When there are office conflicts, it can make for a miserable and uninspiring work environment. Conflicts can happen for a variety of reason including simple personality differences. Unfortunately, disputes in the workplace can adversely affect business and this will be seen in the turnover rate. That is why it is so important to address the problem before it begins.
Here are 5 suggestions to help avoid or minimize workplace conflicts:
1. Communicate
Disputes often occur due to poor communication or no communication. Employees need clear direction and when this has not been effectively communicated to them, conflicts often arise. Employees want to know what their responsibilities are or what their job entails and how they are expected to perform their job. Communication between those in a position of authority, such as a manager or supervisor and employees must be clear, and concise. This is sure to help reduce conflicts and anxiety within the workplace. Additionally setting a standard of good communication will have a positive impact on the way employees communicate with each other. Many conflicts can be avoided by employees being on the same page about what they are doing.
2. Don’t Ignore It
The worst thing that can be done is to ignore that there is any sort of conflict. Even if there hasn’t been a dispute, in most cases tension can be felt. Conflict like this usually does not go away on its own. Left unaddressed conflict often intensifies. Once you notice that there is tension, avoid the possibility of it becoming worse by addressing it head-on. Although it will likely be uncomfortable, it would be more uncomfortable attempting to deal with the conflict once things have escalated.
3. Make It Easy to File A Formal Complaint
You should make it easy for employees to file a formal complaint, if necessary. There should be a process for them to follow so that they are comfortable making a complaint. The process should be as simple as them filling out a complaint form and submitting it to the HR Manager so that they can determine what further action is needed. This will prevent resentment from building and possible complaints from getting out of hand.
4. Create Team Engagement
Creating an atmosphere where employees are encouraged to work together promotes employee engagement. This will lead to employees learning to rely on each other and get to know each other’s strengths and weaknesses. Engagement will help employees become more at ease with co-workers.
5. Treat Every Employee Fairly
You wouldn’t think that this would have to be mentioned but unfortunately, without knowing it, some employers may show favouritism. Employers, managers, and supervisors must remain neutral and treat employees fairly to avoid workplace conflicts.
Manage Expectations
It would be unrealistic to assume that conflicts in the workplace will never occur, but knowing how to avoid conflicts is helpful in preventing and minimizing the number of conflicts that occur. Most employers understand how disruptive conflicts can be to their business and will do what they can to reduce them. This article has provided some simple steps to get started. In most cases, some of these steps are already being implemented. Why not try also incorporate the things that you are not currently implementing to see if you can further reduce the number of conflicts that you are experiencing? There is little to lose and everything to gain if the suggestions work to the advantage of everyone involved.
To learn conflict resolution skills that you can use at work and in your personal life, please visit our Alternative Dispute Resolution Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To improve your negotiation skills and get the results you want while negotiating, please visit our Become a Powerful Negotiator Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To gain skills to handle difficult conversations and difficult people with confidence, please visit our Dealing With Difficult People Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
In cross-cultural negotiations, above and beyond the issues of personal negotiation styles and techniques, one must consider the impact of cultural difference. This impact will often be tied to communication issues, increasing the possibilities of misunderstanding. Things that are said, left unsaid, or unclearly said can all create an extra layer of difficulty on top of the substantive issues to be discussed.
In cross-cultural negotiations, we also often bring a certain amount of baggage to the table based on our personal and group history, with all of the stereotypes and assumptions that may go along with that history. What makes it particularly challenging is that cultural difference is a two-way street, potentially making both sides of the table feel awkward. In a potentially adversarial negotiation, that awkwardness could easily become distrust and fear.
One of the challenges in dealing with cultural difference is the nature of culture itself. While the concept of culture applies to a body of people, and their history, we negotiate with individuals, not a “culture”. In a sense, we are all the product of a variety of micro-cultures; based on our family, gender, race, religion, age, education, geographic history, peer groups, occupation, etc. Generalizing based on one’s culture is not only challenging but dangerous.
To maximize the chances of success in the cross-cultural setting, one should consider a number of factors, including:
1. Etiquette/Protocol Issues
Simple issues we take for granted can make a difference in cross-cultural settings. How do you greet someone; with what level of formality? First name jocularity may work wonderfully in Los Angeles, but fall flat in Beijing where formality is more the norm (at least in the absence of longstanding relations). How should you dress to meet a senior government official in the heat of a Trinidadian summer? Are there gender issues to consider that may impact on how to behave?
Are gifts appropriate? Required? Have we considered the impact of some of the issues set out below, such as personal space norms? Are certain topics acceptable, and if so when can they be raised comfortably?
There may even be protocols that we will never be aware of. For example, in Saudi Arabia, showing the sole of your shoe to your host would be considered a breach of etiquette, but they would rarely point it out to you. In Belgium, failing to properly introduce everyone might ruffle feathers.
Lack of understanding of etiquette can lead to tension, discomfort, and mistrust. In Saudi Arabia, it would be quite normal for a visitor to be greeted by their male host with a very soft handshake and a kiss, then taken by the hand and walked hand in hand around a party being introduced to everyone. Such an activity would make many North American males a tad uncomfortable, but understanding the nature of the cultural norms can make the experience far less daunting.
Try to inform yourself and understand the protocol and etiquette norms in advance, but keep your senses open for any signs that you have stepped into inappropriate territory.
2. Body Language Issues
While in Western (North American and European) cultures, eye contact is often seen as a good thing (a sign of confidence, honesty, etc.), even in those cultures, it can be misinterpreted. In other cultures, such as some aboriginal cultures and Japanese culture, eye contact can be seen as rude or inappropriate or uncomfortable.
One must be careful in reading too much or too little into body language signals, as they can be so easy to misinterpret and so dependant on personal history. As individuals, we are the product of many micro-cultures, all of which play a role in our interactions with others. A Japanese businessperson, for example, is the product of his family upbringing, his education, his gender, his religion, his work experience, his geographic history, his age, etc.
