Who’s leading the way towards Collaboration?

Earlier this week we were informed of new research from the Chartered Management Institute (CMI) and Penna that “Over four in ten managers (43 per cent) consider their line managers to be ineffective.”

Whilst this is shocking in itself, it won’t come as a surprise to many HR professionals in the UK.  A large proportion of conflict that we deal with at People Resolutions stems from poor communication – most likely between line managers and employees.

The research also found a strong link between line manager effectiveness and business performance: “Only 39 per cent of managers in low performing business thought their line managers were effective, compared to 80 per cent in high performing organisations”.

People Management Training as a whole has been around for years – but is it working?  This research would suggest not.  However, this brings the fore the importance of leadership to an organisation.  Can a workforce ever truly be 100% effective if the leadership isn’t?

As part of our 2012 mission help organisations move from conflict affliction to collaborative performance, we must also address the question of who leads such a move in organisational culture. With workplace conflict currently costing UK businesses over £24 billion per year, the drive to minimise conflict and move towards a more collaborative culture is more important than ever.  As will all substantial shifts in organisational culture we believe that this should be lead from the top.

Gen Y Workers – Are They Collaborative?

Generation Y describes our young workforce, born between 1977 and 1990, who are in their early twenties to mid thirties. But for many employers, they’re also the least understood group.

Immersed in technology from an early age and constantly moving from one idea or trend to the next, Gen- Yers are often labelled as having short attention spans and blur the line between their work and private lives; just as they might receive personal text messages and visit Facebook at work, they’re also comfortable with checking work emails over the weekend. They prefer – or rather expect – job profiles full of variety, flexibilty, meaning and interaction in return for their loyalty (which explains why they usually move on after 18 months).

All of this places new demands on the employer to harness a group with mixed characteristics – new media savvy and ethically driven on the one hand and flighty and easily bored on the other. Gen- Yers may be naturally communicative, but does this mean they are more collaborative?

Let’s be clear about what we mean by ‘collaboration’ – an organisational culture where staff across disciplines and roles are able to work together co-operatively towards the business’ objectives. Companies that nurture this kind of environment are less likely to suffer from conflictual behaviours and associated symptoms such as work stress, absence, turnover, low engagement, etc.

On the face of it, the always-on, always-connected Gen-Y worker naturally fits the profile of collaborative contributor. Certainly for organisations built on remote/mobile working, Gen-Y’s inclination towards email, text messaging and online networking as ways to communicate with team members is a valuable asset. But this group has also been criticised for its tendency to favour such methods over face-to-face or telephone contact  with colleagues and customers, despite the potential of email to generate misunderstanding, conflict and delays. In this respect, Gen- Yers could learn from older colleagues who more likely to pick up the phone to iron out an issue, or seek out more ‘in-person’ teamwork.

More than effective communication and teamwork, being collaborative at work means behaving in a fair and equitable way, appreciating diversity in colleagues and having a high level of Emotional Intelligence (EQ). MBA student, Michael Miranda, believes that “Baby Boomers are able to ‘self-manage’ far better than Gen- Y,” the latter being less aware of and in control of their feelings – a core component of EQ.

Of course, each generation (and individual) brings something different to the workplace, and it is a shared appreciation of these varied attributes that makes for a truly collaborative culture. For the passionate, iPhone-reliant Gen-Yer, today’s workplace must present an environment in which individuality can be expressed and collaborative behaviours are rewarded and reinforced from the top.