Working among the Inuit for example, we have been told by Southerners that Inuit are uncomfortable with eye contact. The truth is much more complex. Our Inuit participants in workshops have told us that eye contact may be uncomfortable in some settings (in discussions with elders, in discussions with a power imbalance, and in discussions that are uncomfortable by their nature), but that eye contact is not inherently bad at all. Indeed much communication in Inuit culture takes place with the eyes (‘Yes’ and ‘No’ are often communicated by a mere facial expression – what you might see as raised eyebrows and a grimace respectively). The comfort level with eye contact also depends very much on the background of the Inuk in question. Are they a 60 year old who was raised on the land or a 14 year old raised on MTV?
Other issues of body language commonly worth considering are the aspects of “personal space” and physical contact. Typically, to be comfortable, members of Western cultures desire a couple of feet of personal space. In some Asian cultures, more space may be desired. In Middle Eastern culture and some others, there may be much more physical contact as a norm, particularly between males. Contact between different genders however may be more limited in the Middle East than in Western norms. All of these norms however, are subject to significant variation dependent on the individuals in question and their exact relationship with one another. What works for good friends for example, may not work with strangers.
With all aspects of body language, try to keep your radar open for signs that discomfort is being created.
3. Language Issues
In certain circumstances, language differences will require interpretative services on one or all sides. It is worth exploring the degree of language issues early on to prepare accordingly, before substantive discussions begin. Will there be a similar standard for verbal and written communications?
Recognize that, when translation is required, you will need to at least double the time required to accomplish a goal.
In using translation, you will want to ensure that you are getting accurate and timely translation, so set clear ground-rules for your interpreters. Are they to summarize or to repeat word for word? Nothing is more disturbing than to hear a three minute speech translated with one short sentence.
Technical language is much harder to understand and translate and acronyms can be easily misunderstood. An acronym (PMO) may simply sound like an unknown word. Avoid acronyms where possible. Speaking slowly and enunciating can help.
In negotiations with people from another language group, rather than caucus in private, some people may simply start talking in their own language. One should be careful of such actions as you never know what language proficiency is on the other side of the table. In one case, a group had a conversation in Flemish that was largely insulting to the other side. Unbeknownst to them, a Flemish speaker on the North American side understood every word, and was not amused.
4. Relationship Issues
In Western culture, there may be varying degrees of comfort with personal relationships in a negotiation. Some people are inherently relationship builders by nature and want to get to know the other party before getting down to business. Others are more rational and “cut to the chase” by nature, and may see personal relationships as external to or even dangerous in a business deal.
Other cultures can approach relationships in different ways. South Americans, for example, are more likely to want to get to know you as a person before getting down to business. The same would be true of many Asian cultures.
Americans often see contracts as the answer to all questions in a business relationship, whereas Europeans, particularly from the south, may be more likely to see a contract merely as the starting point of the larger relationship.
In the Caribbean, personal ‘respect’ is a crucial value. The way you deal with people will be remembered for a long time, and reputation can be very important to doing business effectively.
Ask yourself what role relationships should have in this negotiation. Is there a place for building relationships, and how can that be done effectively without disadvantaging oneself?
5. Timing Issues
Different cultures deal with time in very different ways. In Western cultures, punctuality is generally seen as a positive, though in the extreme it can actually be seen as nitpicky behaviour. In Japan and China, a failure to appear on time may be a serious breach of etiquette. In the Caribbean, the Arctic, South America or the Middle East, however, time is often seen as more fluid. Many a conflict at a hotel desk in the Bahamas has arisen because, “I am getting to it” in Nassau does not mean the same as it does in New York City.
In Toronto, cutting to the chase may be quite acceptable, whereas in Tokyo, more time may need to be set aside for negotiations, to lay the groundwork for the relationships. Time might also be used as a weapon. In a Chinese negotiation, for example, the substantive discussions were delayed and delayed until two hours before the known departure time of a Canadian negotiator, putting added pressure on that negotiator to make concessions before leaving.
Whereas many North Americans see a “one issue at a time” approach as a rational one, a Saudi negotiating team may jump all over the map on the issues. Is it a strategy or a cultural trait? We often infer negative intention from actions that have a negative impact on us, but we need to be careful about such knee jerk reactions. By clarifying the process in advance, we are less likely to be surprised in a negative way.
It is worth exploring timing issues explicitly with all parties so everyone understands what is meant by a timetable. When the other side says “We’ll get it to you soon”, what does that really mean?
Be prepared for surprises nonetheless.
6. Trust and Information Issues
North American culture generally values a rational, analytical, straight-forward approach to information, but at the same time, many North Americans typically keep their cards close to their chests and are reluctant to disclose. The adage of “I’ll show you mine, if you show me yours first” would not be uncommon. The approach to information often varies with the parties’ personalities and their relationship at the time, as well as other factors. The greater the level of trust, the more likely that fuller disclosure will occur.
Other cultures may approach information and trust in different ways. Some cultures are more risk averse than others, though typically, our training suggests that most cultures world-wide have a broad component of risk-averse individuals and a small subset of risk-takers. What kinds of personalities are you dealing with? Which are you?
7. Legal Issues
Where foreign law is an issue, advice from counsel adept in the appropriate jurisdiction is a must. The parties will need to determine what law is to apply to any contract, both procedurally and substantively. Be aware that legislation in one or more countries may trump what is written in the contract if there is a conflict. As a result, it is imperative to have someone who knows the legal framework in the relevant jurisdictions. If contracts are drafted in more than one language, what will happen in the event of a conflict?
What level of commitment is necessary to finalize an agreement? A written contract is the norm in most cultures, but the power of the handshake and verbal agreement varies from place to place and person to person. Ensure you are on the same page about the level of commitment and have the appropriate protections in place to ensure compliance.
8. Authority Issues
Depending on the culture (and other issues), true authority for decision-making may rest in various hands. In North America, it would be normal for a representative to attend with authority to make decisions, but there may be practical or strategic reasons for them to attend with limited or no authority to commit their principal. The boss may be out of country, or unwilling to make a final decision, for example.
In Japan, decisions may be made by consensus or by a senior representative of the company. Again, this may well depend on the people and companies involved. In Saudi Arabia, simply trying to determine who has the real authority may be a challenge.
There can be confusion and distrust when authority is spread in a horizontal manner on one side of the table but hierarchically on the other. How can you deal with decision-making to make both sides comfortable? Does a backroom democratic style, with a single point of contact to the client, make more sense than having all decision-makers participate equally with the client?
It is worth clarifying who has authority early on, modeling by your own example.
9. Political/Procedural Issues
When dealing with a foreign culture, you need to educate yourself and be aware of the political and practical realities of getting what you want in the applicable environment. Are there channels that must be followed? If so, what are they, and what is the best route through them that is compatible with the ethical issues in both cultures. Gift giving (and receiving), for example, may be the norm in China, but may run afoul of Government of Canada or company regulations on conflict of interest. This is a political issue. On the practical and procedural side, if giving a gift, what would be appropriate, and how should it be done?
10. Gender Issues
One of the most common and deeply felt value clashes that can occur between cultures is triggered by gender issues. In Saudi Arabia, for example, most Western companies will use male personnel in negotiations, out of concern that female negotiators will not be heard and respected in the same way by the Saudi Negotiators. Companies do this despite (at least in some cases) having their own internal codes of conduct which rule against gender discrimination. Important values and traditions on either side of the negotiation come head to head with stressful results on both sides.
Many aspects of gender relations crop up under some of the other categories set out above, such as etiquette and relationship building. It is worth spending time to consider the impact of gender dynamics on either side of the table, before plowing ahead into unknown territory.
11. Expectation Issues
It may help to clarify the expectations of the parties early on. What one side sees as the logical goal of a negotiation (getting a contract) may not be the goal of the other side (getting to know you/making contacts for future business). It never hurts to have a shared understanding of the goals. Clarify the shared purpose of the negotiation early on.
Conclusions
While there can be no over-arching ‘how to’ list for approaching cross-cultural negotiations (no single negotiation or negotiator is alike), a few simple guidelines will generally be helpful.
1. Seek to understand the culture in question, and encourage the other side do the same. Merely trying to learn and comply with cultural norms may generate significant respect and trust. Seek advice from those familiar with the culture and be careful about assumptions. Try to find a comfort level on both sides. Merely seeking to come to common cultural footing at the outset may create the relationship on which to build the deal. Recognize, however, that you cannot learn another culture overnight and remember the old adage about “a little knowledge”.
2. Know the specific negotiators in question. It is ultimately the person, and not the ‘culture’ to whom you are speaking. It is their individual beliefs and values that matter.
3. Plan your approach to minimize any negative impacts of cultural difference and to maximize the chances of success. Simply understanding that the cause of a problem is mere cultural difference can help. Recognizing that there is no active adversarial intent to hurt either side can go a long way towards preventing the negative reactions and escalation that often happen in such settings.
Written by Paul Godin, 2006
To learn conflict resolution skills that you can use at work and in your personal life, please visit our Alternative Dispute Resolution Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To improve your negotiation skills and get the results you want while negotiating, please visit our Become a Powerful Negotiator Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To gain skills to handle difficult conversations and difficult people with confidence, please visit our Dealing With Difficult People Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
Perhaps you have heard about mediation, taken conflict resolution training or participated in a mediation, and now you are interested in becoming a mediator. Maybe you envision yourself helping people or individuals within organizations that are in conflict. This article will explore how to become a mediator in Ontario, Canada. Although we are focusing primarily on Ontario, many of the concepts covered in this article can also be applied in other jurisdictions.
We are often asked about what one needs to be a mediator in Ontario. It is important to note that there is no regulatory body that governs mediation or mediators in Ontario at the time of this writing. There is also no certification necessary to practice mediation in Ontario. As a result, there are no required steps to become a mediator. While there are no required steps, here are some steps you may wish to consider.
STEPS TO BECOME A MEDIATOR
What are the steps to become a mediator?
START WITH YOUR WHY
Most articles that discuss how to become a mediator begin by suggesting that one chooses a niche or a specific area of interest within mediation. Although this can be helpful, and we will be discussing this in our next step, we believe a better place to start is to consider your reason for wanting to practice mediation.
Clarifying your “why” can help you better refine your thinking about approaching your formal or informal mediation practice. What draws you to want to mediate? Who would you like to help? What skills or previous experience do you possess that can help you?
Where can you see yourself being the most helpful? Do you have a network in a particular field?
The process of identifying your interest in mediation can also help you to decide whether you want to pursue a career in mediation or if adding mediation skills to your toolkit will be sufficient to help you to achieve your desired outcome. A clear “why” can also save you time in the other steps that we will be discussing.
The next step is to consider a niche. The field of mediation, although still emerging, is quite vast. There are a number of ways and areas in which one can apply mediation skills. Some people choose to use their mediation skills to complement their existing careers or practices. For example, HR professionals, lawyers, police officers, and many others use mediation or conflict resolution skills in their existing roles. Other people choose to pursue mediation as a full-time career. Most full-time mediators choose to limit their practises to certain types of disputes (for example, employment issues, workplace disputes, family issues, estate disputes, insurance disputes, etc).
Sometimes choosing a niche can be challenging because you might not be familiar with the mechanics, necessary skills or potential opportunities in different areas of mediation. As such, it can be difficult to know if you will enjoy practicing in that area. If choosing a niche is challenging, try contacting mediators who practice in these areas. This might give you some insights into the area and help you decide the direction you would like to pursue.
Also, remember that the area you choose to explore initially does not have to be the area you choose to practice for your entire mediation career. It is not unusual, for example, for a new mediator to practise in an area in which they have had prior experience and then transition over time to mediating other types of disputes. Some mediators also practice in multiple areas at once. Since many of the skills that one uses in mediation are transferrable, one can choose to pursue another area if the need or desire arises. However, it is important to note that some areas of mediation will require additional training to be proficient.
Areas of mediation practice include but are not limited to:
If you are interested in mediation, you likely already possess a number of skills and knowledge that will assist you in your practice. Ask yourself how comfortable you are facilitating a mediation formally or informally with the skills that you currently possess.
Also, consider how comfortable others would be trusting you to facilitate a process that can help them to try to resolve their disputes. You may wish to ask individuals who you trust to offer honest feedback about how effective you might be for that role. Sometimes these conversations can help us to see our blind spots and to identify skills we might need to develop prior to acting as a mediator or providing conflict resolution processes in our existing roles. Even people with considerable experience resolving conflicts in their existing roles will consider taking additional training prior to becoming a mediator. We offer a workshop on Alternative Dispute Resolution that focuses on developing practical negotiation and mediation training to increase participants’ confidence and heighten their dispute resolution skills. A significant number of our participants have ten, twenty or even more years of experience in their fields and yet they want to enhance and refine their mediation skills for their present roles and, for some, with a view to a future career in mediation.
As you add tools to your conflict resolution toolkit, it can also be helpful to know what skills mediators use most frequently. Some examples of skills mediators possess and constantly develop are:
It might also be helpful to consider applying for a mediation designation. The following organizations in Ontario offer memberships and designations in different areas of mediation:
Finally, networking can also be an effective way to equip yourself. Some of the aforementioned organizations host networking opportunities for their members. Contact local mediators to see if they would be willing to offer some of their time to connect and answer some of your questions. Also, always be attentive to mentorship opportunities. This may be formal mentorship or coaching in a particular skill that you are interested in developing. Feel free to contact us if you have any questions, and we will do our best to connect you to resources that we are aware of.
As we have mentioned in some of our other articles, it can be challenging to get mediation experience, particularly at the beginning. That said, the more experience you can gain, the more confident and capable you will be when you are mediating.
Of course, you can start by trying to get direct experience, for example, looking for volunteer opportunities in your community or in your field of expertise. Also, a number of organizations have developed programs that allow aspiring mediators to practice their skills in real scenarios. We have listed some of these organizations below.
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS
The Ontario Community Mediation Coalition is a not-for-profit association of community mediation services in the Province of Ontario, who hold a common definition of community mediation, agree on a standard of excellence and criteria for membership in the coalition, and support each other in our efforts to build strong communities through peaceful approaches to problem resolution.
This organization often has volunteer opportunities that can be helpful for getting your feet wet in an arena that is safe. They use a co-mediation model for their community mediations so that can also bring a dynamic that can be quite helpful as well.
it is important to envision the task of gaining experience broadly. If there are no opportunities in your area, consider ways to develop some of the skills in other settings. For example, you may not be mediating but you can develop and practise the skills of identifying key interests or framing issues for problem solving at a meeting. You can practise interactive listening at a family dinner. Practising your mediation skills, even in contexts where you are not mediating, will give you important experience. Also, there might be ways to get more experience through practical training that offers practice mediations (link to https://sfhgroup.com/online-course/alternative-dispute-resolution-workshop/) that allow you to develop your skills where there are few downsides.
Another way to get experience is by contacting people you know who may be interested in conflict resolution services. This might include individuals who you know in the mediation field or individuals who also utilize conflict resolution skills in their roles. Those who are most familiar with you may be more likely to use your services or connect you to others who might require your services.
As you gain experience, be intentional about learning from those experiences.
Ask yourself:
Finally, if you are thinking about offering your services through your own practice, envision yourself as an entrepreneur who provides mediation services. As is the case with many start-ups, getting a business off the ground is a risk and requires courage, resilience and strategy.
Marketing your skills can help others to know that your services are available. If no one knows your practice exists, how can they support it? Introduce your network to your skills, update your social media page, get a website if that is helpful, offer talks on conflict resolution to those who are willing to hear from you.
If you are interested in learning how to distinguish your practice from others, consider what we shared in this article.
Once you have gained some experience, consider applying to a mediation roster. Applying to rosters can also help to make others aware of your services. Although rosters do not guarantee that you will be chosen to offer your services, successfully joining a roster can increase your credibility and enhance your resume.
CONCLUSION:
STEPS TO BECOME A MEDIATOR
Enjoy the journey! Feel free to contact us for more details.
To learn conflict resolution skills that you can use at work and in your personal life, please visit our Alternative Dispute Resolution Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To improve your negotiation skills and get the results you want while negotiating, please visit our Become a Powerful Negotiator Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To gain skills to handle difficult conversations and difficult people with confidence, please visit our Dealing With Difficult People Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
Often, in negotiations, people get bogged down in positional bargaining, butting heads and wills in a way that frays nerves, destroys relationships and may not ultimately get anyone what they truly want. One way around the perils of positional bargaining (and there are a variety of ways) is to turn the discussion into a rational one. Switch the focus from a battle of wills into a search for the appropriate external fair standards or benchmarks, often called ‘objective criteria’.
Objective criteria are factual pieces of information, independent of the parties in the negotiation, that are relevant to what should or should not be agreed to in that negotiation. As an example, in negotiating to purchase a particular car, we would want to look at what that car sells for at other dealerships. What do similar cars sell for? What does the blue book (or red book if applicable) say the price should be? What is the previous year’s model selling for? All of those pieces of factual information are relevant to what you should pay for that car, some more relevant than others.
We have all used objective criteria at some point in our lives, but much of the strength of objective criteria comes not only from which objective criteria we use, but how we use them. This article reviews tips and techniques for getting the most out of such objective standards.
The Most Effective Objective Criteria are:
• obtained from as objective and credible a source as is possible (e.g. respected providers of similar goods and services in the marketplace), and are confirmable from multiple sources;
• clearly similar and relevant to the issue in question (e.g. if looking at the car, compare the cost of the same model, same year, same options, same mileage etc., so you are comparing apples to apples);
• simple to work out and understand (i.e. the more convoluted the explanation as to why it is relevant, the less likely it will be persuasive). One could contruct an elaborate argument based on gas mileage and inflation rates that the price of the car should be $10,000, but that’s a circuitous and unconvincing route when more direct comparables exist;
• in a form that is verifiable by the other side immediately or in advance (e.g. share details in advance, bring copies of written documentation and share it, provide contact information so they can verify facts independently, etc.);
• up to date (e.g. a recent appraisal is more persuasive than a six year old one); and
• persuasive not only to you, but to the other party, and to a neutral observer. For example, a valuation from an expert that was chosen and paid by you may not be persuasive, even if they are right, because they are seen as being “in your pocket”.
In Order To Effectively Communicate Objective Criteria, You May Want To:
• ask the other party about criteria of which they are aware;
• There may be overlap (you won’t need to convince them of the credibility of your source if they have already found it);
• Doing so shows your willingness to listen and your interest in their views, and may promote mutual respect;
• You may learn something that surprises and educates you (e.g. you won’t damage your credibility by using outdated or wrong information); and
• Giving serious and sincere consideration to their criteria will model the way you want them to treat your information. In addition, you need to understand their views fully in order to respond to them.
• avoid showing a patronizing attitude when presenting your data. You might be right, but if you present your information in a way that tells the other person they are “wrong”, it may just make them defensive and resistant to your ideas;
• interpret, use and apply the objective criteria provided to you by the other party (you won’t need to convince them of the credibility of their own information, just how to properly apply it);
• present reasons (criteria) first, conclusions later (e.g. so they hear and understand the reasons before reacting to the conclusion);
• give the other party assistance in verifying the objective criteria (e.g. provide reference contacts, copies of documents etc.) If they can’t verify it with their own eyes, why should they believe you;
• share details of objective criteria in advance, if appropriate, so that everyone can do their due diligence and be ready to negotiate when they meet (gives time for information to be digested and tested);
• work together to identify sources of objective criteria which all parties will accept (e.g., neither party may know what the prime rate of interest is, but both might agree that it is the appropriate measure of a fair rate of interest); and
• give the other party time to digest the information and come to terms with it before they decide whether to accept it and be guided by it. To progress, they need to digest.
To Find Effective Objective Criteria, You May Want To:
• identify the options you want to propose and then find the criteria needed to support those options;
• prepare, prepare, prepare. It takes time, but it pays off, and it impresses;
• call appropriate sources to explore the facts (record contact information and conversation details for future use);
• follow up verbal discussions and get relevant written documentation (quotations, specifications, diagrams, etc.);
• use the internet, but use it wisely. Don’t use sources that will cause you to lose credibility;
• ask people with the expertise in the field where to look;
• use third party neutral experts where appropriate and cost-effective (ideally, choose people that are acceptable to all parties as being impartial, or even better, select the expert by agreement with the other parties). A neutral expert that you hired, even if acceptable to the other parties, will be taken with a grain of salt…or two;
• use trade journals, and relevant advertising sources;
• use precedents where appropriate. In deciding what provisions to put in a contract, for example, don’t get into an argument, look at similar contracts in your organizations, in the industry, or look at legislation or model contracts such as the Uniform Commercial Code for guidance;
• where time and money allow, check multiple sources (you can then compare and use the most appropriate and favourable sources). Not every piece of factual information needs to be revealed to the other side. This is why procurement professionals seek at least three quotations, but don’t limit it to just three if time and money warrant casting a broader net;
• ask the other party- they may be a source of useful objective criteria, if you consider them trustworthy and they are willing to share the information (e.g. what have they paid for similar services in the past). You can do this in an RFP if you are seeking proposals;
• review credible sources (e.g. industry leaders, respected individuals or companies); and
• test and improve the criteria to the extent possible (e.g. if a good or service is listed at price X, ask whether you could get it for any less than the list price)
The Limitations of Objective Criteria Include:
• some issues or points are not easy to value, or may not be comparable to other goods, even if they are discussed that way (e.g. in a personal injury claim, how much is the loss of a finger worth?);
• objective criteria can establish a range, but should not become a position or anchor. If you find yourself stuck on a figure (or in a competition between two valid but different objective criteria), add other issues or items to supplement the value of the agreement for you. Review your interests and consider some creative option generation to resolve the difference;
• Relative values may be based on principles or priorities that do not depend on objective criteria, and using objective criteria may not be persuasive or useful. For example, market prices for a particular item will not usually reflect sentimental value (the market assumes that neither buyer nor seller has any particular attachment to the item). An actual seller however may have sentiments that add real value to the item for that person. Listen to them to find out what the other party values and why. You may wish to put them in your shoes, acknowledge that it has that additional value for them (without implying that you should pay for that value), or try some creative option generation. Try respect and creativity when rational debate fails;
• As an example, a homeowner may refuse to go below $215,000 for a home they are selling even when the market clearly shows it should only be worth $200,000. They may take that view because they paid $215,000 for it initially and are not willing to sell at a loss even if the market says the value has dropped. By recognizing their desire to save face and match their initial purchase price, you might find a creative way for them to add $15,000 in value to the house so they get $215,000 and you get $215,000 or more in value (e.g., by throwing in a car, or furniture that would not normally form part of the sale).
Used properly, objective criteria can provide you with a great deal of confidence and support in a negotiation. An understanding of the applicable objective criteria protects you from being taken advantage of by the other side in any procurement or other negotiation. It allows you to more effectively justify decisions that are made in negotiations to third parties like upper management and auditors, a particular concern for today’s procurement professional in the shadow of events like Enron and the sponsorship scandal.
Being armed with the facts also gives you the firmness that prevents you from appearing soft. In fact, if you are well prepared with objective criteria, you can be a very impressive negotiator, inspiring respect not only from your co-workers and superiors, but from the other side as well. And that is one of the best marks of a strong negotiator.
Remember though that it is not enough to have the factual information. Spend some time thinking about how you will use and present that information, and you will find that the extra preparation time pays dividends.
To learn conflict resolution skills that you can use at work and in your personal life, please visit our Alternative Dispute Resolution Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To improve your negotiation skills and get the results you want while negotiating, please visit our Become a Powerful Negotiator Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To gain skills to handle difficult conversations and difficult people with confidence, please visit our Dealing With Difficult People Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
At times, life (or other people) can present us with hard choices and we may have to say no to someone. If what is being offered is worse than our Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA – our plan B essentially), then we should say no and go with our plan B. If a proposal or request to us runs afoul of applicable policies or legislation, we may have to say no. The challenge with saying no, is that refusing someone will inevitably lead to consequences, many of them potentially negative.
We may lose opportunities. Sometimes our “No” need not be the end of a negotiation. In some cases, our “No” may bring the other party back to the table with a sweetened offer on their side, if we haven’t burned the bridge to them. A “No” may alert them to the fact that we have hit our walk away point, and that further flexibility on their part is required to keep us at the table. With some people, nothing other than a “No” will truly convey that message.
In other cases, a “No” may end the negotiation on the issue, but we may not want to end or damage the relationship with the other party or their allies. We may want or need to deal with them productively in the future (e.g. in a workplace context or an ongoing buyer-supplier context).
The question in such cases may not be how we get to “Yes”, but how do we say No productively, with minimal damage. Before arriving at this point, of course, we should exhaust the use of tools like interests, options, legitimacy etc. trying to craft a ‘yesable’ proposal. Don’t start with no when you have other choices. And remember there are many ways to say no:
Finally, just because you are not in a position to say “Yes” as things currently stand, does not mean that your answer in that moment needs to be “No”. As long as you genuinely have an open mind, a much more positive response is to say “Let me think about that for a while longer…” Don’t show them a wall unless you need to; the world “No” sounds like a wall. If you take this route, do consider the question, and do get back to them before too long.
Sometimes we have to say no but we can do so in a variety of ways to minimize the negative impact for us and for the recipients.
To learn conflict resolution skills that you can use at work and in your personal life, please visit our Alternative Dispute Resolution Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To improve your negotiation skills and get the results you want while negotiating, please visit our Become a Powerful Negotiator Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To gain skills to handle difficult conversations and difficult people with confidence, please visit our Dealing With Difficult People Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To learn conflict resolution skills that you can use at work and in your personal life, please visit our Alternative Dispute Resolution Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To improve your negotiation skills and get the results you want while negotiating, please visit our Become a Powerful Negotiator Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To gain skills to handle difficult conversations and difficult people with confidence, please visit our Dealing With Difficult People Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
The key to doing better in our challenging conversations is to begin with an understanding of what makes them challenging in the first place. Once we understand the cause, it is easier to plan a response that is likely to succeed. Remember also that with challenging situations, they are by nature, well, challenging. As a result, we cannot expect a magic bullet response that will make these conversations ‘easy’. The realistic goal is to make them easier than they would otherwise be, and to make them more productive than they would otherwise be. To achieve that goal, we need to understand the key contributions to our difficulty with such conversations.
In their book, Difficult Conversations, Stone et al. suggest that difficult conversations have their roots in three sources – the What Happened conversation, the Feelings Conversation, and the Identity Conversation. The What Happened conversation creates tension because people disagree on factual issues. Their stories differ, or appear to differ. The Feelings conversation involves tensions caused by strong emotions. Many people are uncomfortable dealing with strong emotions, either their own emotions, those of others, or both. The Identity conversation involves difficulties arising when people have their pride and sense of self challenged (like in a performance review). Most people get upset and/or defensive when their sense of self is challenged, directly or indirectly. When these tensions erupt, conversations are far more challenging for all concerned.
To those categories, my surveys of about a thousand students over the years have identified three other general sources of difficulty in conversations – Past History, Conflicting Goals, and Challenging Communication Processes.
When people have a Negative Past History (personally or organizationally), it creates a negative filter through which any current conversation is seen, and that makes productive conversation much harder. People cannot listen to the other person’s story when they have already written it themselves. A union-management discussion does not take place as an empty slate, in which each person is heard entirely on the merits. In many labour settings, people are wearing glasses with lenses tinted by 20 or more years of perceived antagonism. Everything said and done is seen through those lenses. There is often a sense of prejudgment in the air. Since people don’t feel it is fair to be prejudged, this often provokes further identity and emotional reactions.
When people perceive the other party to have Conflicting goals or to be a barrier to achieving their goals, the competitive element of conversations is ratcheted up significantly, and the other side may be seen as the enemy. As human beings we often assume there will be opposition to our goals from the very beginning, and we then treat people as enemies to our goals. For example, you go to a complaints desk expecting them to defend the company line and block your request, so you take an aggressive tone (leading to a defensive identity reaction on their side), or you take an extreme position and lock in, or you withhold information from them which makes you look untrustworthy. When competition is our only focus, we may lose the opportunity for a cooperative response, and receive mirror-image competitive responses instead, making it a fight for both sides.
Finally, if there are Communication Process Challenges, productive conversation can be very hard to achieve even with good intentions. A phone conversation is more challenging for many of us than a face-to-face dialogue simply because we are lacking so many visual signals. Communicating in writing leads to serious interpretation issues. Put a conversation in front of an audience and it is not the same conversation anymore. A rushed conversation is rarely as effective as a planned one. As an example, one friend of mine, who is bright and interesting, is a close-talking person, and I have noticed that even people who have just met her quickly begin avoiding her because her method of communication puts them off. It takes a great deal of patience to stay in the conversation and look past its form.
In reality, all of the six challenges are potentially linked, as each one can generate the others. When a conversation is rushed (Process), it may generate significant frustration (Feelings) and if that pressure appears to be preventing you from reaching your goal (Conflicting Goals), you may become angry (Feelings) or feel like you will lose face (Identity). If an old adversary (Past History) confronts you with a raised voice in a public place (Process) with a disagreement about past events (What Happened), you might become defensive/fearful/angry (Emotions) because your sense of self is being threatened (Identity).
Understanding the cause of the difficulties in conversations helps us deal with them and still have productive meaningful conversations. Once we understand the cause of the difficulty, we can choose the appropriate response to use.
Several tools are good initial responses to try (a conversational first aid kit as it were), because they are low risk approaches with a high potential to improve the challenging behaviour. These include: a) asking good sincere open-ended questions (and listening sincerely to the response); b) not reacting negatively oneself; and c) taking a break even for a few minutes to calm down and plan your response (do this analysis). Even these low risk tools however, are dependent on how they are communicated. If someone is upset and you brush them off saying “I can’t talk now.” don’t be surprised when they get more upset. Contrast that with saying, in a sincere tone:
“All right, I can see this issue has got you very upset. I do want to see if we can work through this together, and I would really appreciate it if you could give me just five minutes to lay this stuff down, and gather my thoughts because I want to devote proper attention to this with you. I just need to clear my head of this other stuff first if you don’t mind.”
Again, there are no magic bullets, so we must ask:
1. What is the difficulty?
2. Why is it happening?
3. How might I respond effectively, if that is the root cause? And finally;
4. Try the response that is most likely to help the conversation, and least likely to do further harm.
Remembering these simple steps will help make any conversation more productive and less stressful for all involved. Every conversation is different, and what works for one person may not work for another. What works at work may not work at home. If we can avoid leaping to negative assumptions about the other person and their behaviour, our ability to choose responses that might actually work is greatly improved. And if your first attempt to improve a conversation fails, don’t give up, learn from the response to what you tried, and try something else.
To learn conflict resolution skills that you can use at work and in your personal life, please visit our Alternative Dispute Resolution Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To improve your negotiation skills and get the results you want while negotiating, please visit our Become a Powerful Negotiator Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To gain skills to handle difficult conversations and difficult people with confidence, please visit our Dealing With Difficult People Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
The use of ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) is not new. ADR has been used by many groups for many years due to its effectiveness in resolving disputes. Each year more companies are choosing to use arbitration to resolve business disputes. With this being the case, the way that ADR is being used has also expanded. It is now more cost-effective and practical for managing various types of workplace conflicts. Each individual company’s reasons for opting for arbitration may vary.
Mediation and arbitration can both be effective forms of ADR. Mediation is a negotiation that a neutral third party will facilitate. The mediator will not make a decision; they help the interested parties come to an amicable agreement. Mediation helps the involved parties find common ground. In contrast, in Arbitrations the Arbitrator will make a decision for the parties as a judge would in court. There are a number of situations where Mediation is a more applicable form of ADR and situations where Arbitration is more applicable.
Advantages of Arbitration over Litigation
Litigation is formal, and usually a public process that helps resolve disputes in a courtroom setting with a judge or judge and jury. There are often strict rules, which the government imposes that dictate the conduct of how the process will be carried out. Arbitration can be private. The parties involved in the conflict will meet with a neutral third party so that both sides are heard and a final decision regarding the matter is made. This is done while using agreed-upon rules to govern the way the arbitration will take place. Arbitration is therefore often used as a more attractive alternative to litigation or appearing in court.
Parties looking for a practical way to resolve a dispute often use arbitration. In many ways it is a better prosses than litigation, which is why more and more businesses prefer it. Here are some reasons why it is better and additional advantages to arbitration:
• Control & Flexibility – The involved parties will set the terms, as to how the arbitration process is carried out. This involves establishing rules about hearings, discovery, and time limits. Arbitrations can be scheduled on any day and at a time that works for all parties involved.
• Speed – According to recent studies, U.S. District Court cases tool more than a year longer to even go to trial than arbitrations took to be resolved.
• Inexpensive – Arbitrations are significantly less expensive than court cases. The decreased amount of time that it takes to resolve a dispute has a big impact on the lower costs because of factors such as; lawyers fees, costs of witnesses, and days booked away from doing other work. Also, investigations and appeals are limited, which means that you also save with possible future expenses.
• Simple Rules of Investigation and Evidence – The parties can choose to make the arbitration process as simple or as complicated as they would like. This allows for rules such as time limits placed on how long an investigation into a matter can take, rules of evidence, time allotted to make legal arguments and many other factors to meet the parties needs.
• Privacy & Confidentiality – The arbitration process can be private and only designated parties are in the meeting. Proceedings are confidential, whereas litigation is public.
• Arbitrator – The involved parties have the right to choose an arbitrator. They will generally choose an arbitrator with experience in the subject matter that is being disputed who they both respect. This is especially seen as more favorable rather than leaving it up to a judge who may not know the subject matter and may not have a favorable reputation.
• Faster Resolution – Arbitrations usually take significantly less time to go through than a trial once it starts. This, combined with taking a lot less time to get started on a matter allows for expedited resolutions compared to court cases. Additionally arbitration usually doesn’t allow for many appeals, which means the disputes are resolved faster.
To learn conflict resolution skills that you can use at work and in your personal life, please visit our Alternative Dispute Resolution Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To improve your negotiation skills and get the results you want while negotiating, please visit our Become a Powerful Negotiator Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To gain skills to handle difficult conversations and difficult people with confidence, please visit our Dealing With Difficult People Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
The development of stress and conflict in the workplace is a problem that affects most businesses. Unclear and inconsistent company policies can be a source of stress. Work related pressure can hamper employee performance, and prove expensive to employers. Every business should strive to reduce workplace related stress. This can be achieved by a sound management policy that encourages employees towards enhanced performance and better productivity. Problems between employees can arise due to ambiguous policies having been created by the company’s management. The mission statement of the company and properly defined job descriptions are common sources of misunderstood policies.
Lack of clarity in the company’s mission, vision or business plan:
Most businesses plan ahead. Some organizations have detailed mission statements and vision plans, while others only look to the short-term future. Regardless of the approach, it is important to make employees feel connected to this very important facet of the business. Employees will likely feel more motivated and involved if they are made aware of the importance of their contribution towards the overall objective of the company. A manager is responsible for ensuring that his or her team is aware of its important role in supporting the overall objectives of the company. If this is not accomplished, then employees will be hard pressed to want to be “team players” and the result will be an absence of clear objectives and goals.
Clearly defined role and responsibilities:
Having a clear job description that avoids confusion about a role is a valuable way to avoid workplace conflict. If an employee’s responsibilities are unclear, then changes to the company through new hires, transfers, role changes or structural changes could allow for stress and conflict to arise among confused employees. By clearly defining a worker’s role, expectations of responsibilities are set. A manager should never assume that his or her team knows exactly what they are expected to do. The manager is responsible for ensuring that his or her workers are aware of their job descriptions. Once this is accomplished, the manager can help team members develop strategies to accomplish their tasks, goals and timelines of completion. If a manager has not clearly defined his or her team members’ roles, conflict can arise between employees about their responsibilities.
Clarity in operating procedures:
It is important to have a clear and well-documented operating procedure for the employees to follow so that they do not waste time having to reinvent the wheel, and there is minimum stress on the employees because the process is already in place. It is the manager’s role to ensure that standard operating procedures are in place for the benefit of his or her employees.
Clearly communicating policies:
If a company’s policies are not clearly communicated to its employees, then misunderstandings and conflict are likely to follow. By communicating clearly, promoting open channels of communication, and engaging in regular communication, a manager stands a better chance to prevent workplace conflict. Not having an effective system of communication in the workplace will cause the development of frustration amongst the workers about their inability to communicate with management.
A manager risks a greater likelihood of stress and conflict developing in the workplace by failing to clearly communicate a company’s policies and objectives, and by failing to define a worker’s responsibilities.
To learn conflict resolution skills that you can use at work and in your personal life, please visit our Alternative Dispute Resolution Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To improve your negotiation skills and get the results you want while negotiating, please visit our Become a Powerful Negotiator Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To gain skills to handle difficult conversations and difficult people with confidence, please visit our Dealing With Difficult People Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
Interview with Peter Dreyer: Originally published in the Barbados Advocate
Ruth Moisa Allayen
“Mediation [as an alternative form of dispute resolution] is becoming more and more widely used in governments, the courts and corporations as a means of facilitating their negotiations and resolving disputes.” So says Mr. Peter Dreyer, of Stitt Feld Handy Group, the training arm of ADR Chambers, one of the largest mediation groups in Canada. Dreyer, in an interview with the Barbados Advocate, pointed out that mediation – where two or more parties would employ a third neutral party to facilitate negotiations in an attempt to reach a resolution, and without losing ownership their interests and settlement – could translate into significant savings of time, cost and stress associated with going taking the dispute to court.
The firm’s lead faciltator in the Caribbean has for the last twelve years conducted training in Barbados, Trinidad, St.Lucia and the Bahamas where he has designed and delivered numerous Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) workshops. Amoung those organisations to benefit from these intense training sessions were Banks Holdings, Caribbean Development Bank, Arawak Cement Co. Ltd and the Barbados Judiciary in Barbados, Atlantic LNG, Petrotrin and Neal and Massy Holdings in Trinidad, and various governmental ministries within the region.
Dreyer was pleased to report that over the years, more businesses within the region were investigating mediation as a worthy option in conflict management, as is evident in the rise of occurences of mediation clauses within employee and other business contracts.
Pertaining to sales negotiation techniques and collective bargaining arising in Union-Management disputes, he spoke of the need to shift from traditional adversarial approachs – where one party came out the winner, at the expense of the other party – to seeking a win-win situation that could only be achieved when both parties worked together to get their interests met. Overall, companies who used the ADR approach, according to Mr. Dreyer, were able to find different ways of handling disputes, save money and were able to develop a more effective strategy for their sales teams.
When asked what this year’s participants of the ADR workshops could look forward to, Dreyer spoke of the development (or enhancement) of a new and transferrable skill set that could be used not just at work, but also at home and within their communities. These skills would allow them handle challenging issues and emotional people, mediate disputes while preserving relationships, and negotiate their way through difficult situations. From Principled Negotiation to the art of persuasion, The workshops promise to offer a superior product and participants will be challenged to work hard to reap the gain thereof while, through it all, having an enjoyable learning experience.
To learn conflict resolution skills that you can use at work and in your personal life, please visit our Alternative Dispute Resolution Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To improve your negotiation skills and get the results you want while negotiating, please visit our Become a Powerful Negotiator Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
To gain skills to handle difficult conversations and difficult people with confidence, please visit our Dealing With Difficult People Workshop page to learn more about upcoming in-person and instructor-led online sessions.
